Any major changes coming in the new CBA? [CBA agreed upon: post 59]

[adambr2]

Doesn't a 10 day DL kind of open the door for starting pitchers whose teams planned on skipping a start anyway going on the DL for 'arm soreness' to gain a roster spot?

[adambr2]

Unless I missed it, didn't see anything about the Competitive Balance Lottery?

[brewcrewdue80]

Doesn't a 10 day DL kind of open the door for starting pitchers whose teams planned on skipping a start anyway going on the DL for 'arm soreness' to gain a roster spot?

 

I'm all for that. There's you #26 man on the roster. Get somebody to help the team more.

 

When sending someone on the DL, they can "Rehab" without the move to throw in the minors as an option? Say you put Anderson on the DL for 10days. and on day 5 or 6, you give him a 1IP or 2IP bullpen outing for the AAA or AA team?

 

Figuring the guy you call up is Bullpen arm who gets in 2-4IP before being sent down?

 

Could be a way to sorta Option a player who doesn't have options. Matt Garza?

[torts]

 

[sarcasm]Oh no! But what if that opens the door for more All-Star games ending in a tie?! How horrible that would be!![/sarcasm]

 

Laugh all you want, but the home field advantage thing was a really good idea at the time. Might have worked out better if teams actually tried, but they didn't really play 100% so it turned into a bit of a joke.

 

What some argue is the most popular sport in the world, soccer, ends in ties all the time. Hockey games are allowed to end in ties and often do. NFL games can end in ties. Yet, one meaningless baseball game ends in a tie and people get upset and rules are unnecessarily changed? It's an exhibition game featuring baseball stars. The outcome and score of the game should be secondary and meaningless. My guess is if I picked 5 random years and asked you to tell me who won the all-star game in that year, you would not know. Why wouldn't you know?...because it's not important and it shouldn't be important. Whether the players tried or not, tying the game to WS home field advantage was never a good idea.

 

There hasnt been a tie in hockey since the 05-06 season.

[markedman5]

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/the-inside-details-from-baseballs-fascinating-new-cba-082559072.html

[rickh150]

Not much in this deal is real small market friendly.....

[Austin Tatious]

Does anyone have a detailed summary of the new international rules?

 

I heard something about a hard cap. That's fine but I still hoped for a draft.

 

We need to really invest in relationships down there. A hard cap would help so the Cubs, Yanks, Bosox, Rangers and Dodgers don't stack five top prospects for every one Milwaukee gets. But, to get the right guys we need to get in the muck and play with the trainers who have access to the talent. Start making expensive handshakes.

 

It's unseemly in the AAU basketball way. At least this is a professional league.

 

The Brewers can win as a small market. Don't sign Looper, Garza, Suppan, et al. Use money on developing talent. International relationships, scouting, minor league instruction. Invest there and that will be effective.

[adambr2]

Not much in this deal is real small market friendly.....

 

How so? We'll have an extra pick every year without needing to win a lottery, a hard cap on international spending should help us be more competitive in that area, and the lack of forfeiting a 1st round pick for a QO should help us in a year or two.

[rickh150]

Less revenue sharing $, probably....

Revenue sharing helping Yanks get richer, A's getting poorer...

No 1st rounder attached to FA, blowing salaries up, along with arby deals...

Still no international draft...

Big, new TV deals ignored making lakes into gulfs between bigs and smalls...

Oh, thanks for the scraps, though, MLB.

[rickh150]

Aren't Cards getting revenue sharing money, using it (with state funds) for Ballpark Village $200+ addition?

[adambr2]

Less revenue sharing $, probably....

Revenue sharing helping Yanks get richer, A's getting poorer...

No 1st rounder attached to FA, blowing salaries up, along with arby deals...

Still no international draft...

Big, new TV deals ignored making lakes into gulfs between bigs and smalls...

Oh, thanks for the scraps, though, MLB.

 

Other than the international draft, just trying to understand here what exactly you're looking for here that isn't just a product of a free market. Blown up salaries sounds bad and a salary cap sounds good, but the reality is that the pie is as big as it is and it's just a matter of how much of it each side gets.

 

Most of what you mentioned is something that MLB wants, including the draft. Can't just go ahead and do it, gotta get the union on board too, and they weren't.

[rickh150]

Less revenue sharing $, probably....

Revenue sharing helping Yanks get richer, A's getting poorer...

No 1st rounder attached to FA, blowing salaries up, along with arby deals...

Still no international draft...

Big, new TV deals ignored making lakes into gulfs between bigs and smalls...

Oh, thanks for the scraps, though, MLB.

 

 

 

Most of what you mentioned is something that MLB wants, including the draft. Can't just go ahead and do it, gotta get the union on board too, and they weren't.

 

 

So.... not a small market friendly deal then.

[adambr2]

Less revenue sharing $, probably....

Revenue sharing helping Yanks get richer, A's getting poorer...

No 1st rounder attached to FA, blowing salaries up, along with arby deals...

Still no international draft...

Big, new TV deals ignored making lakes into gulfs between bigs and smalls...

Oh, thanks for the scraps, though, MLB.

 

 

 

Most of what you mentioned is something that MLB wants, including the draft. Can't just go ahead and do it, gotta get the union on board too, and they weren't.

 

 

So.... not a small market friendly deal then.

 

I didn't say it's not, as I said several posts ago.

 

The point is that the MLB cannot just go ahead and implement an international draft or other measures on their own.

[brewcrewdue80]

Not much in this deal is real small market friendly.....

 

Why do you say that?

The changes on the International signing where essentially small markets can spend 10mil. Vs. a Big Market 8.3mil. Luxury tax penalties? Confusing but seems pretty painful to exceed multiple seasons. Would put big markets most likely to keep payrolls towards the max and not go over.

 

You get a 1st pick+500k international spend bonus, or a 2nd pick+1mil international bonus. How that's decided I wouldn't know but no more lotteries where St Louis gets a 1st round comp and the Brewers get nothing in unfortunate years.

 

The QO penalties award small markets over big markets.

 

Truthfully, this seems to me to restrict big markets quite massively. And the Players, I'm not sure why they'd want to hurt their earning potential so much.

How likely is it Bryce Harper will get 10/500 in free agency if the big market team leaves 150mil roughly left to spend on the team? I guess if teams like New York are going from making 500million profit to 725million profit with these restrictions they aren't going to concern 100million in tax penalties if they decide to grow to 300million payroll. Returning them back to a 500million profit.

 

The international part is really hurting. Hard Capped at 4.75mil for 20teams and the other 10, unsure again how determined if receive 1/500 or 2/1mil.

 

If you split it adds 7.5mil. Means 102.5million hard capped. The Padres as that article states paid 80million this period alone in 40+40tax on the last signing period....you know supposedly the tax that induces MLB international funding to promote and develop in that area more... Now how does that money come to this supposed prior penalty receiver?

[Austin Tatious]

Sorry if this was already posted but terms of the new international signing policy:

 

http://www.baseballamerica.com/international/new-mlb-international-signing-rules/#p9J5kGlFPx4Xev9t.97

 

A bit convoluted to unwind.

[rickh150]

Not much in this deal is real small market friendly.....

 

Why do you say that?

The changes on the International signing where essentially small markets can spend 10mil. Vs. a Big Market 8.3mil. Luxury tax penalties? Confusing but seems pretty painful to exceed multiple seasons. Would put big markets most likely to keep payrolls towards the max and not go over.

 

You get a 1st pick+500k international spend bonus, or a 2nd pick+1mil international bonus. How that's decided I wouldn't know but no more lotteries where St Louis gets a 1st round comp and the Brewers get nothing in unfortunate years.

 

The QO penalties award small markets over big markets.

 

Truthfully, this seems to me to restrict big markets quite massively. And the Players, I'm not sure why they'd want to hurt their earning potential so much.

How likely is it Bryce Harper will get 10/500 in free agency if the big market team leaves 150mil roughly left to spend on the team? I guess if teams like New York are going from making 500million profit to 725million profit with these restrictions they aren't going to concern 100million in tax penalties if they decide to grow to 300million payroll. Returning them back to a 500million profit.

 

The international part is really hurting. Hard Capped at 4.75mil for 20teams and the other 10, unsure again how determined if receive 1/500 or 2/1mil.

 

If you split it adds 7.5mil. Means 102.5million hard capped. The Padres as that article states paid 80million this period alone in 40+40tax on the last signing period....you know supposedly the tax that induces MLB international funding to promote and develop in that area more... Now how does that money come to this supposed prior penalty receiver?

 

KC not liking new CBA..... switching strategy- trading off starters- rebuild underway.

[adambr2]

Not much in this deal is real small market friendly.....

 

Why do you say that?

The changes on the International signing where essentially small markets can spend 10mil. Vs. a Big Market 8.3mil. Luxury tax penalties? Confusing but seems pretty painful to exceed multiple seasons. Would put big markets most likely to keep payrolls towards the max and not go over.

 

You get a 1st pick+500k international spend bonus, or a 2nd pick+1mil international bonus. How that's decided I wouldn't know but no more lotteries where St Louis gets a 1st round comp and the Brewers get nothing in unfortunate years.

 

The QO penalties award small markets over big markets.

 

Truthfully, this seems to me to restrict big markets quite massively. And the Players, I'm not sure why they'd want to hurt their earning potential so much.

How likely is it Bryce Harper will get 10/500 in free agency if the big market team leaves 150mil roughly left to spend on the team? I guess if teams like New York are going from making 500million profit to 725million profit with these restrictions they aren't going to concern 100million in tax penalties if they decide to grow to 300million payroll. Returning them back to a 500million profit.

 

The international part is really hurting. Hard Capped at 4.75mil for 20teams and the other 10, unsure again how determined if receive 1/500 or 2/1mil.

 

If you split it adds 7.5mil. Means 102.5million hard capped. The Padres as that article states paid 80million this period alone in 40+40tax on the last signing period....you know supposedly the tax that induces MLB international funding to promote and develop in that area more... Now how does that money come to this supposed prior penalty receiver?

 

KC not liking new CBA..... switching strategy- trading off starters- rebuild underway.

 

The Royals not liking the new CBA is one man's Twitter opinion...here is another opinion of the exact opposite.

 

 

http://kingsofkauffman.com/2016/11/30/kc-royals-new-cba-good-for-the-royals/

 

The Royals may rebuild but IMO it has a lot more to do with their current situation than the new CBA.

[Point Beer Is Best]

There's quite a bit of opinion out there of "this is why former players shouldn't be Executive Directors of a players association" and there may be some truth to that. What the owners really wanted - suppression of the dollars spent on international talent acquisition - they got. They disguised it at first as wanting an international draft, but ultimately received anyways by the Union agreeing to a hard cap for the very first time. Never in my life would I have though the MLBPA would acquiesce to a hard cap. But there may have been some "well less for them (int'l) means more for us" thinking by some of the membership, which also applies to the current minor league compensation issues.

 

Another change that players were upset to find out is that their meal per diem is decreasing from $105/day to $30, but that is supposed to be made up for with each team supplying chefs to prepare meals for the visiting ball club. So the players will make out alright, but clubhouse attendants that used to run to get meals for players (and receive a tip) will be most impacted by that change.

 

One of the biggest things not touched on here is the fact that the deal was jointly announced by MLB/MLBPA before the CBA was presented and ratified by the members. Some view this as a way to cast any vocal opponents to the new deal in a negative light and to fall in line.

[MilwaukeeBeers]

This really sucks... I thought they were gonna level the playing field at least a little bit. Now it looks like large markets are without question the ones that benefit the most from the new CBA.

[MilwaukeeBeers]

If I'm the Brewers I blow my wad on the international signing period and draft bonus pool. Now is the time to do so more than ever.

[adambr2]

Just curious, but did anything happen in the CBA to discourage the common practice of teams deliberately delaying the promotions of their prospects or sending them back down at certain points in order to gain an extra year of service time or prevent them from becoming a Super 2?

 

I know that the MLBPA is very frowny on that practice and was hoping to change things, but I hadn't heard if anything was actually done to do so.

 

Obviously with guys like Brinson and Hader nearly MLB ready, it's something that affects us.