This cannot go on much longer.

[Edgy MD]

Maybe. That's certainly a possibility.

The other view is it takes a competitive bidder off the table for Duda and reduces his leverage.

[Mex17]

Regardless, here is my idea for a compromise when the next CBA negotiation comes around. . .

Players get:
-Free Agency after four years (down from six).
-Arbitration after two years (down from three).

Owners get:
-Pace of play concessions.
-A hard January 15th deadline for Major League free agents to sign Major League deals, after which you cannot sign a Major League deal until June 1st (if you want to sign a minor league deal, that's your prerogative).

Both get:
-Performance based metrics (the same ones that the new breed of GMs are using to evaluate free agents now) to be used in arbitration hearings, shifting away from mere service time being a primary factor. This could benefit either side on a case by case basis. . .the player gets closer to market value if he performs well or a pay cut if he regresses.

[Benjamin Grimm]

Mex17 wrote: -Free Agency after four years (down from six).

That will never happen.

Mex17 wrote: -A hard January 15th deadline for Major League free agents to sign Major League deals, after which you cannot sign a Major League deal until June 1st (if you want to sign a minor league deal, that's your prerogative).

That will never never never never happen.

[ashie62]

seawolf17 wrote: But has anyone from a team actually confirmed that? Have the Red Sox actually said "Hey, we offered the guy 5/125?" I don't think so. It's all "sources," which can potentially be a load of crap. I'm not saying there *is* collusion, but it's really weird that there are *this* many big names still floating around in February.

Pretty much. There appears to be a "glut" of mediocre ballplayers looking for a home. Good luck to them all; the times they are changing.

Have not seen any 5/125 signings as of Saturday 2/3/18

Just sayin.

[Frayed Knot]

Both get: -Performance based metrics (the same ones that the new breed of GMs are using to evaluate free agents now) to be used in arbitration hearings, shifting away from mere service time being a primary factor. This could benefit either side on a case by case basis. . .the player gets closer to market value if he performs well or a pay cut if he regresses.

Arbitration is merely an either/or hearing in which both sides are free to make their case via whatever facts or opinions they wish. iow, there's nothing stopping anyone from using performance based metrics now.
In fact I suspect most already do use them currently, at least they use the ones they think will buttress their side of the argument.

Service time is but one piece of the puzzle but there's nothing codified in the process as to how big a factor it plays. If you want to diminish (or eliminate) the effect of service time you need to change the mindset of the arbiters.
Again, I suspect that's something both sides already do whenever is suits their purpose.
Owners: "Yeah he's sixth year but he's only averaged 120 ABs/season so has played far less than your typical final arb year guy"
Agent: "Sure it's his first year of eligibility, but how many others in his position have had this level of success?"

[Mex17]

Benjamin Grimm wrote: Mex17 wrote: -Free Agency after four years (down from six). That will never happen. Mex17 wrote: -A hard January 15th deadline for Major League free agents to sign Major League deals, after which you cannot sign a Major League deal until June 1st (if you want to sign a minor league deal, that's your prerogative). That will never never never never happen.

Let me say it this way then.

If I was a member of the MLBPA right now, I would be getting ready to go completely nuclear and scorch the earth if the owners do not grant free agency after four years once this CBA expires in 2021. And, since I know that in collective barbaning one side does not unilaterally give unless they get something back, the signing deadline was something I thought of. I'm sure that the GMs and managers are not happy right now not knowing the full compliment of their teams two weeks from camps opening.

Edited February 3, 2018 by Guest

[Benjamin Grimm]

I think the more likely solution is a minimum payroll.

[Mex17]

Benjamin Grimm wrote: I think the more likely solution is a minimum payroll.

That does not help the guys who are hitting the free market for the first time on the north end of 30.

[Benjamin Grimm]

It's much better than forcing them to accept a minor league contract.

If teams are forced to spend, then some of that money will go to 30-year-old free agents.

[Mex17]

Benjamin Grimm wrote: It's much better than forcing them to accept a minor league contract.

Who's doing that?

If you are so stubborn so that you cannot accept how you are valued after a 2 1/2 month long process, you deserve to get screwed.

[Mex17]

Benjamin Grimm wrote: If teams are forced to spend, then some of that money will go to 30-year-old free agents.

It's one thing to get paid for a season, quite another to get paid at market value over several seasons while you are in your prime. Under the current conditions, guys can now get cheapskated when they are younger and producing on the field and are powerless off of it, and then get thrown away once they attain more power but are now in the latter half or past their primes. The aggregate result is lower overall career earnings, even if you got paid top dollar for maybe a season or two in between Scylla and Charybdis. The only way to address that is to grant arbitration eligibility and free agency earlier in their careers.

AAV is not the problem here, length of term is.

[Edgy MD]

And by "earlier in their careers," I'd say, "right at the start of their careers."

[Ceetar]

players got themselves into this mess at the last CBA. I'm not even sure what the players could give up in a negotiation at this point to pull things back in their favor in terms of salary cap/floor/free agency/etc. except the labor. they can withhold the labor. And the best way to do that, which they're greedily not likely to do, is to share the pot with the minor leaguers.

[Guest 41Forever]

I’m not sure what the “mess” is. It’s not like these guys are getting screwed. They are choosing between which team’s $100 million contract they will accept. And we’re talking about a handful of very, very good players.

If Bryce Harper goes unsigned next year, that’s one thing. Yu Darvish is another.

[nymr83]

There is no mess, there is just something for agents who may have given bad advice to their clients to whine about.

And something for writers to write about at a slow time of year.

Assuming a guy is keeping himself in shape (and, that is their job) what does it take for a hitter to be "ready"? a week of spring training? maybe 2 weeks for the pitchers? so when we get to the point that more than a couple of good players are looking like they wont start the year on time, it'll be a "mess" - right now its a somewhat interesting talking point.


As for changes to the next CBA, the union should push for a salary floor or punishment if a 'soft floor' isnt met and to eliminate rules that encourage tanking (and therefore encourage not signing players better than those you have now at prices you can afford).

[Ceetar]

41Forever wrote: I’m not sure what the “mess” is. It’s not like these guys are getting screwed. They are choosing between which team’s $100 million contract they will accept. And we’re talking about a handful of very, very good players. If Bryce Harper goes unsigned next year, that’s one thing. Yu Darvish is another.

The actual numbers aren't important, it's the percentage of profits that might be the focus. It could be argued that literally 99% of the players are underpaid. A waiter in 2017 makes more in tips than in 1997, but it's the same 15-20%, meanwhile the owners are making $8 profit on a $15 hamburger instead of $2 profit on an 8 dollar burger.

It doesn't go unnoticed to the players that all the teams are raking in additional cash from the MLBAM sale/dividends/whatever it is. Owners get richer and richer, and the players wealth isn't keeping up at all. They knew this, and instead their sticking point was a 4 day longer season to work in extra offdays. The owners have this salary cap/tax thing that heavily incentives not going over it. They're getting new stadiums paid for, free* labor from minor leaguers. regular payments from advanced media. record television contracts.

[Frayed Knot]

Mex17 wrote: Benjamin Grimm wrote: It's much better than forcing them to accept a minor league contract. Who's doing that? If you are so stubborn so that you cannot accept how you are valued after a 2 1/2 month long process, you deserve to get screwed.

If teams know that a player needs to sign by a certain date or risk missing half a season they'll just delay until that time to force the player's hand.
That's essentially what was done with drafted players (that plus a kind of floating cap) the sole purpose of which was to take away most of their bargaining power.
But those guys don't have a union and it's tough to see the ones who do agreeing to such a plan.

Ceetar wrote: players got themselves into this mess at the last CBA.

What changes happened during the last CBA that were detrimental to the union?

[Guest 41Forever]

Ceetar wrote: 41Forever wrote: I’m not sure what the “mess” is. It’s not like these guys are getting screwed. They are choosing between which team’s $100 million contract they will accept. And we’re talking about a handful of very, very good players. If Bryce Harper goes unsigned next year, that’s one thing. Yu Darvish is another. The actual numbers aren't important, it's the percentage of profits that might be the focus. It could be argued that literally 99% of the players are underpaid. A waiter in 2017 makes more in tips than in 1997, but it's the same 15-20%, meanwhile the owners are making $8 profit on a $15 hamburger instead of $2 profit on an 8 dollar burger. It doesn't go unnoticed to the players that all the teams are raking in additional cash from the MLBAM sale/dividends/whatever it is. Owners get richer and richer, and the players wealth isn't keeping up at all. They knew this, and instead their sticking point was a 4 day longer season to work in extra offdays. The owners have this salary cap/tax thing that heavily incentives not going over it. They're getting new stadiums paid for, free* labor from minor leaguers. regular payments from advanced media. record television contracts.

Interesting thought. But why do I, as a consumer, care about the profit split of the hamburger? The owner has a stake in the waiter being happy since he is the direct contact with the customer and, if he is a good businessman, will treat him fairly or lose him to a competitor. The waiter is hired to perform a task, and if he is not happy with what he is paid, he can A) Negotiate for a higher wage based on his skills and performance, or Take his skills and performance to someone else who will pay him what he feels is appropriate. In a competitive market, he'll do well. He also has the option of opening his own burger place.

As a consumer, I care only about the quality of a $15 hamburger and the quality of the service. And if the burger becomes too expensive in relation to the quality of the product or the quality of the service, I'll start bringing my family somewhere else.

Darvish is a fine pitcher, and he'll soon be very, very rich. He's entitled to what he can negotiate for his services based on what the market will bear for fine pitchers regardless of what the owner is making. Just because he's not being offered as much as he thinks he should be offered -- or is delaying signing because he thinks that is a tactic that will increase the competition for his services and inflate the value of his contract -- doesn't mean that there is collusion. Owners have an incentive to field the best team they can because winning increases attendance and presumably profits. Unless they are Derek Jeter, who seems intent on destroying a franchise and will soon learn how many fans are willing to pay to see a team with no good players or even a really cool home run sculpture, if he gets his way.

Now, as a consumer, paying $50 for a seat at a Major League game limits my ability to attend Major League games. And that's a consideration of the owner, because he's still paying those contracts regardless of attendance.

[Frayed Knot]

I'm also thinking that some of our suggestions here are, to a certain extent anyway, solutions in search of a problem.

While the number of unsigned FAs this late in the off-season is certainly unusual, other than the fact that we bored fans have been denied our typical helpings of hot stove fodder, there's nothing to say that November/December signings are superior to January/February ones. There are still going to be the same number of jobs as there were last season and either these guys are going to get signed in the next few weeks or they'll be replaced by rookies and pre-FA types instead which, considering that a certain segment of the fan base is always itching to "play the kids", this is kind of what some fans claim to want.

But absent collusion (no evidence of it in my view - certainly not yet) and absent the idea that owners are ignoring these guys wholesale or not even returning agent phone calls in pursuit of some end I can't fathom (at least partially not true) this is merely the yearly cat-and-mouse dance that's been going on for the entirety of the FA era, just on a different timetable this year. It'll get solved.




oe: a broad analogy comes to mind from earlier in the decade when some fans and writers were crying about there being too few HoF'ers inducted one year and therefore an immediate change in the whole voting process was needed. It was caused in part by the early steroid year guys and the idea that only one or two newbies, or in some cases only vet-committee inductees, was too few for some to handle and it was said to be making a mockery of the system and doing everything up to and including ruining the economic base of a small town in upstate NY (as if that's the reason the HoF exists).

Since then nothing has changed except for voting becoming somewhat more restrictive (15 years on the ballot down to 10) and yet the last four years will have had more inductees than in any other four-year period in the place's existence.
Results from one year (or even longer) are not the same thing as a lasting trend and certainly not proof of a broken system.

Edited February 4, 2018 by Guest

[MFS62]

And then maybe its just THIS:
https://www.crawfishboxes.com/2018/2/3/16967658/everything-youve-read-about-this-hot-stove-season-is-false-darvish-arrieta-martinez-hosmer-moustakas

Are the "big" free agents this year really worth what they're asking?
Later

[Edgy MD]

As a consumer, I care plenty about the justice behind the products and services I buy.

And baseball has done everything it can to constrain the opportunities for players to offer their skills elsewhere.

[Lefty Specialist]

So if I was a fan of a normal team, I would say "Cool. We can swoop in and get some FA's on the cheap and really build up our roster."

Alas, I'm a fan of the Mets, and they'll find a way to f it up.

[Ceetar]

Lefty Specialist wrote: So if I was a fan of a normal team, I would say "Cool. We can swoop in and get some FA's on the cheap and really build up our roster." Alas, I'm a fan of the Mets, and they'll find a way to f it up.

so called 'normal' teams aren't even doing that.

you could say that that's what the Mets did with Gonzalez, Reyes, and Bruce though. Got a slugger and a veteran bench for cheap no?

[Centerfield]

If I had to summarize the Mets off-season, I'd say they signed a middle reliever, a middling hitter, and a couple of middle-age guys.

[Guest 41Forever]

Interesting story by Verducci about the free agent market and issues we've been discussing. Mets content regarding Olliver Perez's contract and Jay Bruce.

Headline: The Free Agent Market is Frozen Because the Players Bargained for Luxury, not Labor

https://www.si.com/mlb/2018/02/02/brodie-van-wagenen-agent-free-agency-market

Edited February 5, 2018 by Guest

[Benjamin Grimm]

That is an interesting article. It's been said that Boras always relies on finding "one dumb owner" each season. If, as the article suggests, the age of dumbness is over, then he'll have to find a new methodology.

And if this plays out as Verducci suggests, it doesn't mean that player's careers will be shorter, just that they'll have shorter-term contracts, and earn less money, as they get deeper into their thirties and become less productive. There have surely been many cases where a team has paid an older player for his past productive seasons spent in another organization. It had to be only a matter of time before it became clear that this doesn't make much sense.

[Ceetar]

man, that's some serious shilling for owners.

Mentions younger players are more valuable but doesn't mention anything about minor leaguers or years of control or any of that. Doesn't mention the rising revenue and that contracts shouldn't compare to 2008.

Different run scoring environment too. record home runs, juiced balls. Of course a guy like Chacin is going to get less than Perez did, Perez was three years younger! Poorly researched. Jason Bay was much better than Jay Bruce too.

[Frayed Knot]

'Mentions younger players are more valuable but doesn't mention anything about minor leaguers or years of control or any of that." -- Because it's not relevant to the topic, nor have those parameters changed recently.


"Doesn't mention the rising revenue" --- Yes he does, twice in fact.
"... and that contracts shouldn't compare to 2008." -- He's not (only) comparing the numbers on the contracts, he's comparing the mindset on offering deals


"Different run scoring environment too. record home runs, juiced balls." -- Run scoring in 2007 was a shade higher than in 2017. HRs are up compared to a decade ago but run scoring is not.


"Of course a guy like Chacin is going to get less than Perez did, Perez was three years younger!" -- But not merely 'less', Chacin signed for two years rather than three at a rate barely half as much despite it being a full ten years later

[nymr83]

Thanks for posting the whole thing and denying Verducci his clicks. Come on 41, you should know better!

[Vic Sage]

yes to 83 and FK; no to 41 and Ceetar.