I first want to thank you for your continued support of the great game of baseball. This past season, we were reminded of how the national pastime can bring us together and restore our hope despite the difficult challenges of a global pandemic. As we began to emerge from one of the darkest periods in our history, our ballparks were filled with fans; the games were filled with excitement; and millions of families felt the joy of watching baseball together.
That is why I am so disappointed about the situation in which our game finds itself today. Despite the league’s best efforts to make a deal with the Players Association, we were unable to extend our 26 year-long history of labor peace and come to an agreement with the MLBPA before the current CBA expired. Therefore, we have been forced to commence a lockout of Major League players, effective at 12:01am ET on December 2.
I want to explain to you how we got here and why we have to take this action today. Simply put, we believe that an offseason lockout is the best mechanism to protect the 2022 season. We hope that the lockout will jumpstart the negotiations and get us to an agreement that will allow the season to start on time. This defensive lockout was necessary because the Players Association’s vision for Major League Baseball would threaten the ability of most teams to be competitive. It’s simply not a viable option. From the beginning, the MLBPA has been unwilling to move from their starting position, compromise, or collaborate on solutions.
When we began negotiations over a new agreement, the Players Association already had a contract that they wouldn’t trade for any other in sports. Baseball’s players have no salary cap and are not subjected to a maximum length or dollar amount on contracts. In fact, only MLB has guaranteed contracts that run 10 or more years, and in excess of $300 million. We have not proposed anything that would change these fundamentals. While we have heard repeatedly that free agency is “broken” – in the month of November $1.7 billion was committed to free agents, smashing the prior record by nearly 4x. By the end of the offseason, Clubs will have committed more money to players than in any offseason in MLB history.
We worked hard to find compromise while making the system even better for players, by addressing concerns raised by the Players Association. We offered to establish a minimum payroll for all clubs to meet for the first time in baseball history; to allow the majority of players to reach free agency earlier through an age-based system that would eliminate any claims of service time manipulation; and to increase compensation for all young players, including increases in the minimum salary. When negotiations lacked momentum, we tried to create some by offering to accept the universal Designated Hitter, to create a new draft system using a lottery similar to other leagues, and to increase the Competitive Balance Tax threshold that affects only a small number of teams.
We have had challenges before with respect to making labor agreements and have overcome those challenges every single time during my tenure. Regrettably, it appears the Players Association came to the bargaining table with a strategy of confrontation over compromise. They never wavered from collectively the most extreme set of proposals in their history, including significant cuts to the revenue-sharing system, a weakening of the competitive balance tax, and shortening the period of time that players play for their teams. All of these changes would make our game less competitive, not more.
To be clear: this hard but important step does not necessarily mean games will be cancelled. In fact, we are taking this step now because it accelerates the urgency for an agreement with as much runway as possible to avoid doing damage to the 2022 season. Delaying this process further would only put Spring Training, Opening Day, and the rest of the season further at risk – and we cannot allow an expired agreement to again cause an in-season strike and a missed World Series, like we experienced in 1994. We all owe you, our fans, better than that.
Today is a difficult day for baseball, but as I have said all year, there is a path to a fair agreement, and we will find it. I do not doubt the League and the Players share a fundamental appreciation for this game and a commitment to its fans. I remain optimistic that both sides will seize the opportunity to work together to grow, protect, and strengthen the game we love. MLB is ready to work around the clock to meet that goal. I urge the Players Association to join us at the table.
Manfred
Originally Posted by Vladimir_Kyrilytch: Soccer is the best sport in the world. An american might think 'oh the ball went into the stands, that's a tv timeout and I'll have a chance to do tiktoks a bunch of times over. So this is fine.
But in soccer, the clock runs. It runs all the time. You dont get a tiktok time out. They grab the ball and the game continues. I absolutely love it. So do they.
I spent 2 months in England once. Ate more baked beans for breakfast than I ever would have expected.
They aren't into endless stoppages. Game will fail there. No englishman will accept 80% commercials during the "game". They laugh at us for that and they should
:-) Soccer doesn't come close, nor does any other sport, to American Football in entertainment value. [Reply]
Originally Posted by ChiefsCountry:
You mean the NFL where only 6 franchises have made the Super Bowl from the AFC since 2003?
You surely aren't equating this to baseball. The New England Patriots are the only reason that is skewed, they traded star players and draft picks for more draft picks and fit inside a salary cap each year, which is the opposite of big market dominant teams in the MLB. As much as I love the Chiefs and hate the Pats, this defied all odds and will likely never come close to repeating due to the structure of the league. [Reply]
Originally Posted by ChiefsCountry:
You mean the NFL where only 6 franchises have made the Super Bowl from the AFC since 2003?
A lot of that is the product of poor management or teams having an elite QB. It is not because some teams have a financial advantage over others.
I think both a cap and a floor are great ideas. I am not sure if it's being discussed or not, but the MLBPA should be fighting for better pay for minor league players. [Reply]
This is going to get done. There are hree where there's any meaningful divide:
Originally Posted by :
SALARY ARBITRATION
MLB: Would keep current system or replace it with salaries based primarily on award recognition and career Fangraphs WAR, saying the change would address MLBPA’s concerns about paying younger players based on value. Players currently eligible for arbitration under the expired CBA would be grandfathered and have the choice of salary arbitration or the new system.
MLBPA: Would lower eligibility to two years of major league service, its level from 1974 through 1986, when it increased to three years. In the expired agreement, it was three years plus the top 22% by service time of players with at least two years but less than three years.
Originally Posted by :
SERVICE TIME
MLBPA: Made proposals aimed to prevent what it says is service-time manipulation, including allow accruing of service time for rookies for award
These two would likely be taken out a single shot - i.e. significantly expanding what qualifies as an season of service time for arbitration purposes. I think it presently requires 172 days on the roster (season is 187 days long). Make that 120 days with a maximium amount of years earned in a single season being 1 (so someone can't earn 4 seasons in 3, for instance). It would do a lot to prevent service time manipulation. Make it 90 if need be; that would require teams to wait until the ASB essentially to call up guys and that's a big ask if a player is truly ready to play. Most teams wouldn't do it.
Get guys to arb more frequently and easier and the players won't dig their heels in on the compensation once they get there.
Originally Posted by :
LUXURY TAX
Threshold was $210 million in 2021, with tax rates of 20% for first offender, 30% for exceeding in consecutive years and 50% for exceeding in three or more consecutive years. Surcharge for exceeding $230 million and $250 million.
MLB: Proposed raising threshold to $214 million in 2022 and offered an option of a $100 million payroll minimum funded by a 25% tax on payrolls above $180 million. Tax threshold would rise to $220 million in final season.
MLBPA: Proposed raising threshold starting at $245 million for the 2022 season and eliminating non-tax penalties.
I don't expect there's universal agreement on the salary floor but in the end, if the owners have to scrap the floor and eliminate the non-tax penalties (which are just used to fund the revenue sharing FOR the floor) and give a little bit on the starting luxury tax threshold, they'll do that. Enough wealthy teams would be fine with an increase and enough cheap teams will be fine not having to navigate a floor.
And again, this is posturing by PA, IMO - they'd ultimately be fine with that non-tax penalty being put in if it just creates a pool for the 'poorer' teams to spend from. Sooner or later the middle class of MLB FAs is going to get squeezed out and a situation like this will help them get paid. This would help more players than eliminating it would, even if the alternative would help the high end of the market get paid more. At some point the PA will understand this. [Reply]
Originally Posted by IowaHawkeyeChief:
You surely aren't equating this to baseball. The New England Patriots are the only reason that is skewed, they traded star players and draft picks for more draft picks and fit inside a salary cap each year, which is the opposite of big market dominant teams in the MLB. As much as I love the Chiefs and hate the Pats, this defied all odds and will likely never come close to repeating due to the structure of the league.
There is way more parity in baseball than the NFL and NBA. NFL the teams with the superstar QBs win. NBA the superstar player wins. It pretty much proves out. The only dynasty in baseball has been San Francisco Fucking Giants in the last 20 years.
Most teams at the bottom are ran piss poor and do shitty drafting. Most big free agency signings are just so fans and agents can get hand jobs and feel good. They generally back fire on the teams. [Reply]
Originally Posted by ChiefsCountry:
You mean the NFL where only 6 franchises have made the Super Bowl from the AFC since 2003?
That's a function of QB. No salary cap would be the same - just those teams would all be in big markets. Forget about Chiefs keeping Mahomes or Indy keeping Manning after their rookie deals. [Reply]
This is going to get done. There are hree where there's any meaningful divide:
These two would likely be taken out a single shot - i.e. significantly expanding what qualifies as an season of service time for arbitration purposes. I think it presently requires 172 days on the roster (season is 187 days long). Make that 120 days with a maximium amount of years earned in a single season being 1 (so someone can't earn 4 seasons in 3, for instance). It would do a lot to prevent service time manipulation. Make it 90 if need be; that would require teams to wait until the ASB essentially to call up guys and that's a big ask if a player is truly ready to play. Most teams wouldn't do it.
Get guys to arb more frequently and easier and the players won't dig their heels in on the compensation once they get there.
I don't expect there's universal agreement on the salary floor but in the end, if the owners have to scrap the floor and eliminate the non-tax penalties (which are just used to fund the revenue sharing FOR the floor) and give a little bit on the starting luxury tax threshold, they'll do that. Enough wealthy teams would be fine with an increase and enough cheap teams will be fine not having to navigate a floor.
And again, this is posturing by PA, IMO - they'd ultimately be fine with that non-tax penalty being put in if it just creates a pool for the 'poorer' teams to spend from. Sooner or later the middle class of MLB FAs is going to get squeezed out and a situation like this will help them get paid. This would help more players than eliminating it would, even if the alternative would help the high end of the market get paid more. At some point the PA will understand this.
Awesome more Mike Leake type signings is just what the sport needs. [Reply]
Originally Posted by ChiefsCountry:
There is way more parity in baseball than the NFL and NBA. NFL the teams with the superstar QBs win. NBA the superstar player wins. It pretty much proves out. The only dynasty in baseball has been San Francisco ****ing Giants in the last 20 years.
Most teams at the bottom are ran piss poor and do shitty drafting. Most big free agency signings are just so fans and agents can get hand jobs and feel good. They generally back fire on the teams.
That's because the variance on an MLB game and even 7-game playoff series is so high. Look at which teams make the playoffs every year and tell me there's parity.
It's extremely easy for inferior teams to get hot and win the WS, once they make the playoffs. But the 162-game regular season is a huge barrier that separates out the contenders.
I went to George Brett's last game. I flew back to KC for Hos, Esky, Cain and Moose's last game. I'll be there for Salvy's last game. Rooting for homegrown stars means a lot to fans. Rooting for homegrown players who stay to make the HOF means a lot. If the Royals had lost Brett in 1979 or whatever I'd have lost a lot of my fandom. [Reply]
Originally Posted by suzzer99:
That's because the variance on an MLB game and even 7-game playoff series is so high. Look at which teams make the playoffs every year and tell me there's parity.
It's extremely easy for inferior teams to get hot and win the WS, once they make the playoffs. But the 162-game regular season is a huge barrier that separates out the contenders.
I went to George Brett's last game. I flew back to KC for Hos, Esky, Cain and Moose's last game. I'll be there for Salvy's last game. Rooting for homegrown stars means a lot to fans. Rooting for homegrown players who stay to make the HOF means a lot. If the Royals had lost Brett in 1979 or whatever I'd have lost a lot of my fandom.
14 of the 15 American League teams have won their division since 2014.
Actually only 2 teams haven't made the playoffs since 2014 - Mariners and Phillies. Padres, Marlins, and Reds are the others but they made it because of the 2020 expanded playoffs. [Reply]
Originally Posted by ChiefsCountry: 14 of the 15 American League teams have won their division since 2014.
Actually only 2 teams haven't made the playoffs since 2014 - Mariners and Phillies. Padres, Marlins, and Reds are the others but they made it because of the 2020 expanded playoffs.
A large reason for this is because of team's ability to "tank" to get better picks and the ability to hold on to them longer. The MLBPA, from what I have seen, despises both of those. [Reply]
Originally Posted by ChiefsCountry:
Awesome more Mike Leake type signings is just what the sport needs.
{shrug}
I'm over pretending to give a shit about the owners pocketbooks. These teams are making money hand over fist.
And it shouldn't impact teams that are already fielding competitive salaries and/or intelligent front offices. If anything it will occasionally save them from themselves. If the Pirates were forced to go spend some damn money, maybe it would've offered Leake enough for the gap between him and someone like Scherzer to be insignificant enough that a team like STL would just go get Scherzer instead.
The fact that teams like the Cardinals can half-ass an off-season because they know that 1/3 of the league isn't going to bother to try and that should get them enough wins to sneak out a winning season even in a down year is a problem. Competitive balance is a good thing for MLB. Teams like the Pirates are not. [Reply]
I'm over pretending to give a shit about the owners pocketbooks. These teams are making money hand over fist.
And it shouldn't impact teams that are already fielding competitive salaries and/or intelligent front offices. If anything it will occasionally save them from themselves. If the Pirates were forced to go spend some damn money, maybe it would've offered Leake enough for the gap between him and someone like Scherzer to be insignificant enough that a team like STL would just go get Scherzer instead.
The fact that teams like the Cardinals can half-ass an off-season because they know that 1/3 of the league isn't going to bother to try and that should get them enough wins to sneak out a winning season even in a down year is a problem. Competitive balance is a good thing for MLB. Teams like the Pirates are not.
I just don't think paying a bunch of turds just to say you spent money is any better. Remember how many bench turds got paid when the NBA salary cap jumped. Didn't really change the competitive balance of the league.
Baseball has to figure out a way in that six year window for team control to pay the guys who deserve to be paid their WAR and not have to rely on bloated contracts in their 30s. [Reply]
Originally Posted by ChiefsCountry:
I just don't think paying a bunch of turds just to say you spent money is any better. Remember how many bench turds got paid when the NBA salary cap jumped. Didn't really change the competitive balance of the league.
Baseball has to figure out a way in that six year window for team control to pay the guys who deserve to be paid their WAR and not have to rely on bloated contracts in their 30s.
They have that. I've gone over the math on this before, but any player out there can approach their team and exchange top dollar for guaranteed money.
Tatis did it. Franco just did it. We know teams are willing to discuss it. It's an open market and if players would be willing to allow a couple of team option years after the they reach FA eligibility, teams would be willing to pay them more at the front end of those years. It's the guaranteed nature of contracts in MLB that make teams reticent to spend that kind of AAV over those kinds of term. To an extent, the young players are (again) being sacrificed at the alters of the older, more established guys.
And I still maintain that the players position back in 1994 (and since) has been penny wise and pound foolish all along. The owners proposed to allow unrestricted free agency after 4 years back in 1994 in exchange for a salary cap.
The owners have offered a revenue split in exchange for a cap in the past.
Both have been met with hard 'noes' from the MLBPA and it's just a dogmatic refusal at this point. More players will be better off with the creation of a cap and a defined revenue split than they would be under this bizarre-ass model.
The only people that would be truly hurt by it are the uber-stars. And in a league that is so dependent on overall team construction, why shouldn't that be the case? Mike Trout's the best player in a generation and he's never led a single post-season inning. He's made it to October once. Last year's MVPs didn't make the post-season. Once CY winner missed and the other went down with a whimper.
Star players just don't matter as much in baseball. A single great player can't drag a team into contention like in the other major sports. So why should it bother me that the star salaries may be compressed a bit in the name of everyone else getting more? And with a cap and defined revenue split, that's exactly what's happened. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
In his defense, I make it a point to watch a Chiefs game.
I watch the Cardinals while I'm doing other things. I don't sit down for first pitch and watch all 9 innings. And there aren't a hell of a of baseball fans more attuned to the game than I am.
But to me, that's part of the charm. 162 games with no clock and a leisurely pace. It isn't appointment television and doesn't need to be. It's filler - empty calories. If football is essentially raw protein, baseball is my loaded baked potato.
And I'm just fine with that. I don't need Michael Bay to be the next commissioner in order to enjoy the sport for what it is (and what it is not).
To this day, it’s what I love about the game. [Reply]
