PDA

View Full Version : Other Sports MLB and players agree to new 5-year CBA


alnorth
11-22-2011, 05:50 PM
http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/7269300/major-league-baseball-players-owners-sign-new-labor-agreement

As expected, MLB will go at least 21 years without a strike or a lockout. Some terms in the new deal were expected, other items in the new CBA were completely unexpected.

#1) Houston will move to the AL West in 2013. Everyone knew this was happening, so moving on.

#2) A second wild card will be added, both wild cards will play a 1-game playoff round. This was mostly known about already, but everyone had assumed this wasn't going to happen before 2013. MLB is now saying there's a good chance they will do it next season before the realignment, final decision this January.

#3) Instant replay will be expanded to review fair/foul down the line, and catch/trap calls. Current replay is used only to review home runs. This is subject to negotiation with the umpire's union.

#4) Some stupid crap about tobacco on the field that no one should care about.

#5) Other random things about players getting caught DWI, slight bump in minimum salary, and new helmets in 2013.

#6) MLB will be the first sport in the United States to test for HGH (50 game suspension). The players union thinks the science has progressed enough to start testing, but is reserving the right to challenge the science behind the tests if someone comes up positive.

#7) Teams will be allowed to have 26 active players for double headers, if the double-header is scheduled more than a day in advance

#8) The luxury tax threshold will remain at $178MM for 2012-13, and will go up to $189MM for 2014-16

#9) Free agent draft pick compensation will be completely revised. A team must now offer a player who is becoming a free agent a 1-year contract at the average of the top 125 salaries in baseball to be eligible for a pick (roughly $12.4MM). There will be no more statistical type A or type B rankings. So basically, you would only offer this and get a pick if turned down if you are about to lose a superstar. (signing team gives up their 1st-rounder unless it is a top-15 pick, in which case the 2nd-rounder) Also, slightly more players will qualify for super-two status.

Here's a weird unexpected change that may hurt KC

#10) We knew reform was coming to the draft, but not that it would be this severe. There will be a total draft budget for each team in the first 10 rounds. Teams going over by 0-5% will pay a 75% tax. Teams paying 5-10% over will pay a 100% tax and will lose their next 1st-round pick. Teams going more than 15% over could lose their next 2 first round picks. So basically, this is almost a hard cap because no one is probably ever going to go more than a few percent over budget.

#11) Luxury tax will be paid for international contracts exceeding $2.7MM

Now for some of the weird unexpected stuff from out of left field, most probably benefitting small markets for the most part.

#12) Beginning in 2017, teams from New York, Chicago, LA, Atlanta, Boston, Houston, Oakland, Philly, SF, the Texas Rangers, Toronto, and Washington will be ineligible to receive revenue sharing. If any of those teams would have been eligible for revenue sharing, that share is instead refunded back to the teams who paid into revenue sharing. (Suck it, White Sox!)

#13) Here's potentially a big one. There will be a new competitive balance lottery to award extra draft picks to small-market teams. Those draft picks can be traded. No clue how you qualify for picks, how many picks, or how high in the draft. Perhaps KC will go from spending big money in the draft for kids who fall, to just outright getting extra picks every year? edit: 6 sandwich picks between the 1st and 2nd round, and 6 more between the 2nd and 3rd round. The smallest 10 markets and 10 revenues are eligible. Odds are based on last year's winning percentage.

Mr. Laz
11-22-2011, 05:53 PM
still just shoveling bullshit

as long as one team is allowed to spend 200 million while other teams spend 50 million then it's pile of crap no matter how they try and dress it up.

alnorth
11-22-2011, 05:59 PM
still just shoveling bullshit

as long as one team is allowed to spend 200 million while other teams spend 50 million then it's pile of crap no matter how they try and dress it up.

It is not the 90's anymore. The Royals haven't made the playoffs since the early 2000's because their management sucked until perhaps recently. MLB has had more champions the last 10 years than the NFL despite having 2 fewer teams.

Fruit Ninja
11-22-2011, 06:00 PM
It just means small market owners wont be losing money, so the owners are happy.

alnorth
11-22-2011, 06:10 PM
Players who are drafted can no longer sign major league contracts. They must now wait their turn like everyone else. (This was a favorite trick of Boras)

BWillie
11-22-2011, 06:25 PM
F*** you Bud Selig. I hope you get hung from an aids tree you asshole.

Mr. Laz
11-22-2011, 06:28 PM
It is not the 90's anymore. The Royals haven't made the playoffs since the early 2000's because their management sucked until perhaps recently. MLB has had more champions the last 10 years than the NFL despite having 2 fewer teams.
Every champion has been in the top 15 in payroll except for one, the Marlins.

The Marlins were almost immediately sold off piece by piece because the team couldn't afford the salary they did pay. Small Television market teams will never be on equal footing until there is a salary cap. It doesn't matter what rationalizations and BS excuses people try to make up.

alnorth
11-22-2011, 06:35 PM
Every champion has been in the top 15 in payroll except for one, the Marlins.

The Marlins were almost immediately sold off piece by piece because the team couldn't afford the salary they did pay. Small Television market teams will never be on equal footing until there is a salary cap. It doesn't matter what rationalizations and BS excuses people try to make up.

irrelevant self-selection bias.

If you are a world series contender, you are highly likely to have your payroll grown into top-15 before the big game. It takes a very fast youth movement to break that rule. If the Royals were to win in 2015 or 2016, they would likely have a top-15 payroll too.

Teams which do not have a top-15 payroll are either incomplete or have blown it up to start over.

evenfall
11-22-2011, 06:40 PM
I think this sounds like a very good agreement, particularly knocking the big markets out of any potential revenue sharing and the rookie salary/contract changes.

alnorth
11-22-2011, 06:42 PM
The time to make excuses for the Royals is over. They pulled in over $110MM in total revenue in 2010 and we know they are getting at least $25-30MM in revenue sharing, perhaps more. They spent over $70MM on payroll for garbage teams not that long ago. Their payroll is understandably low now, but there is no reason at all to expect them not to take the Minnesota route if it works out in a few years. (The twins have a top-10 payroll well over $100MM)

evenfall
11-22-2011, 07:04 PM
(The twins have a top-10 payroll well over $100MM)

The Twins have big problems. They have a lot of salary tied up in players that can't stay healthy and they have a farm system that is mostly depleted. You can date the team's decline and the departure from the old success formula to the Santana trade, perhaps. They got away from what made them good. The Royals are better positioned for the future than the Twins.

Minnesota's recent GM change may signal a return to the old approach, but the Twins prove that their model still has to be executed perfectly. It's exceedingly difficult. Minnesota has had limited success in some ways, they have posted a lot of wins in recent years but they have been bounced in the divisional round five times in a row and have been swept the last 3 times in a row.

Oakland is often pointed at as another example, but they haven't been to the World Series since 1990.

This system is proven in the regular season, but it doesn't usually point to postseason success, though there are a few contrary examples.

At any rate, the Twins aren't really a small market team anymore. They're right around the middle of the league in market size, and were #9 in payroll last year. They are not hamstrung any longer by a bad stadium situation. I don't think they are a good example of a small market team. Tampa Bay is probably better.

alnorth
11-22-2011, 07:34 PM
Tampa Bay is a terrible example. Their stadium sucks, it is difficult for anyone in Tampa to get there, and their fans suck. Even our TV deal with FSNKC, small as it is, is better than Tampa Bay.

MLB needs to let that franchise move, the owner has done all the right things and got nothing in return.

alnorth
11-22-2011, 07:36 PM
There are now going to be a lot fewer high school players coming out for the draft, unless they are elite. The NCAA will be thrilled.

KC_Connection
11-22-2011, 07:39 PM
These changes really hurt the small-market teams that had been taking advantage of the system for the past few years like the Rays and Royals. I know that it completely ruins the Jays' ability to pay over slot for picks, which is what allowed them to build one of the strongest farm systems in baseball in just two years.

It also destroys the earning potential of young amateur players...which is bullshit. I'm really not sure why the MLBPA agreed to this.

evenfall
11-22-2011, 07:44 PM
Tampa Bay is a terrible example. Their stadium sucks, it is difficult for anyone in Tampa to get there, and their fans suck. Even our TV deal with FSNKC, small as it is, is better than Tampa Bay.

MLB needs to let that franchise move, the owner has done all the right things and got nothing in return.

They are an example of a small market team competing even with a bad stadium, that's what I meant.

GloryDayz
11-22-2011, 07:52 PM
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/P3ALwKeSEYs" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Ebolapox
11-22-2011, 07:52 PM
f*ck bud selig.

58kcfan89
11-22-2011, 07:57 PM
Alls I wanna know is are we gunna sign Hosmer, Moose, etc. for the long-term? Or are we still going to have to drop them as soon as they're free agents?

And does the draft budget thing totally fuck us? I know the Royals supposedly spend more than anyone on the draft...

alnorth
11-22-2011, 07:58 PM
These changes really hurt the small-market teams that had been taking advantage of the system for the past few years like the Rays and Royals. I know that it completely ruins the Jays' ability to pay over slot for picks, which is what allowed them to build one of the strongest farm systems in baseball in just two years.

It also destroys the earning potential of young amateur players...which is bullshit. I'm really not sure why the MLBPA agreed to this.

Probably same reason as the NFLPA. Envy. Except it is magnified 10 times over for baseball because at least an NFL rookie will see the field, baseball players were seeing high school players get millions that they'd rather see come to them, given to players who may never even make it above AA ball.

One thing the new system will certainly do, no one is going to pass on signability. Signability no longer exists, if you draft someone with the #45th pick, it isn't the 8th-best player who slipped, it is probably the 45th-best player. (or 29th-best player in your opinion because you think you've got the goods on scouting and the other teams are morons)

alnorth
11-22-2011, 08:01 PM
And does the draft budget thing totally **** us? I know the Royals supposedly spend more than anyone on the draft...

The draft was something we exploited more than almost anyone else. The Royals started doing it before a lot of other teams caught on and realized that overpaying on the draft was a great risk/reward play, and they hit it hard and heavy the last few years to get the young players they got now. People lauded Beane for exploiting the one-year signing of a free agent only to flip him in July for draft picks, if KC is successful this season they may praise DM for being the guy who made it rain in the draft.

At least the Royals used that advantage while it existed, from here on out its all scouting.

GloryDayz
11-22-2011, 08:02 PM
Alls I wanna know is are we gunna sign Hosmer, Moose, etc. for the long-term? Or are we still going to have to drop them as soon as they're free agents?

And does the draft budget thing totally **** us? I know the Royals supposedly spend more than anyone on the draft...

I'll make sure of it...