Really a hot stove. 

MLB and MLBPA met today, MLBPA took one of their requests off the table (5 year FA) and the two sides are meeting again tomorrow. Sounds like progress ...

44 minutes ago, Michael said:

MLB and MLBPA met today, MLBPA took one of their requests off the table (5 year FA) and the two sides are meeting again tomorrow. Sounds like progress ...

How dare they?  MLB is evil and owners have all the money.  MLBPA shouldn't change any of their demands!!!!

 

-Das   probably.

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2022/01/mlbpa-drops-push-for-earlier-free-agency-eligibility-in-latest-cba-proposal.html

 

4:45 pm: In addition to holding firm on their push for two-year arbitration, the MLBPA remained steadfast on a few more of their top goals. Jeff Passan of ESPN reports that the union proposal included a bump in the league minimum salary to $775K, the institution of an eight-team draft lottery and a $245MM base luxury tax threshold. All three issues had been known goals of the MLBPA in past proposals, and the setting of the CBT threshold is expected to be of particular import. In recent offers, MLB has pushed for tax thresholds in the $214MM – $220MM range, leaving a fairly significant gap between the parties.

3:51 pm: As part of this afternoon’s collective bargaining proposal, the MLB Players Association dropped its push for an earlier path to major league free agency, reports Evan Drellich of the Athletic. It now seems likely the next CBA will require players to accrue six years of MLB service time in order to reach the open market — as had been the case under prior agreements.

The game’s service time structure is one of the most contentious issues during ongoing negotiations. The MLBPA, desiring to get players to free agency earlier, had previously been pursuing a modified service/age threshold that would’ve allowed players to test the market after six years of MLB service or after five years of service if the player had reached a certain age (initially 30.5 years, later 29.5).

Major League Baseball had steadfastly refused to entertain that possibility, either pushing for a continuation of the six-year status quo or an age threshold (29.5, in MLB’s previous offers) that was independent of service time. It seems the league will get its wish to preserve the path to free agency as is, marking a significant development.

In an additional alteration, Drellich reports that the MLBPA agreed to alter its push for reduced revenue sharing from large-market organizations to small-market franchises. Chelsea Janes of the Washington Post adds more specifics, reporting (on Twitter) that the union’s latest offer included a revenue sharing cut in the $30MM range relative to the 2016-21 CBA.

 

Earlier in the winter, the union had been pushing to cut revenue sharing by around $100MM. The past CBA required recipients to use those funds “to improve (their) performance on the field,” but there was no provision that required teams to invest the money into player salaries (as opposed to such things as scouting, analytics or player development, all of which indirectly attempt to improve team performance). The MLBPA has expressed its belief that smaller-market clubs have been too content to pocket that money, filing grievances to that effect against the A’s, Marlins, Rays and Pirates in recent years.

As with an expedited path to free agency, the league has opposed modifications to the revenue sharing system. It remains to be seen whether that pushback is categorical or one of degree. The MLBPA’s proposal still included a revenue sharing cut, of course, but it’s significantly smaller than the union’s previous pushes in that regard.

While the MLBPA made a pair of notable steps towards MLB’s vision, one thing that hasn’t changed is the union’s desire for earlier arbitration eligibility. Drellich reports that the union’s proposal this afternoon would allow players to qualify for arbitration after reaching two years of MLB service, as have all of the PA’s past offers. (The previous CBA required three years for arbitration eligibility for most players). MLB has thus far refused to discuss earlier paths to arbitration, either. Whether the league will be more amenable to that possibility now that the union has made some changes in other key areas is unclear.

Janes tweets that this afternoon’s meeting lasted around two hours and fifteen minutes. Encouragingly, the parties are set to meet again tomorrow, according to a report from Hannah Keyser of Yahoo! Sports (Twitter link). At that sit-down, MLB plans to put forth some form of counter-offer, tweets Drellich, although the league won’t make a comprehensive proposal that hits on every topic of discussion. It seems possible today’s proposal will kick-start negotiations, which have moved at a glacial pace in the nearly two months since the start of the lockout.

That’s not to say agreement on a new deal is imminent. According to Drellich, the MLBPA “rejected most, if not all” of the terms the league put forth in its most recent offer, a bit more than two weeks ago. Jeff Passan of ESPN tweets that today’s meeting was “contentious;” Drellich categorized it as “heated.”

It also bears reiterating that the full specifics of the MLBPA’s proposal aren’t known. In addition to ongoing potential holdups regarding arbitration eligibility and revenue sharing, such issues as the competitive balance tax, league minimum salary and playoff expansion will need to be sorted out. With a bit more than a month before the scheduled start of the first Spring Training games, the parties have to make rapid progress in a number of areas if a disruption to the exhibition schedule is to be avoided.

Someone please wake me up when the lockout is OVER, thanks. 

son of the beach

4 hours ago, taiwanmarlin said:

son of the beach

It would be a bad strategy in negotiations if they said otherwise. Doesn't change anything.

5 hours ago, taiwanmarlin said:

son of the beach

i'm assuming they used a stock photo...unless it's just an old article

16 hours ago, rmc523 said:

How dare they?  MLB is evil and owners have all the money.  MLBPA shouldn't change any of their demands!!!!

 

-Das   probably.

because i havent been wholly against ownership being fucking assholes for 2 years???

read the room. 

the MLB owners would be moronic to lose 1 regular season game over this lockout.

they would be more or less stupid to lose one ST game also, but it wont do nearly as much harm as losing one regular season game over this.

1 hour ago, Das Texan said:

the MLB owners would be moronic to lose 1 regular season game over this lockout.

they would be more or less stupid to lose one ST game also, but it wont do nearly as much harm as losing one regular season game over this.

IMO every ST game they lose is almost a day for day delay on the regular season.

6 minutes ago, Michael said:

IMO every ST game they lose is almost a day for day delay on the regular season.

no its not.

they can lose the first 1-2 weeks of games and not impact the start of the regular season in all reality. 

20 minutes ago, Das Texan said:

no its not.

they can lose the first 1-2 weeks of games and not impact the start of the regular season in all reality. 

So players are going to just start off doing 6 inning / 3 PA games right out of the gate, no pitchers and catchers reporting, etc, just straight into nearly full game action? Calling for injuries here.

4 hours ago, Das Texan said:

because i havent been wholly against ownership being fucking assholes for 2 years???

read the room. 

 

Relax, it was a joke.

14 minutes ago, rmc523 said:

 

Relax, it was a joke.

Latest on CBA talks:

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2022/01/mlb-rejects-mlbpas-proposal-for-30mm-cut-to-revenue-sharing.html

 

8:24 pm: Susan Slusser of the San Francisco Chronicle writes that MLB’s proposal would also include international signing bonus pool forfeitures for teams that exceed the CBT threshold. Interestingly, Slusser adds some details on the union’s CBT proposals as well. Under the MLBPA’s proposed framework, the CBT would escalate from the $245MM mark in 2022 to $273MM by 2026.

8:06 pm: Over the past two days, both the MLB Players Association and Major League Baseball have put forth proposals on some of the game’s core economic issues. While the sides have made a bit of movement towards a midpoint — the MLBPA agreed to drop its push for earlier free agency eligibility; MLB agreed to a union formulation for a bonus pool that’d award certain pre-arbitration players based upon their performance — there’s still plenty of work to be done.

Ben Nicholson-Smith of Sportsnet (Twitter links and thread) provides more details on MLB’s offer this afternoon. Notably, the league rejected the union’s recent push for a $30MM cut in revenue sharing, reiterating its desire to leave the process unchanged. (The MLBPA had initially been seeking a $100MM cut to revenue sharing but dropped the ask in yesterday’s offer). MLB also rejected a union push for players to accrue service time during postseason play.

Both Nicholson-Smith and Bob Nightengale of USA Today note that the league continues to push for more significant penalties for teams that exceed the luxury tax threshold. According to Nightengale, MLB’s most recent offer on the matter would’ve included a 50% tax on CBT overages and the forfeiture of a third-round draft pick for surpassing the threshold.

That’d mark a rather significant uptick over the penalties in the previous CBA, which contained no draft pick forfeiture and a 20% tax on overages for teams exceeding the base threshold for the first time. The sides are also divided on where such a threshold should be set. While the union has pushed for the CBT marker to jump from $210MM to $245MM next season, MLB has offered a far more modest increase to $214MM next year, maxing out at $220MM at the end of a five-year term.

With plenty of key economic issues still to be ironed out, Jeff Passan and Jesse Rogers of ESPN write that the parties are planning to turn their attention to some ancillary subjects over the coming days before coming back to the issues of greater divide. Nicholson-Smith tweets that the joint drug agreement and grievance procedures are among the forthcoming topics of discussion.

Progress.

Slow progress.

Progress nonetheless.

13 hours ago, Michael said:

So players are going to just start off doing 6 inning / 3 PA games right out of the gate, no pitchers and catchers reporting, etc, just straight into nearly full game action? Calling for injuries here.

players need about 2 weeks really of game speed to get up at it.

Players are already prepping for the season as it is.

See 'summer camp' 2020. 

You dont need a month plus of games. 

They should add in penalties for teams that spend under 75 million payroll for 3 straight seaosns as well. 

6 hours ago, Das Texan said:

They should add in penalties for teams that spend under 75 million payroll for 3 straight seaosns as well. 

Sherman is scared.

3 hours ago, SonOfJack said:

Sherman is scared.

Why would Joel Sherman be scared of that?

On 1/23/2022 at 3:57 PM, EricOwens! said:

14 team playoff sounds terrible. One perk of having a season with 162 games is that you REALLY know who the best teams are by the end. Extending to 14 cheapens the regular season and puts more weight on 1 or 3 games playoffs rather than a 162 game sample size. Yuck.

And a downside of the current 10-team system is that more than half the league is out of the race by June.

The MLB absolutely needs to expand the playoffs. Having only 10 teams get in is ridiculous. I would be okay with shortening the regular season, though.

Edited January 26, 20224 yr by Valid

 

 

9 hours ago, Valid said:

And a downside of the current 10-team system is that more than half the league is out of the race by June.

The MLB absolutely needs to expand the playoffs. Having only 10 teams get in is ridiculous. I would be okay with shortening the regular season, though.

Those teams are usually out of the race by April.