Major League Baseball and the Major League Baseball Players Association unveiled the latest collective bargaining agreement yesterday afternoon, and it brings numerous changes, many of them major.
Before we break down the new CBA, though, let's pause and attempt to digest just how remarkable it is that both sides were able to come to an agreement without the slightest trace of rancor. Things have certainly changed from the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s, when the sides despised each other and refused to cooperate on even the tiniest labor issue, a stance that caused repeated work stoppages.
It is a tribute to MLBPA executive director Michael Weiner, MLB lead negotiator Rob Manfred, and, yes, even Commissioner Bud Selig that both sides can now compromise and put the best interest of the sport at the forefront of all negotiations. While the latest CBA won't please everybody, it is heartening to know that the sport will have had 21 continuous years of labor peace once the five-year contract expires after the 2016 season.
Labor peace may be the norm for the new generation of baseball fans. For those of us who have been around longer, it often seemed that world peace would be achieved before labor peace in baseball.
Now, on to some of the CBA highlights and my thoughts on them:
Free agents who sign minor-leaguer contracts who are not added to opening day roster or are unconditionally released five days prior to the start of the season will receive a $100,000 retention bonus and the right to elect free agency June 1.
This is fair for the marginal player who fails to land a major-league contract in free agency. One of the situations a player fears most is being released on the final day of spring training when the other 29 club have their rosters set, thus being frozen out of finding a major-league job to start the season. This alleviates those concerns.
Starting in 2012, Type A and Type B free agents and the use of the Elias ranking system will be eliminated.
Getting rid of the archaic system is a great victory for everyone, whether you're a sabermetrician or a casual fan.
The current system of draft pick compensation will be replaced with the following system:
Only players who have been with their clubs for the entire season will be subject to compensation.
A free agent will be subject to compensation if his former club offers him a guaranteed one-year contract with a salary equal to the average salary of the 125-highest paid players from the prior season. The offer must be made at the end of the five-day free agent “quiet period,” and the player will have seven days to accept the offer.
A club that signs a player subject to compensation will forfeit its first round selection, unless it selects in the top 10, in which case it will forfeit its second highest selection in the draft.
The player’s former club will receive a selection at the end of the first round beginning after the last regularly scheduled selection in the round. The former clubs will select based on reverse order of winning percentage from the prior championship season.
This is a much better system on every level. It gives teams a greater chance to retain their free agents and also gives clubs more incentive to try to sign elite free agents, since they won't always have to fear losing a high draft pick. It's a win for everyone.
The Rule 4 Draft, also known as the first-year player draft or amateur draft, will continue to be conducted in June, but the signing deadline will be moved to a date between July 12 and July 18 depending on the date of the All-Star Game.
Drafted players may only sign minor-league contracts.
Each club will be assigned an aggregate signing bonus pool prior to each draft. For the purpose of calculating the signing bonus pools, each pick in the first 10 rounds of the draft has been assigned a value. (These values will grow each year with the rate of growth of industry revenue). A club’s signing bonus pool equals the sum of the values of that Club’s selections in the first 10 rounds of the draft.
Players selected after the 10th round do not count against a club’s signing bonus pool if they receive bonuses up to $100,000. Any amounts paid in excess of $100,000 will count against the pool.
Clubs that exceed their signing bonus pools will be subject to penalties as follows:
Excess of Pool Penalty |
(tax on overage/draft picks) |
• 0-5% |
75% tax on overage |
• 5-10% |
75% tax on overage and loss of 1st round pick |
• 10-15% |
100% tax on overage and loss of 1st and 2nd round picks |
• 15%+ |
100% tax on overage and loss of 1st round picks in next two drafts |
Proceeds generated by the tax will be distributed to payee clubs under the revenue sharing plan that do not exceed their signing bonus pools. Draft picks that are forfeited by clubs will be awarded to other Clubs through a lottery in which a club’s odds of winning will be based on its prior season’s winning percentage and its prior season’s revenue. Only clubs that do not exceed their signing bonus pools are eligible for the lottery.
Competitive Balance Lottery
For the first time, clubs with the lowest revenues and in the smallest markets will have an opportunity to obtain additional draft picks through a lottery.
The 10 clubs with the lowest revenues and the 10 clubs in the smallest markets will be entered into a lottery for the six draft selections immediately following the completion of the first round of the draft. A club’s odds of winning the lottery will be based on its prior season’s winning percentage.
The eligible clubs that did not receive one of the six selections after the first round and all other payee clubs under the revenue sharing plan will be entered into a second lottery for the six picks immediately following the completion of the second round of the draft. A club’s odds of winning the lottery will be based on its prior season’s winning percentage.
Picks awarded in the Competitive Balance Lottery may be assigned by a club, subject to certain restrictions.
The top 200 prospects will be subject to a pre-draft drug test and will participate in a pre-draft medical program.
Selig says the major revamping of the draft is to help small-market clubs be more competitive. That is hard to fathom when the Pirates and Royals, two of the smallest of the small-market franchises, have used the draft and over-slot spending as their primary means of overhauling ailing farm systems. The draft was the one place small-market clubs had a chance to compete with the big-money franchises, and they have now lost that advantage.
I do like the idea of being able to trade the supplemental lottery picks. It's a nice new wrinkle, but MLB should go one step further and allow clubs to trade all of their draft picks. If the small-market clubs can no longer benefit by spending in the draft, at least they could gain something by having the option of trading their picks or receiving additional selections in deals.
Players, managers, and coaches will be prohibited from using smokeless tobacco during televised interviews and club appearances. In addition, at any time when fans are permitted in the ballpark, players, managers and coaches must conceal tobacco products (including packages and tins), and may not carry tobacco products in their uniforms or on their bodies. Individuals who violate the policy will be subject to discipline. The parties also agreed upon an extensive program of education and public outreach regarding the dangers of smokeless tobacco.
The parties agreed on a program of mandatory evaluation by a trained professional for players who are suspected of an alcohol use problem (including players who are arrested for DWI or other crimes involving alcohol), and for players who are arrested for crimes involving the use of force or violence.
The parties agreed that no new players will be permitted to use a low density maple bat during the term of the agreement.
By 2013, all major league players will wear a new batting helmet developed by Rawlings that protects against pitches thrown at 100 mph. The new version of the helmet is significantly less “bulky” than prior versions of the more protective helmet.
The concussion policy that was implemented prior to the 2011 season has been improved and will remain in effect for the duration of the basic agreement
It's hard for any right-thinking person to disagree with any of this. I chewed tobacco for 20 years, beginning as a freshman in a high school. I can say from experience that it is a vile habit, and I feel blessed that it did not result in any health problems. The sooner maple bats are eliminated and the new high-impact batting helmets are made mandatory, the better, because I have long feared that a death on the field might be the only way to get legislation passed on either piece of equipment. And, no, I'm not trying to be overdramatic by writing that.
Beginning in spring training 2012, all players will be subject to hGH blood testing for reasonable cause at all times during the year. In addition, during each year, all players will be tested during spring training. Starting with the 2012-13 offseason, players will be subject to random unannounced testing for hGH. The parties have also agreed on a process to jointly study the possibility of expanding blood testing to include in-season collections.
The players agreed to this with almost no resistance during the negotiations, and I applaud them for that. Giving a blood sample is never fun, and I could only imagine how bothered I would be if a lab technician showed up unannounced at my home and wanted to stick a needle in my arm. However, the players are adamant that they want the fans to know that they are clean and that the game is on the up-and-up.
Thank you for reading
This is a free article. If you enjoyed it, consider subscribing to Baseball Prospectus. Subscriptions support ongoing public baseball research and analysis in an increasingly proprietary environment.
Subscribe now
The Occupy Yankee Stadium crowd got some love by a raising of the luxury tax. Funny how some of these teams who cry loudest about the Yankees are teams that get their only good crowds of the season when the Evil Empire is in town. But steps must be taken towards the rich "paying their fair share" towards a classless society or, in baseball jargon, "a level playing field."
No steps were taken to eliminate the playing of "God Bless America", which seems to have become mandatory at every park's 7th-inning stretch. (Maybe not in Toronto, or if the A's move to Berkeley). I don't know which is the worse legacy of 9/11; TSA groping at the airport or having to stand for "God Bless.." at every ballgame. Phony forced patriotism. We have the national anthem; that's enough. Anything that speeds up the game is good.
Which won't happen with the expanded video replay rules. The real problem here is the increasing proliferation of incompetent umpires. But of course the umps also have a union, so the ability to adequately perform a job would be an unreasonable standard to which to hold them.
dodgerken does not represent the true feelings of Dodgers fans such as myself.
*reaches for tin foil hat*
Presumably, Japan is unaffected, and the posting system will still apply there. Why is Japan treated differently?
http://www.theonion.com/articles/area-man-passionate-defender-of-what-he-imagines-c,2849/
I swear, the Onion had DodgerKen in mind when they wrote this.
It occurs to me that there's a way to game the system if you wanted to pay a high draft pick more; you could draft people you don't want and use that money on another player. Still, since you'll get to sign everyone if you don't screw it up, I don't see this happening on any kind of regular basis.
I think the CBA is good for the fan experience of baseball.
The biggest problem (well, I don't think it was a problem, just cough up the money) in the previous system was that smaller revenue clubs were not necessarily taking the best player available due to signability issues. An excellent example of this was the Blue Jays last year - they managed to get the top left-handed high school pitcher in the draft (projected) in the supplemental round because he wanted too much money and they were the only club willing to give it to him. Another example is include Rick Porcello; he would have been taken much higher than Detroit if he could not demand a high signing bonus.
Under the new system, the amount of money available to sign draft picks is finite. The elite player can't sit there and say, "Ok, give me 10 million or I will walk," knowing the Yankees will pony up because now the Yankees can't. There is now a major incentive for draftees to sign because the finances WON'T be better the next year and you lost out on a year towards achieving the golden road - free agency. It is possible for a club to go "full out" on a single player and sacrifice the next year's draft in order to get an elite player, but that would require collusion with the agent in order to get the player to fall to that particular team; this could be potentially fatal to the drafting team as the contract would be void and there would be financial and draft pick penalties.
I dislike the caps on international players. If they are not going to be subject to the draft, then let the small market teams try and acquire them with cash. If you cap their earnings, it is just making it cheaper for the Red Sox, Yankees and other really rich clubs to get these players.
The cap is so low that all teams can afford it. I dislike it as well, but do not see it as giving any one team an undue advantage. It just screws the kids. Three cheers for the billionaires!
If three teams all offer the same amount, the shady middle-men will dictate which one the kid signs with based on "future consideration", methinks.
Is that true? My interpretation of the rules is that for every slot in rounds 1-10 has a "value" attached to it, and the team that holds the slot gets that "value" added to their pool. So, if a team has 7 1st round picks, then the value of those 7 slots is added to their spending pool. Am I wrong about this, because if I am, then this deal is significantly worse than I thought.
I think this may be the change that has the greatest impact on the game as we know it. The draft cap is interesting, but may not have more than a marginal effect on how things play out, as the raised cap leaves room for mucking around.
The rule of compensation only going for players who have stayed with the same team throughout the entire season will push more teams into early contract extensions for soon-to-be free agents, eliminate pre-free-agency deals, other than for bench types. There will likely be fewer deals involving top prospects as GMs can focus their calculus on the expected gains the player can provide on the field, and not worry about prospective value from potential compensation.
Once a team with a prospective FA gives up trying to sign him, his market value will drop due to cratering leverage. This could be interesting.
The one, quasi-legitimate claim I've heard from opponents is that this will discourage multi-sport stars from choosing baseball. This may or may not be true, but the lifetime earnings of a baseball player are so much larger than that of the NFL that if baseball loses an occasional Bubba Starling or Zach Lee because they're only willing to play baseball if they get a big signing bonus, that's a price I'm willing to live with.
Other teams spend heavily on international youngsters - the Rangers for example, don't have a huge payroll, but have spent heavily in Latin America to build up the farm. This is also not allowed any more. The Rays have an academy in Brazil, but this does them little good now, as they have to register all prospects, giving other teams the chance to sign them too, and they will find it that much harder to take young talent away from soccer, where the very best youngsters can earn many millions by 20-21.
The teams that will actually benefit from this are the ones, say like the White Sox, who have chosen not to spend time or money on young talent, although they have the resources to do so if they wanted to. I would suspect that under these rules, you could put together an acceptable draft just from paying slot, and reading about the young players on the internet.
Not that straightforward. When you draft earlier, you get better talent and a higher quota. This new system should prevent the distortions of players telling certain teams they won't sign with them so they can get to the organization they want. I *know* this rubs some people the wrong way -- in which other industry is an employee locked into an employer at the outset of his career? -- but this does address the issue that the draft was built for, namely, getting the best players to the weakest teams.
It will be interesting to see if it all plays out as planned, who will be the first agent to find a loop hole in the new agreement, etc.
Has anybody said they think this might backfire? Perhaps, this will be construed as collusion.
Jesus, Mary & Joseph.
So, if a player is unconditionally released 6 days before the start, then is signed by another team two days later and he makes that other team's opening day roster: he gets $100,000 and June 1 free agency, right? because he is still released 5 days before the start. It states "or" so if either condition exists he gets the benefits. No team would likely want to sign him under those circumstances, because they would lose him in two months.
However, if he is released 4 days before the start of the season, signs with another team, and makes their opening day roster, he gets nothing. That would motivate teams to hold him until 4 days before the start, to lessen the chance that they will have to pay that 100G. Again, that is the opposite of the intention of this clause. It would make a bit more sense if it was "released within 5 days prior . . ."
But still, I can't see how the June 1 free agency helps at all, if the player is released. I could see that applying to the player who didn't make the opening day roster and was sent back to the minors, but that could work against the player: a) presumably, he would only get a contract for up to June and could be cut off after that; b) fewer teams will be willing to sign a struggling veteran under these conditions.
I could see the 100 grand retention for players cut within 5 days of the season's start - to tide them over until they find a new team to play for - like a severance package.
However, I do not see how teams and players benefit from both things happening if either condition applies.
Remember also what is being quoted everywhere is the summary MLB published, not the exact language in the CBA, which is hopefully more concise in situations such as these.
http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/prospects/ask-ba/2011/2612572.html
Jered Weaver is excellent, Kazmir was, then there's Stephen Drew who's good-not-great, a few decent players like Daniel Bard and Xavier Nady, and a whole bunch of Roscoe Crosby and Vince Sinisi.
It's hard to say whether this is better or worse than typical draft performance since it's only about 20 players, etc., and it doesn't include players who weren't top-15 ranked but still signed for 1st round money (like Matt Tuiasosopo or Jason Adam). A more systematic study would be very interesting (paging Rany Jazayerli?). But I think it demonstrates that the Majors aren't exactly bursting with superstars who could have been Pirates and Royals if only they'd ponied up a couple extra $mil.
The facts are, 1)not many of the elite talents really slip during the draft (usually only one or two) so most teams aren't actually losing out, 2)even the elite talents are unlikely to pan out, and 3)the draft talent outside the top 5 or so (really the top 1) is pretty flat. There simply isn't much difference between then #8 and #17 guys, or the #20 and #50 guys, so spending a large premium to get the "better" one isn't really a great investment, or a huge difference-maker.
The more I swish the new rules around in my head, the less convinced I am that they're really going to hurt small market teams. Sure it restricts the Pirates from signing 4 1st-round talents, but it also restricts the Red Sox from doing the same. Instead, smaller market teams get more picks, and they won't have to go "over slot" to make them worthwhile players (since the slot numbers are more realistic and presumably fewer top talents will fall and still expect big paydays), giving them an actual advantage over the bigger market clubs. Honestly, I kind of like it.
Of course, as others have pointed out, the amateurs get screwed pretty hard, and that pisses me off (in general I favor more money to amateurs vs. established players, but that's another discussion). I am not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV, but my understanding is that amateur drafts in all sports are possibly/probably illegal as currently constituted, since they are covered by a collective bargaining agreement which is collectively bargained by two parties that both have a vested interest in screwing the people covered by the draft.Of course, the NFL's age limit was widely thought to be illegal too, so...
Take 1996, for example. The Yankees were able to draft Ian Kennedy AND Joba Chamberlain before the Royals got their second pick. The Red Sox got FOUR players before the Royals picked again.
The top of the second round will be true second round topic again. The top of the third round will be true third round talent again.