Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 2, 2021 13:00:00 GMT -5
Put it all here. Heyman has a minor update of no progress, hardly shocking. This is going to drag out it seems and there might even be a lockout I have seen some here mention. Who knows, maybe we get an 11th hour miracle.
|
|
|
Post by lajoiesghost on Jun 2, 2021 13:31:29 GMT -5
There will be 'no progress' right up until the last minute or even into a work stoppage because that's when each side's leverage it at it's greatest. That's when the dollars are affected.
|
|
|
Post by TheChico on Aug 18, 2021 16:41:19 GMT -5
MLB proposal in new offer (The Athletic)
Salary floor $100 required for all teams and but luxury tax ceiling will be $180 million.
Anything over $180 million is 25% hit which is a increase which is currently 20%, no word on multiple offenders.
Projected Union response to this: LOL!!!!!!!!
|
|
|
Post by happtobehere on Aug 18, 2021 19:15:17 GMT -5
MLB proposal in new offer (The Athletic) Salary floor $100 required for all teams and but luxury tax ceiling will be $180 million. Anything over $180 million is 25% hit which is a increase which is currently 20%, no word on multiple offenders. Projected Union response to this: LOL!!!!!!!! MLB is completely out of touch with reality.
This type of proposal is going to be considered "in bad faith" by the players and just set the tone for an ugly battle.
|
|
|
Post by bryzzobrist on Aug 18, 2021 19:19:42 GMT -5
Isnt the tax at like 208m right now? Yikes.
|
|
|
Post by tbs20 on Aug 18, 2021 19:27:12 GMT -5
I don't see how this gets done on time unless everyone is desperate from missing time due to covid
|
|
|
Post by TheChico on Aug 18, 2021 20:02:38 GMT -5
Isnt the tax at like 208m right now? Yikes. $210 Million actually. Since last CBA, MLB worked out a mega deal with TBS and demanding 14 team playoff in the new CBA but lets lower the luxury tax to $180 million just because they are adding a floor for $100 million which only 12 teams are under? that does not move the needle at all for the union.
|
|
|
Post by TheChico on Aug 18, 2021 20:05:00 GMT -5
MLB proposal in new offer (The Athletic) Salary floor $100 required for all teams and but luxury tax ceiling will be $180 million. Anything over $180 million is 25% hit which is a increase which is currently 20%, no word on multiple offenders. Projected Union response to this: LOL!!!!!!!! MLB is completely out of touch with reality.
This type of proposal is going to be considered "in bad faith" by the players and just set the tone for an ugly battle.
Do they even think these things through? I mean the concept is fine but starting the celling at $180 million is just plan silly, This is a non-starter anything below $210 million, owners getting TBS money and want expanded playoffs so they need to pay up.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 19, 2021 2:34:20 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by happtobehere on Aug 19, 2021 6:20:45 GMT -5
MLB is completely out of touch with reality.
This type of proposal is going to be considered "in bad faith" by the players and just set the tone for an ugly battle.
Do they even think these things through? I mean the concept is fine but starting the celling at $180 million is just plan silly, This is a non-starter anything below $210 million, owners getting TBS money and want expanded playoffs so they need to pay up. This shows a complete disconnect between the MLB brass, the players and the fans.
No doubt the players will want the luxury tax raised, similar in structure to as it is now. By suggesting large market teams spend less money is basically telling your star players to take pay cuts. Meanwhile, MLB profits will continue to rise.
Second, the fans, honestly, do not want to see "competitive balance", MLB talks about wanting to increase fan interests, shockingly, baseball had the most fan interest when the Yankees were dominating the playoffs year after year.
Is MLB blind to what is happening around the rest of the sports? Does College Football have competitive balance? Of course not, the same teams are in the College Playoffs year after year. Is Basketball losing interest with the league developing "super teams"? Fuck no it isn't! Did football's popularity nose dive with Tom Brady dominating the league and the Patriots being Super Bowl favorites year after year? Not one bit!
Of course fans want to see the equivalent to Gonzaga but not at the expense of Kentucky not making the NCAA tourney....
General fans, youth, deep down want super teams, they want the Dodgers making the playoffs every year with the occasional flare up like the Rays competing with the "big Boys" but for it to be the exception, not the rule.
Alabama has a huge following around college football, Alabama, the shittiest market you could imagine, because they are great. Viewers tune in across the SEC and the national to see Alabama crush team and/or hope they lose. This is the reality but baseball foolishly believes fans want to see different teams in the playoffs. Do they really think anyone will tune into a Royals/Marlins World Series?
Expand the playoffs like last year to get the shit markets in and then see if they can make a run. That is the answer. Raise the luxury tax so big market teams can dominate year after year because a bad Yankees team is bad for baseball.
It blows my mind that baseball can be this ignorant despite having profit sharing. Do they think the Yankees, Red Sox, Dodgers have such a large following just because of where they play? If that was the case then Oakland wouldn't be in the dumps. The Rangers would have a massive national following..Tampa would be more profitable than St. Louis. Manfred and the owners in general need to pull their head out of their collective asses.
|
|
|
Post by lajoiesghost on Aug 19, 2021 8:54:15 GMT -5
The occasional "feel good" story is good for the game but the big market teams push the ratings not only with their own fan base, but other fans who watch to root against them. If the Cubs are out, I will still watch and I will have a team I am rooting for, and of course a team or two I root against. So yes, in that respect you almost need an evil empire or two for all the fans whose team didn't make it.
|
|
|
Post by happtobehere on Aug 19, 2021 12:01:01 GMT -5
The occasional "feel good" story is good for the game but the big market teams push the ratings not only with their own fan base, but other fans who watch to root against them. If the Cubs are out, I will still watch and I will have a team I am rooting for, and of course a team or two I root against. So yes, in that respect you almost need an evil empire or two for all the fans whose team didn't make it. Exactly, no one was calling baseball unwatchable when the Yankees were dominating and making the playoffs 17 out of 18 years. Baseball interest was growing because you either loved the Yankees or you loved to hate the Yankees.
MLB's luxury tax proposal, one won't get approved by the players association, two would be an absolutely eliminate long term, high dollar deals.
I had high hopes for Manfred coming in as he was progressive in his attempts to modernize the game, but the past couple seasons have been a disaster for him. The handling of the Astros was a complete joke and this CBA negotiations are going to be a shit show, especially if they are this out of touch with the players and the fans.
If Manfred wants to see baseball become more competitive, 1.) allow smaller market teams to spend more on amateur talent. 2.) do not hinder teams desire to trade prospects with a low ball luxury tax threshold and/or high penalties for going over the luxury tax that results in the loss of draft picks. 3.) no more losing a draft pick for signing a QO player.
This way, larger market teams are more willing to give up their best prospects for a chance to win now. Since the QO, hardly ever do you see franchise altering trades because teams refuse to deal their upper echelon prospects. Outside of the Turner/Scherzer and Berrios trades, no top 100 prospect was traded. Some very good prospects were traded but you didn't see and haven't seen in a very long time the Samardjiza/Hammels for 7 Ranked Russell, Billy McKinney and Dan Straily type trade.
The proposed 180 luxury tax threshold would encourage more teams to "tank" and force more teams to "rebuild" sooner. It would also make deadline deals be less intriguing then they already are due to less interesting prospects being dealt and making high dollar players like Bryant less likely to be moved and receiving even smaller returns.
It's proposals like this that makes me wonder, who the hell advises the commissioner?
Side note, whenever I read a stupid idea, the scene from Casino where DeNiro tells the chef to "put an equal amount of blueberries in each muffin" pops in my head
|
|
|
Post by batman66 on Aug 19, 2021 14:50:01 GMT -5
The occasional "feel good" story is good for the game but the big market teams push the ratings not only with their own fan base, but other fans who watch to root against them. If the Cubs are out, I will still watch and I will have a team I am rooting for, and of course a team or two I root against. So yes, in that respect you almost need an evil empire or two for all the fans whose team didn't make it. Exactly, no one was calling baseball unwatchable when the Yankees were dominating and making the playoffs 17 out of 18 years. Baseball interest was growing because you either loved the Yankees or you loved to hate the Yankees.
MLB's luxury tax proposal, one won't get approved by the players association, two would be an absolutely eliminate long term, high dollar deals.
I had high hopes for Manfred coming in as he was progressive in his attempts to modernize the game, but the past couple seasons have been a disaster for him. The handling of the Astros was a complete joke and this CBA negotiations are going to be a shit show, especially if they are this out of touch with the players and the fans.
If Manfred wants to see baseball become more competitive, 1.) allow smaller market teams to spend more on amateur talent. 2.) do not hinder teams desire to trade prospects with a low ball luxury tax threshold and/or high penalties for going over the luxury tax that results in the loss of draft picks. 3.) no more losing a draft pick for signing a QO player.
This way, larger market teams are more willing to give up their best prospects for a chance to win now. Since the QO, hardly ever do you see franchise altering trades because teams refuse to deal their upper echelon prospects. Outside of the Turner/Scherzer and Berrios trades, no top 100 prospect was traded. Some very good prospects were traded but you didn't see and haven't seen in a very long time the Samardjiza/Hammels for 7 Ranked Russell, Billy McKinney and Dan Straily type trade.
The proposed 180 luxury tax threshold would encourage more teams to "tank" and force more teams to "rebuild" sooner. It would also make deadline deals be less intriguing then they already are due to less interesting prospects being dealt and making high dollar players like Bryant less likely to be moved and receiving even smaller returns.
It's proposals like this that makes me wonder, who the hell advises the commissioner?
Side note, whenever I read a stupid idea, the scene from Casino where DeNiro tells the chef to "put an equal amount of blueberries in each muffin" pops in my head
They need to can Manfred and Theo needs to add to his legacy and run baseball. I mean half the current rules they made are because of the way he ran teams and found ways to manipluate the system so they gave him hurdles to try to make it harder and so he would not have an advantage .
|
|
|
Post by TheChico on Aug 19, 2021 15:14:58 GMT -5
Do they even think these things through? I mean the concept is fine but starting the celling at $180 million is just plan silly, This is a non-starter anything below $210 million, owners getting TBS money and want expanded playoffs so they need to pay up. This shows a complete disconnect between the MLB brass, the players and the fans.
No doubt the players will want the luxury tax raised, similar in structure to as it is now. By suggesting large market teams spend less money is basically telling your star players to take pay cuts. Meanwhile, MLB profits will continue to rise.
Second, the fans, honestly, do not want to see "competitive balance", MLB talks about wanting to increase fan interests, shockingly, baseball had the most fan interest when the Yankees were dominating the playoffs year after year.
Is MLB blind to what is happening around the rest of the sports? Does College Football have competitive balance? Of course not, the same teams are in the College Playoffs year after year. Is Basketball losing interest with the league developing "super teams"? Fuck no it isn't! Did football's popularity nose dive with Tom Brady dominating the league and the Patriots being Super Bowl favorites year after year? Not one bit!
Of course fans want to see the equivalent to Gonzaga but not at the expense of Kentucky not making the NCAA tourney....
General fans, youth, deep down want super teams, they want the Dodgers making the playoffs every year with the occasional flare up like the Rays competing with the "big Boys" but for it to be the exception, not the rule.
Alabama has a huge following around college football, Alabama, the shittiest market you could imagine, because they are great. Viewers tune in across the SEC and the national to see Alabama crush team and/or hope they lose. This is the reality but baseball foolishly believes fans want to see different teams in the playoffs. Do they really think anyone will tune into a Royals/Marlins World Series?
Expand the playoffs like last year to get the shit markets in and then see if they can make a run. That is the answer. Raise the luxury tax so big market teams can dominate year after year because a bad Yankees team is bad for baseball.
It blows my mind that baseball can be this ignorant despite having profit sharing. Do they think the Yankees, Red Sox, Dodgers have such a large following just because of where they play? If that was the case then Oakland wouldn't be in the dumps. The Rangers would have a massive national following..Tampa would be more profitable than St. Louis. Manfred and the owners in general need to pull their head out of their collective asses.
I totally agree!! Competitive balance is bullshit excuse, if you the lower the luxury tax then teams that are currently over the $180 million are just going to shed payroll any way they can to get under it and for around 25 teams in this league will use the $180 million as their new hard cap with a small group of big market teams going over it but also will try to reset it after no more than 2 years over. Why MLB thinks it is a great idea for big market teams like the Yankees feeling the need to move a couple star players to reset the tax and close their competitive window early is good for baseball is beyond me. All sports needs villains, it makes for good baseball even if some fans don't know that. Also the big market teams drive most the revenue and keep baseball on the map, without them your product losses value. The expanded playoffs is going to happen, I would be shocked if it does not, there is way to much money to be made from both sides for that to not happen, but if they want to add a tool for small market teams, then allow draft picks to be traded just like any other sport. I don't get why MLB is so against this? a team like the Rays would LOVE to take on other teams draft picks if offered in deals, this keeps their farm afloat while keeping their payroll in check. Also totally agree get rid of some of the luxury tax penalties, like draft picks, surcharges and IFA stuff and make it a simple formula. like First year over 25% and add another 10% for every year over it, more big market teams will spend which means more revenue sharing for the smaller market teams. Right now it really restricts spending for big market teams which means left revenue sharing you would believe.
|
|
|
Post by lajoiesghost on Aug 19, 2021 15:21:29 GMT -5
I don't really watch NBA much but I like the way they do their salary cap. I always thought there should be some incentive or cap break for a team to re-sign its own player. I grew up in a time when teams had mostly the same players year after year and I think that is good for any sport. I would favor MLB having a per player cap formula and a sign your own incentive. With some minor tweaking to the NBA system, both players and teams could benefit and the fans would have more of the same team to root for, promoting loyalty to the team AND the sport. As an example, a player could get 5% above their max contract if they resigned with the same team and the team could get a similar luxury tax break or maybe a bump in their draft $ available to spend. There are lots of ways you could give incentive to both the player and the team for re-signing their own free agents but still give players the freedom to move on of they choose.
|
|
|
Post by ddevonb on Aug 19, 2021 20:19:19 GMT -5
MLB proposal in new offer (The Athletic) Salary floor $100 required for all teams and but luxury tax ceiling will be $180 million. Anything over $180 million is 25% hit which is a increase which is currently 20%, no word on multiple offenders. Projected Union response to this: LOL!!!!!!!! MLB is completely out of touch with reality.
This type of proposal is going to be considered "in bad faith" by the players and just set the tone for an ugly battle.
I think this is huge overstatement. They are just starting negotiations and both sides will start by asking for more than they could possible expect to get. Each side will add more issues along the way and they will each make concessions. We shouldn't take this first statement as what they really want... because it's not. It's a launching position for negotiations because someone needed to start.
|
|
|
Post by Returnofstevefitz on Aug 20, 2021 7:03:15 GMT -5
I know both sides are far apart today, but a lot of "experts" seem to think at the end of the day, both parties will realize what's needed and a deal will get done.
|
|
|
Post by batman66 on Aug 20, 2021 7:49:23 GMT -5
I know both sides are far apart today, but a lot of "experts" seem to think at the end of the day, both parties will realize what's needed and a deal will get done. I hope so. I think they realize neither side can afford a stoppage , especially the owners after the hit they took with Covid . And a strike or lockout would set baseball back and make it even harder to make progress with getting peak interest back moving forward.
|
|
|
Post by happtobehere on Aug 20, 2021 8:30:37 GMT -5
MLB is completely out of touch with reality.
This type of proposal is going to be considered "in bad faith" by the players and just set the tone for an ugly battle.
I think this is huge overstatement. They are just starting negotiations and both sides will start by asking for more than they could possible expect to get. Each side will add more issues along the way and they will each make concessions. We shouldn't take this first statement as what they really want... because it's not. It's a launching position for negotiations because someone needed to start. I don't think it's an overstatement at all.
I'll put it this way, if you were going in for your annual review and your boss kicked off negotiations by telling you that they were going to reduce your pay 15% but raise the rates of the entry level positions, how pissed off would you be? Would you really listen to the next thing that comes out of your bosses mouth?
Let me ask you, if you cut the major market teams spending by 15% what do you think is going to happen to contracts for top tier free agents? Next what drives baseball's mean? Next, what drives baseball's arbitration raises?
We know big market teams strive to stay around the luxury tax. If that threshold is 250 million or 150 million, teams will attempt to stay below to avoid stringent penalties. What does it mean when you reduce top market teams spending by 35 million dollars? It means you have less teams involved in giving out massive contracts, which means top players who create the market are forced to take less money.
You may say I'm exaggerating but anyone with a clue about how baseball economics can see what baseball just tried to do to the players, and the players who know it better than anyone else, know that is in bad faith. This is basically the equivalent of throwing a sucker punch at the weigh in.
|
|
|
Post by thisbuds4u on Aug 20, 2021 13:40:35 GMT -5
MLB proposal in new offer (The Athletic) Salary floor $100 required for all teams and but luxury tax ceiling will be $180 million. Anything over $180 million is 25% hit which is a increase which is currently 20%, no word on multiple offenders. Projected Union response to this: LOL!!!!!!!! I'm not sure it's a LOL situation. It might be a very shrewd move by Manfred and the owners. A 'divide and conquer" approach to negotiations. While everyone focuses on the top wage earners, the majority of players will never reach that status. It's been no secret that service time is a big issue for the players how teams manipulate it and the length of team control. There are a lot of young ballplayers who are vastly underpaid with the way the current CBA is set up. Raising the minimum will force teams like the Pirates and Marlins to spend more unlike there current agenda where they keep players around till they get to expensive and trade them away. Every player is going to have his own best interest at heart? If those bottom wage earners see a significant increase, they will be inclined to vote for this CBA. While $1 million dollars doesn't seem like much to Trout, Lindor or Tatis, it will to the guys making league minimum.
|
|