Players vs. Owners...Let them Fight! (or, the CBA Negotiation Thread)

[Derwood]

The MLBPA offered their first list of "wants" to the owners.

These include:

A "competitive-integrity tax" for any team that does not spend $150M

Increase minimum salary from $780,000 to $1.5M

Increased revenue sharing that initially guarantees every small market club a minimum of $240M in revenue every season

Expanded draft lottery to further deincentivize tanking

Expansion of salary arbitration eligibility

Increased benefits for lower revenue Clubs who lose players to free agency

Penalties for Clubs that neglect to spend revenue sharing payments on team payroll

[mul21]

The only thing I saw that I thought would be a non-starter for the owners was an increase in super 2s from 22% to 44%.  That seems like a huge jump in guys eligible for arbitration after 2 seasons.

[Irrelevant Dude]

I have no idea how much revenue small market teams get today, but guaranteeing them $240M seems crazy to me, especially when you are only "forcing" them to spend $150M.  And then at the same time they continue to get other benefits of being small market/lower revenue teams.  

[Andy]

1 hour ago, Irrelevant Dude said:

I have no idea how much revenue small market teams get today, but guaranteeing them $240M seems crazy to me, especially when you are only "forcing" them to spend $150M.  And then at the same time they continue to get other benefits of being small market/lower revenue teams.  

That looks like a union attempt to have some sort of giveback in exchange for several demands that management is unlikely to give the time of day.

It also gives them an easy talking point when it gets swatted down: "We literally offered them guaranteed profits and they rejected it"

[Bertz]

It's very obvious that this is going to end up being a trade of:

- Green light on TV and expansion changes 

for

- 10-15% bumps to various financial pieces (LT, min salary, etc.)

It's so stupid this is going to require a 3 month lockout first.  This god damn league just can't do anything without a deadline.

[mul21]

22 minutes ago, Bertz said:

It's very obvious that this is going to end up being a trade of:

- Green light on TV and expansion changes 

for

- 10-15% bumps to various financial pieces (LT, min salary, etc.)

It's so stupid this is going to require a 3 month lockout first.  This god damn league just can't do anything without a deadline.

What are you specifically talking about here?  I assume going to 32 teams is the expansion part but TV changes look like what?  Shared revenue across the league like the NFL?

[Tangled Up in Plaid]

 

[Bertz]

15 minutes ago, mul21 said:

What are you specifically talking about here?  I assume going to 32 teams is the expansion part but TV changes look like what?  Shared revenue across the league like the NFL?

Manfred and most of ownership (everyone but the Dodgers?) wants to consolidate TV under the league umbrella.  That does two things;

- Makes it easy for fans.  All local broadcasts for all teams live under MLB.tv (probably with some different pricing tiers) and blackouts are officially dead

- If the league controls the whole pie instead of it being team by team, it makes it easier for MLB to peel games off and package them to national broadcast partners at a markup

I don't know exactly what level of veto rights the players have, but my understanding is this is something that needs to be handled under the CBA.  And the league set all of the current national broadcast deals to expire in '28 specifically so they could come to the negotiating table with as much inventory as possible.  So it can't be punted to 2032 without some major pain.

(As an aside this TV stuff is why there's roughly 0% chance of the lockout impacting a significant number of regular season games)

[mul21]

18 minutes ago, Tangled Up in Plaid said:

 

Man, that's not going to fly at all.  $245 million is peanuts and I have to imagine there's something in there to allow teams who are way over some time to get under.  The Dodgers, Mets and Yankees are all $90+ million over that cap this year.  10 teams are at $245 million or more for 2026.

[Tangled Up in Plaid]

The floor seems crazy as well. The Marlins would have to add 120 million in payroll

[Jason Ross]

Yeah, we are clearly in "nonsense" time in which both sides are putting forth offers neither side would ever agree to, with just enough apparent "give"  to seem like the good guy. 

To be clear, I am on the MLBPA and players side of "getting as much of the pie as possible' but just because I hope they get that doesn't mean I can't recognize an offer of this stature from their side, too.

[Derwood]

[Irrelevant Dude]

5 hours ago, Bertz said:

Makes it easy for fans.

What has MLB done in recent history to make anyone believe their goal is to make things easier for fans?  They are willing to splinter the TV rights across 10 different networks/services if it maximizes their revenue.

[soccer10k]

5 hours ago, mul21 said:

Man, that's not going to fly at all.  $245 million is peanuts and I have to imagine there's something in there to allow teams who are way over some time to get under.  The Dodgers, Mets and Yankees are all $90+ million over that cap this year.  10 teams are at $245 million or more for 2026.

They’ll ha the offseason to make trades and a lot of teams would need to add salary. Shouldn’t be too hard to get under.

[Tangled Up in Plaid]

2 minutes ago, soccer10k said:

They’ll ha the offseason to make trades and a lot of teams would need to add salary. Shouldn’t be too hard to get under.

It'll be really interesting to see what teams do in November because the assumed lockout would begin Dec 1