Quote from WindsorUK on December 6, 2021, 12:00 pm

Or....your all time Padre 9?

Quote from WindsorUK on December 6, 2021, 12:02 pm

Or....top 3 at each position?

Quote from fenn68 on December 22, 2021, 6:30 am

Although no progress on CBA … some discussion of the opposing position issues, not only between the owners and the union BUT between the big market owners and the small market owners.

Clearly the union is demanding earlier FA which leads to (most believe) higher contracts as players are in the market at closer to their peaks. Add they don’t want the luxury tax / attached comp picks for QO.

Since there is so much money in play for the big market teams … those owners are more willing to make some concessions. However, the owners need a vote for approval and the small market clubs are set to block … especially on the earlier FA proposal and more liberal arbitration rules. Small market teams survive with arbitration and 6 year control keeping their payrolls down and therefore can be more competitive.

So in reality the negotiation is a 3 way … therefore harder … between the union and the big clubs and the small clubs.

Quote from fenn68 on December 22, 2021, 6:44 am

Another union issue the the destruction of the “middle class” players under the current CBA. Keep in mind the Union is for ALL the MLB players not just the super stars … where all the big money is going.

(As best I can recall the specifics of what I heard) … but before this CBA the “middle class” FA averaged about $11MM/yr in their new deal. Methodology eliminated the top 10% of contracts and all contracts below $1MM. Currently that “middle class” dropped to $6MM.

Basicallly the new CBA (and owners strategy) are pushing money to the elite … squeezing out the experienced veterans and replacing them with low cost (under the 6 year control benefit to the team finances). Many would argue that that “better” players are out in the cold while lesser talents take their roster slots.

That situation motivates the Union to argue strongly to significantly alter the arbitration structure (more money to the “controlled” players making it less advantageous to focus on the “controlled” young players).

Quote from MrPadre19 on December 30, 2021, 12:34 pm

I sure do miss talking Padre baseball..........

Quote from fenn68 on January 3, 2022, 1:43 pm

Saw MLBTR piece on the CBA and their view of when we should see resolution. I see it a bit differently.

”Soft” deadline of Feb 1 has no chance … neither side is losing money at that point. Always follow the money.

Owners in theory start losing revenue when ST games become canceled (players don’t get paid for ST so will not care) … that becomes a threshold at the end of Feb. Players will want to squeeze the owners (and shorten ST) so no pressure on them. Owners may be losing some revenue (not all that much in the big picture from ST) and could (and may) NOT open ST camps even for the minor leaguers … avoid a costs AND set up a case for running a ST camp once the CBA is approved … days to get the camp open and players to arrive … then still run a “minimum” length ST (probably at least 2-3 weeks for the health of the pitchers.

Now that scenario begins to put pressure on the union … if the regular season gets delayed then the players start losing income along with the owners.

So, if neither the MLBPA or the owners want to lose money, the season needs to start on time (Mar 31) … backing up for a minimal ST … CBA approved between Mar 10 - 15.

Side: the remaining FA will get squeezed … especially the mid-level / lower end where supply well exceeds demand. Probably some potential real good 1 year deals. Expect a number of high level minor league deals.

 

Quote from WindsorUK on January 4, 2022, 6:13 am

In theory, spring training could begin on time, is that correct? With the lost time from COVID 2 summers ago, I'm sure most organisations want to get their young players as many reps, and as much top line instruction, as possible, so I can't imagine starting them late. Not to mention the incidence of injury for guys who try to rush through a truncated ST.

 

Quote from fenn68 on January 4, 2022, 6:58 am

Quote from WindsorUK on January 4, 2022, 6:13 am

In theory, spring training could begin on time, is that correct? With the lost time from COVID 2 summers ago, I'm sure most organisations want to get their young players as many reps, and as much top line instruction, as possible, so I can't imagine starting them late. Not to mention the incidence of injury for guys who try to rush through a truncated ST.

 

Remember that ST for minor leaguers normally starts weeks after the ML players arrive. So, yes ST for minor leaguers could start on time (or pretty close).

That would support the owners allowing them to run the ST games as scheduled with minor leaguers (and maintain the revenue for the clubs and the cities).

I guess that could add some additional leverage to the owners … with an up and running ST site once the CBA is approved the issue is only getting the players to show up. So if it takes 2 weeks minimum to get “in shape” a CBA approval (and ST for ML players) should be around March 15 … later and the March 31 opening day in in trouble … and both sides use money.

I hope the owners / players don’t go the route of starting the regular season on time to maximize revenue with a “short ST” … basically playing ST quality in the regular season and increasing the risk of player injury by having an expanded roster for the first 2-4 weeks.

As I suggested before, a case could be made to open camp as scheduled for the ML players and bring in … at least … the top prospects and AAA/AA rosters. Coaches are around so extra development time of the minor league players could be a plus and they could start ST games on time with those minor leaguers. Just more pressure on the MLBPA with non-roster players getting in shape and showcasing … the ML FA and the fringe ML players on the roster have a good chance of not having a job once the season starts.

Using the Padres as an example … strong ST could elevate the likes of Abrams, Kopps to ML roles this avoiding a FA signing and bumping players off the 40 man. Might also bring marginal minor leaguers into the picture fill bench roles … at least to start the season at a cheaper cost than a FA or fringe roster options. Pressure on the veteran FA to sign after the season starts at a bargain price.

 

Quote from fenn68 on January 13, 2022, 2:44 pm

Well looks as though the owners formally put out their initial CBA offer … no one ever expected the union to accept it but this is the first real step in negotiations having something formal in place to counter propose. Would expect a union formal counter proposal soon … which the owners will reject.

Then with formal owners’ and union proposals on the table … the extremes are set and both sides can begin moving in and out on each issue trying to get to an economic balance that satisfies both sides (not that they will every be satisfied).

Not going to be quick … many think on or about March 1 for agreement. Remember players don’t start losing money until opening day on March 31 and they generally don’t like to have ST beyond maybe 2 weeks … so no incentive to concede on any of their points quickly. Owners know this so no incentive to concede anything now and wait until the players are feeling some pressure.

Note owners will start losing some money as ST games are cancelled (but not big money) and possible they will be run with minor league players. Key for the owners is the expanded playoffs where the BIG payoff is for them and will pay for any lost early revenue. Of course the union knows this and is going to use the expanded playoffs as their primary bargaining chip as long as they can.