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 BigRedChief:
This sounds like a version of Whitey ball. There weren't a lot of home runs but it was way more exciting baseball than the current version. Let the millennial see this type of baseball and see if MLB can stop its slow decline with the public.
Like I said earlier - close to that, but I don't need it all the way to Whitey's Rugburners era.
I'm not against homers. They just can't be commonplace. Right now MLB is 'chasing the high' of homeruns and soon 40 homerun seasons won't be good enough, they'll need 50. Then 60. Then we'll be looking for ways to bring back the steroid era until homers just don't mean anything anymore.
The way to keep homers exciting isn't more of them, it's fewer of them.
Like I said earlier:
Originally Posted by :
Essentially I want 30 to be the new 40, 40 to be the new 50 (remember when 50 bombs was incredible?) and so on. And a lot of these 20 HR hitters would be like 6-8 homerun hitters and I'm just fine with that. A guy like Tommy Edman who's a switch hitter with little more than dead red pull power shouldn't have 11 bombs - he should have 5 or 6. Ian Happ hit almost entirely wall-scrapers last year; guy should've had like 12 instead of 25.
Power hitters should be an exception, not the rule.
The guys that hit bombs should be hitting bombs. I want the Ohtani's and Tatis's of the world with those majestic rocket shots to be truly exceptional. The game is just worse when someone like Marcus Semien can hang with those guys. Ian Happ is just a perfect example of the kind of guy that we should be looking to get out of the game. A league full of guys living off 370 ft homers while striking out 160 times and batting .225 while playing shitty defense anywhere you put him makes this game worse in every conceivable way.
In my world, Ian Happ isn't a big leaguer anymore and a guy like Kolten Wong never struggles for a second to get a halfway decent contract. [Reply]
The MLBPA came back today and agreed to work out how an international draft would work by July 25 and if they cant agree then the QO remains in effect.
Fucking morons. You had 2 years with no QO to make those same decisions and now you don't. But the league got tired of your bullshit and gave you the deal on the table and said take it or leave and you left it.
Originally Posted by jd1020:
The MLBPA came back today and agreed to work out how an international draft would work by July 25 and if they cant agree then the QO remains in effect.
Fucking morons. You had 2 years with no QO to make those same decisions and now you don't. But the league got tired of your bullshit and gave you the deal on the table and said take it or leave and you left it.
Good for the owners.
Start taking shit off the table every hour it doesn't get done. These MLBPA has WILDLY overplayed their hands. I'm guessing that when the union started seeing articles come out last night blaming THEM for the impasse, they realized the same.
"Good Faith" efforts, indeed.
Funny what happens when the press is merely being unfair to the owners instead of being a straight up propaganda arm of the MLBPA like they have been for the previous weeks. They started backing down after about 6 hours of press that was still slanted in their favor, just not as egregiously.
Originally Posted by jd1020:
The MLBPA came back today and agreed to work out how an international draft would work by July 25 and if they cant agree then the QO remains in effect.
****ing morons. You had 2 years with no QO to make those same decisions and now you don't. But the league got tired of your bullshit and gave you the deal on the table and said take it or leave and you left it.
Why is there a distinction of an International draft vs a domestic draft? I've never understood that. All players should be in the same player pool to attempt to make the same amount of money. That is the most fair way to do it. There is just one draft in the NBA. Seems to work just fine. [Reply]
Originally Posted by BWillie:
Why is there a distinction of an International draft vs a domestic draft? I've never understood that. All players should be in the same player pool to attempt to make the same amount of money. That is the most fair way to do it. There is just one draft in the NBA. Seems to work just fine.
International Game wasn't the pipeline it's become back when the entry draft started.
Then when it became a pipeline, teams didn't want them subject to the draft because it was an area where smart ballclubs could hoard talent under the radar and without having to 'wait their turn' via a draft. And they were relatively cheap.
Now teams are having to throw a LOT of money at them and it had become something of a wild wild west that managed to stay largely apart from the regulation the rest of MLB's 'talent procurement' processes were subject to. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
International Game wasn't the pipeline it's become back when the entry draft started.
Then when it became a pipeline, teams didn't want them subject to the draft because it was an area where smart ballclubs could hoard talent under the radar and without having to 'wait their turn' via a draft. And they were relatively cheap.
Now teams are having to throw a LOT of money at them and it had become something of a wild wild west that managed to stay largely apart from the regulation the rest of MLB's 'talent procurement' processes were subject to.
Sounds like it should be a regular draft. Everyone should get drafted together, then. International and domestically. [Reply]
Originally Posted by jd1020:
Just going to dilute the product and money.
How is it fair to a latin kid who will get peanuts thrown at him but some HS senior with a big arm gets 10M more?
Everything should be in the same draft.
Not having them in the same draft - or an international draft - makes ball clubs be able to take advantage of cheap labor and exploit the latin player market. [Reply]
Originally Posted by BWillie:
How is it fair to a latin kid who will get peanuts thrown at him but some HS senior with a big arm gets 10M more?
Everything should be in the same draft.
Not having them in the same draft - or an international draft - makes ball clubs be able to take advantage of cheap labor and exploit the latin player market.
The international draft that is proposed starts with $5.5M slot money which is equivalent to pick 6 in the regular draft so I'm not exactly sure where you are getting your numbers from.
On the whole international players would be getting MORE money with the proposed draft. Just removing the corruption found in the current signing period where kids already have agreements with teams under the table long before they sign and taking a little bit of the money from the very top and spreading it around to the rest of the field of prospects. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
Again, I don't disagree that a deadened ball is an easier alternative.
But remember - I'm a benevolent God Emperor here.
The problem with just deadening the ball is that it also slows balls hit in play and on smaller fields, those still become outs. And frankly, I don't want to 'rob' hitters on hard contact. Nor do I want to do anything to make it easier for fielders - I want those guys to be badass to do the job.
So a deadened ball doesn't just stop homers, it makes hard ground balls less hard so it gives IFers another step. It takes balls that may have hit and run into a gap slow down so fielders can cut them off. It's the easy way to kill cheap power, but it's not the best way because it doesn't come with the ancillary benefits of creating more grass. More grass means wider gaps and more baserunning. It means OFers have to decide if they're going to play in on balls and risk having liners hit over them off the fence or if they're going to play back and cede those line drives that they may have had a play on.
It's just a better way of doing it. And ballparks don't sell out anymore anyway until the post-season. Nor are those premium seats anywhere but Fenway. So the owners shouldn't have a problem with it (invariably they will).
I'm not saying that un-juicing the balls doesn't have some merit. I'm just saying that it's an artificial way to get a watered-down version of the results I'm looking for.
I understand what you're getting at, but taking the ball back to a prior era PLUS the banning of shifts will actually create more than an off-set effect. The guys who just hammer the ball to the pull side will have no problem with a prior ball. The light hitters will be the ones that suffer...which is parallel to your point on no cheap home runs - no cheap shots through the infield holes or into the gap. Light hitters go back to being who they are. [Reply]
Luxury-tax thresholds - $230M to $244M over course of five-year deal. (increase of $2M in final year from last offer)
Pre-arb pool: $50M (increase of $10M)
Minimum salaries, $700K to $780K. (increase of $10K in final year)
3 p.m. “deadline.”
CBT thresholds remain an issue, as they always have been, but gap has narrowed. MLBPA last known: $232m-$250m. MLB $230m-$242m (and could change today). On accounting: does new prearb pool $ count? MLB wants player stipends for ASG, Derby, special events (int’l play) to count too
BREAKING: Major League Baseball and the MLB Players Association have reached a tentative agreement on a new labor deal, sources tell ESPN. While it still needs to be ratified by both parties, that is expected to be a formality, and when it is:
Baseball is back.
Players vote is 26-12 in favor. Baseball will be back!
Union executive board vote was 8-0 against the MLB proposal but teams voted 26-4 in favor of it, carrying the day, Unusual that the general player population goes so far against player leadership.
