Uh oh...labor trouble brewing?

[Frayed Knot]

Yeah, it would certainly take some of the shine off his rep if this turns into even a partial fail during his first time at the helm.

[Ceetar]

I figure most of the rumors and reports right now are mostly maneuvering by either side and don't take much stock in it. I'll start thinking about it more seriously if we start getting through January without a deal.

[Frayed Knot]

If they go through January without a deal (and have everything in a holding pattern until then) then their problems are a lot more serious than anyone is letting on.

Unlike the years that produced strikes and lockouts, there doesn't seem to be that one BIG issue where the two parties are on fundamentally opposite sides. This year seems to be more a case where there are a series of issues [FA compensation, roster size, Int'l Draft, Lux Tax limits] where working arrangements already exist and where compromises can be reached on those that need changing but a lot of details to work through before they get there.
Supposedly the owners are a bit miffed that the player side didn't seem all that interested in getting down to it until very recently and that's why they're up against the deadline. Maybe that's just spin or maybe it's that the player side leader, Tony Clark, is new to this and doesn't have the labor background typically found in a union head.

[Frayed Knot]

CBA Done! - Five Year Deal.
And they even left over three hours to spare.

[Benjamin Grimm]

ESPN.com wrote: "The league that wins the All-Star Game no longer will get home-field advantage in the World Series, which instead will go to the pennant winner with the better regular-season record"

[duan]

Benjamin Grimm wrote: ESPN.com wrote: "The league that wins the All-Star Game no longer will get home-field advantage in the World Series, which instead will go to the pennant winner with the better regular-season record"

HOORAY!

That is SO MUCH FUCKING BETTER.

[duan]

And we don't have to feel unlucky, because KC still had better record in 2015.

[stevejrogers]

duan wrote: And we don't have to feel unlucky, because KC still had better record in 2015.

Wrigleyville is probably kicking themselves for missing out on the clincher in Chicago.

Hmmmm...I wonder if that was the actual impetus for the change, besides being an overall dumb one.

[Benjamin Grimm]

I doubt it. Everything isn't about the Cubs.

[MFS62]

Benjamin Grimm wrote: I doubt it. Everything isn't about the Cubs.

Of course not.
Its about the Cardinals - because they have the "best fans in baseball". (I've been watching too much ESPN. I gotta' lie down)

Later

[Benjamin Grimm]

The Washington Post wrote: ● Compensatory draft picks: Under the old CBA, teams that signed most free agents were obliged to give up a first-round draft pick in return. In the new deal, that compensation will be tied to a team’s payroll. If a team that signs a free agent is over the threshold for the competitive-balance tax, it will relinquish two picks. If the signing team is under, it will give up just one pick. No first-round picks will be exchanged as compensation. ● What remains the same: MLB had pushed for an international draft that would have subjected prospects in the Domincan Republic and other baseball-rich countries to the same point of entry as players in the U.S., including Puerto Rico, and Canada; the union successfully rejected that proposal. Roster sizes remain the same at 25 in the regular season, but can still expand to as much as 40 in September, despite a proposal that would have changed them to 26 during the regular season but with a more aggressive cap in September.

I haven't seen anything definitive on whether the QO system remains in place. I had thought that they were going to eliminate the clause that has teams losing draft picks if they sign a free agent, but it actually looks like it's been expanded, in that some teams could lose two picks. I'm not clear on what that last sentence in the first paragraph means. Is it saying that any lost picks would not be from the first round?

[Frayed Knot]

I'm fine with the fact that this [the home-field All Star winner] is going away, but it was also about 97th on my list of priorities. Everyone knew that this was never anything other than an attempt to artificially boost the "importance" of the ASG for marketing reasons, something I always treated it as silly rather than criminal.


Selig always contended that the reason they couldn't go to a best-record method was that the WS carried with it such a large media and logistical contingent that it was necessary to know well before the end of the regular season where the Series might be played and on which days in order to reserve enough hotel and exhibition space. iow, do you 'pre-reserve' space, in say Houston, for Tues-Wed-Thurs during the final week of October or tell them that you could need the previous and following weekends instead.
Maybe they're now getting faster service through 'PRICELINE.com' or something.

[Lefty Specialist]

duan wrote: Benjamin Grimm wrote: ESPN.com wrote: "The league that wins the All-Star Game no longer will get home-field advantage in the World Series, which instead will go to the pennant winner with the better regular-season record" HOORAY! That is SO MUCH FUCKING BETTER.

This. A thousand times this.

[Benjamin Grimm]

The old way, during the LCS there were two possible cities where the World Series might open. Now there will be three. Not such a big difference.

I agree about the All-Star Game thing. I'm glad it's no longer tied to home-field. It wasn't really important to me, but it was stupid, and now there's one less stupid thing in the world.

[seawolf17]

Benjamin Grimm wrote: I doubt it. Everything isn't about the Cubs.

Shh! Don't say that too loudly or they'll hear you and start crying.

[Frayed Knot]

I haven't seen anything definitive on whether the QO system remains in place. I had thought that they were going to eliminate the clause that has teams losing draft picks if they sign a free agent, but it actually looks like it's been expanded, in that some teams could lose two picks. I'm not clear on what that last sentence in the first paragraph means. Is it saying that any lost picks would not be from the first round?

More deets becoming available -- from MLB.com: "Free-agent compensation specifics on Draft-pick compensation are still being discussed", but this much seems to be known
- qualifying offers -- which will still be calculated based on the average of the top 125 salaries -- can still be extended to free agents, but no more than once per player in his career. A player must still be on his club for the entire season to receive a qualifying offer.
- teams losing a free agent who received a qualifying offer will get a Draft pick only if the player signs a contract worth at least $50 million. After that, the pick depends on a team's market size, according to MLB Network Insider Ken Rosenthal.
- beginning in the 2017-18 offseason, teams will not lose first-round Draft picks for signing a premier free agent. However, teams exceeding the luxury-tax threshold would lose a second-rounder, a fifth-rounder and $1 million in international pool money. Clubs that haven't exceeded the luxury-tax threshold will lose a third-round pick.




Other than that, there looks like there were tweaks to the lux tax standard (it's going up) and to the tax rates on those exceeding it.
Also changes to what seems like a harder cap in Int'l signings
and that the beginning of the season will be moved forward by a half-week so as to create more in-season off days starting in 2018
No changes were made in roster size or to caps on roster size in September.

http://m.mlb.com/news/article/209969472/mlb-owners-players-agree-to-new-labor-deal/

[Guest Mets Willets Point]

It's nice that the one union full of wealthy Republicans is able to flex their muscle at a time when the next Presidential administration is gearing up to demolish every other union that still survives.

[Guest d'Kong76]

Benjamin Grimm wrote: ESPN.com wrote: "The league that wins the All-Star Game no longer will get home-field advantage in the World Series, which instead will go to the pennant winner with the better regular-season record"

Thank god that's gone, it really was one of the dumber things of all time.

[Benjamin Grimm]

I felt the same way, until November 8, that is.

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

Benjamin Grimm wrote: I felt the same way, until November 8, that is.

That's funny.

[nymr83]

Disabled List going from 15 days to 10 - expect shenanigans around starting pitchers and off days.

[Edgy MD]

I don't particularly like that. It'll create crazy traffic and juggling that just invites bad faith.

[Frayed Knot]

The idea behind it is so as to reduce those situations where players are in a holding pattern for 4 or 5 days waiting to see whether or not their 'Day to Day' condition will actually require the full 15. Making 10 the minimum should do away with at least some of those.
I suspect this was a sort-of compromise to the 26th man on the roster idea. Not more players but maybe more available ones.

[Ceetar]

Frayed Knot wrote: The idea behind it is so as to reduce those situations where players are in a holding pattern for 4 or 5 days waiting to see whether or not their 'Day to Day' condition will actually require the full 15. Making 10 the minimum should do away with at least some of those. I suspect this was a sort-of compromise to the 26th man on the roster idea. Not more players but maybe more available ones.

Theoretically it should lessen players being 'forced' to play through nagging injuries. if it's gonna take a few days, you're not losing as much to a DL stint.


ASG home field advantage is WAY BETTER than tying it to a system that gives the advantage to the AL. At least that was basically random.

[stevejrogers]

Benjamin Grimm wrote: I doubt it. Everything isn't about the Cubs.

True, but they were the first non MFY 100+ win team that won the World Series since 1986.

Just seems a bit more than a coincidence.

[Edgy MD]

I have no problems with those periods. Deciding whether to shelve a player or ride out his injury is part of baseball strategy and it provides a few drops of drama during games and between games.

And seriously, a team can go out there and win with 16 players, so creating a rule to keep a team from being without a 25th player for a day or two seems to be overly coddling.

[Centerfield]

Right.

Even 12 days is a little better. Make a starting pitcher disrupt 2 starts at least.