What Will The New Collective Bargaining Agreement Look Like?

[Ohtaniland]

12 minutes ago, Stradling said:

Well baseball has guaranteed contracts and a strong Union, (see: Hamilton, Josh).  As far as basketball goes, they could void one contract, but the player still got that money, they were just off the team and it didn't go against the cap.  

I have no issue with partially guaranteed contracts. Base salary with incentives. Kenta Maeta's contract  should be a model for all new contracts but the greedy agents and players would never let that happen. 

[kevinb]

17 minutes ago, Stradling said:

Well baseball has guaranteed contracts and a strong Union, (see: Hamilton, Josh).  As far as basketball goes, they could void one contract, but the player still got that money, they were just off the team and it didn't go against the cap.  

wonder if the new commissioner will be different or more of the same as the old when it came to backing down to the union. 

[kevinb]

I'm really ok with players being greedy because it's their business and they have to milk it for what it's worth because once it's gone it's gone. But I would really like to see a salary cap. I hate that teams like the Dodgers Yankees Sox hell even what the Angels did with signing huge contracts year after year being so far and above other teams in terms of payroll. I'd like teams to be more even with what they can spend and you then get better players on more teams then just stock liking them one the 4-5 teams that can afford it. 

[AngelsLakersFan]

9 hours ago, Kevinb said:

I hate that teams like the Dodgers Yankees Sox hell even what the Angels did with signing huge contracts year after year being so far and above other teams 

The Angels aren't above too many teams where it counts...

[Amazing Larry]

Lot's of these ideas are things the owners would not want to implement:

1. Scheduled Double Headers: Why would an owner want to slam 2 games in 1 day drastically reducing attendance and viewership?

2. Ending Inter-league Play: The owners love inter-league play. For instance Socal has transplants from all over the country. Having teams like The Cards and The Cubs come to town is a huge draw.

3. Shortened Season: Less games = less money made

[kevinb]

7 hours ago, AngelsLakersFan said:

The Angels aren't above too many teams where it counts...

What are the Angels ranked in terms of payroll 6th 7th?

[Stradling]

20 hours ago, Kevinb said:

wonder if the new commissioner will be different or more of the same as the old when it came to backing down to the union. 

How many years are you willing to go without baseball?  It isn't easy to break a union when the union members on average make $4 million a year.

[kevinb]

1 hour ago, Stradling said:

How many years are you willing to go without baseball?  It isn't easy to break a union when the union members on average make $4 million a year.

You don't have to break them but it would be nice to explain salary cap that the rest of American Major League sports play by 

[arch stanton]

3 minutes ago, Kevinb said:

You don't have to break them but it would be nice to explain salary cap that the rest of American Major League sports play by 

It looks like you don't read enough in the other sections of this forum. We only want to cap the salaries of the people who wear paper hats and hand us a cheeseburger through a small window.

[kevinb]

1 minute ago, arch stanton said:

It looks like you don't read enough in the other sections of this forum. We only want to cap the salaries of the people who wear paper hats and hand us a cheeseburger through a small window.

My head might explode if I went to the political forum. 

[AngelsLakersFan]

16 hours ago, Kevinb said:

You don't have to break them but it would be nice to explain salary cap that the rest of American Major League sports play by 

There already is a de facto salary cap in MLB. 

[John Stellman]

On 8/4/2016 at 10:24 AM, Ace_Shoemaker said:

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/an-early-preview-of-mlbs-2016-cba-negotiations-part-ii/

I would like to be able to trade draft picks, not sure if that's realistic or not though.

What else do want or think will be part of the new agreement after the next agreement?

The player ought to strike.  Then the Angels won't have to go out on the field and embarrass themselves.

[kevinb]

5 hours ago, AngelsLakersFan said:

There already is a de facto salary cap in MLB. 

Tell that to the Dodgers who's team salary is at what a gazillion dollars or is that 2 gazillion?

[AngelsLakersFan]

1 hour ago, Kevinb said:

Tell that to the Dodgers who's team salary is at what a gazillion dollars or is that 2 gazillion?

It's a shame the Giants have no chance against them. :-(

[kevinb]

9 minutes ago, AngelsLakersFan said:

It's a shame the Giants have no chance against them. :-(

Tell that to the Padres or the Rockies 

[AngelsLakersFan]

Just now, Kevinb said:

Tell that to the Padres or the Rockies 

The Padres and the Rockies don't have a chance against anyone. The Dodgers spending has nothing to do with that.

[California Cajun]

On Thursday, August 04, 2016 at 4:50 PM, ScottyA_MWAH said:

I think they were discussing shortening the season to 154 games too.  But if they do that, I'd want them to expand the playoffs.  The Wild Card game is fine, but I'd like to see the rest of the series 7 games.

And as a far as realignment, it'd be pretty drastic.  5 divisions, 6 teams per. 

Pacific: Padres, Angels, Dodgers, A's, Giants and Mariners. 

South: Braves, Astros, Marlins, Rays, Nationals, Rangers,

East: Red Sox, Yankees, Mets, Blue Jays, Phillies and Pirates

Midwest: White Sox, Cubs, Twins, Brewers, Tigers, Orioles

Central: Indians, Reds, Royals, Cardinals, Rockies, D-Backs

Each division winner goes to the playoffs, plus three wild cards.

 

I'm all for regional alignments, but less postseason so the season can end by Oct. 15.

My thoughts are four 8 team divisions,  2 in the AL and 2 in the NL.  Add 2 teams to make 32 and have a 50 year moratorium on more expansion.  (I'd like to see Brooklyn back in MLB.)

Each division plays 154 intra division games, which means 22 games against each opponent. 

For the postseason you have a best of 7 division series and the two winners meet in a best of 7 World Series.

The divisions are aligned by geography.  The AL (or NL) West would have the Angels, Dodgers, A's, Giants, Mariners, Padres, Dbacks, and Rockies. 

[California Cajun]

On Thursday, August 04, 2016 at 4:17 PM, ukyah said:

i don't have enough info to have preferences, but i imagine major changes to the QO rules and some tinkering with draft picks/FA.

The qualifying offer price has to be more realistic because other teams won't give up the draft pick for most players.  Current teams usually won't pay the QO.

[kevinb]

43 minutes ago, AngelsLakersFan said:

The Padres and the Rockies don't have a chance against anyone. The Dodgers spending has nothing to do with that.

K money I'm sure money spent has nothing to do with victories. 

[AngelsLakersFan]

1 hour ago, Kevinb said:

K money I'm sure money spent has nothing to do with victories. 

Payroll explains about 40% of victories. Of course higher payroll is a result of success, so it is hard to separate the two. If a team wins its players are going to start getting paid more. You have to ask what ways payroll is contributing to a teams success, and with the way things are set up now there isn't much. Teams cannot flex financial muscle through the draft. Teams will soon be unable to do the same internationally (that was the goal of the last international system). Free agents are generally old players on decline, with limited remaining value, and at extremely high prices. The only real way left, currently, to flex financial strength is through trades, and taking on bad contracts in exchange for good ones, which is something the Dodgers have done. If you want to even the playing field look there, at limiting the difference in money being exchanged between trading teams. Salary caps are almost entirely a mechanism for reducing play salary.

[ten ocho recon scout]

On 8/8/2016 at 9:33 PM, Kevinb said:

My head might explode if I went to the political forum. 

I think he was referring to the time nate logged in under a fake account, and said "i had INO today, its overrated. Cut their salaries." In the fast food news off topic thread, not the political one.

[kevinb]

14 hours ago, AngelsLakersFan said:

Payroll explains about 40% of victories. Of course higher payroll is a result of success, so it is hard to separate the two. If a team wins its players are going to start getting paid more. You have to ask what ways payroll is contributing to a teams success, and with the way things are set up now there isn't much. Teams cannot flex financial muscle through the draft. Teams will soon be unable to do the same internationally (that was the goal of the last international system). Free agents are generally old players on decline, with limited remaining value, and at extremely high prices. The only real way left, currently, to flex financial strength is through trades, and taking on bad contracts in exchange for good ones, which is something the Dodgers have done. If you want to even the playing field look there, at limiting the difference in money being exchanged between trading teams. Salary caps are almost entirely a mechanism for reducing play salary.

I am just saying that. Say the the payroll was a strict 200 mil a year for an example. and you had a floor at 100 say for an example. It would help the competitive balance. The Dodgers are at somewhere of what 280 or 260 mil? So they couldn't afford to take on shit trades to get the one good player of Gonzales in that deal. But also you would see many more good players be spread around more teams. You wouldn't see the Dodgers or the Giants be spending 500 million dollars in one off season that would be spread through out other teams making those deals and would help competitively through out the league. Similar to you see football has good players spread out, where as baseball its really only a handful of teams having these high priced players and the low market teams don't usually. There are some exceptions. I would just like to see it so it wasn't a who bought the best team it was who put the best team together in other areas. Just my opinion.

The Rockies and Padres for example when you have teams like the Dodgers and to a lesser extent the Giants spending a ton of money that the Padres and Rockies can't spend financially. How bad was Baltimore and the other teams in the East when the Sox and Yankees were spending crazy amounts. You can say well look at Baltimore now, but at how long can they keep that team together before things get too high priced for that they can't afford it. Again just me spewing stuff that I think thats wrong with baseball, and wish were different.

[AngelsLakersFan]

22 hours ago, Kevinb said:

I am just saying that. Say the the payroll was a strict 200 mil a year for an example. and you had a floor at 100 say for an example. It would help the competitive balance. The Dodgers are at somewhere of what 280 or 260 mil? So they couldn't afford to take on shit trades to get the one good player of Gonzales in that deal. But also you would see many more good players be spread around more teams. You wouldn't see the Dodgers or the Giants be spending 500 million dollars in one off season that would be spread through out other teams making those deals and would help competitively through out the league. Similar to you see football has good players spread out, where as baseball its really only a handful of teams having these high priced players and the low market teams don't usually. There are some exceptions. I would just like to see it so it wasn't a who bought the best team it was who put the best team together in other areas. Just my opinion.

The Rockies and Padres for example when you have teams like the Dodgers and to a lesser extent the Giants spending a ton of money that the Padres and Rockies can't spend financially. How bad was Baltimore and the other teams in the East when the Sox and Yankees were spending crazy amounts. You can say well look at Baltimore now, but at how long can they keep that team together before things get too high priced for that they can't afford it. Again just me spewing stuff that I think thats wrong with baseball, and wish were different.

You have to look at the economic effects of changes like that. If there was a hard salary cap you would see the price of every player go down. If the salaries of players go down then the top revenue teams will have the ability to buy more players. The salary cap has to move all the way to the floor, to the lowest teams payroll level to completely level the playing field.

If you want to create an even playing field you have to increase revenue sharing. This is the real driver behind the NFL's parity.