MLB New CBA Discussion

Post #1 » by **Cyrus** » Sat Nov 19, 2011 6:27 pm

So it looks like a done deal,

two Big items that may effect the jays are:

Cap or I mean Lux tax on Amateur Draft, so if they exceed a threshold signing players, then you will pay a lux tax.

Same goes for international free agents...

Do you think Jays will be lux tax spenders in the amateur and international free agent.

Not sure if it applies to this year, but it means someone like Yu, with his 50 mill posting, and contract, could be even higher with a lux tax fee on it.

Kaizen · Post #2 » by **Kaizen** » Sat Nov 19, 2011 6:38 pm

I love that the teams are stupid enough to accept an agreement that hurts small market teams while allowing big-market teams to spend what they want on team payroll. There is no justifiable reason to restrict spending on these areas while still enabling teams to spend so much on the MLB payroll. Why would a player like Chapman sign with the Reds over the Yankees if they are offering the same amount?

The only reason why Zach Lee signed with the Dodgers is because they gave him an offer he couldn't refuse. I hope real baseball fans realize that they will be losing even more athletes to other sports now.

Post #3 » by **Schad** » Sat Nov 19, 2011 6:41 pm

It won't apply to someone like Darvish, only amateurs. Still hate it, but I doubt that it'll stop us from pursuing IFAs and draft picks...the value-per-dollar is still going to be incredibly high, unless the threshold is really low and the multiplier is 300% or more. Which it won't be.

Ought to call it the "Jays, Rays, Sox and Pirates drank your milkshake and you were too **** stupid to do anything about it" rule. JRSaPDYMaYWTFStDAAI Rule for short.

Post #4 » by **Cyrus** » Sat Nov 19, 2011 7:10 pm

Yeah i dont know about these rules, unless there is ahigher lux tax on team spending, taxing draft and international amateur free agents is one of the small viable ways for small market teams to get good, now what are they suppose to do

Weems · Post #5 » by **Weems** » Sat Nov 19, 2011 7:16 pm

Yep. It's not good. You could only hope we'll be luxury tax spenders if opportunity calls for it.

Free agent comp is the same?

flatjacket1 · Post #6 » by **flatjacket1** » Sat Nov 19, 2011 7:25 pm

Well this sucks... and this new tax affects the worse teams more than the rich teams. I hope the modifier isn't 200%+

Michael Bradley · Post #7 » by **Michael Bradley** » Sat Nov 19, 2011 7:41 pm

Yeah MLB really dropped the ball on this one, IMO. Small market/budget teams taking advantage of the draft system is far more likely to create parity in the long run than taxing on draft spending. The Jays are going to get far more bang for their buck spending $2M on Daniel Norris (for example) than they will spending $2M on a back-up catcher for this year. We are talking about having control over a young talent for six years (plus their minor league time) vs. the option of using that same money on MLB talent that will simply sit on the bench for a season or two. It makes no sense. Small market teams almost have to use the draft that way to make up for the payroll/market differences that exist within the league. While I generally agree that the best amateur talent should go to the worst teams (that's what the draft is meant for), I don't agree with limiting a team's ability to spend in later rounds since that can entice two sport stars to play baseball rather than football. All MLB is potentially doing is limiting the talent base even more while doing nothing to prevent the $150M difference between the Yankees and Rays (for example) in payroll. This move doesn't help anyone; only hurts teams like the Jays, Pirates, Rays, etc.

I haven't heard anything about the compensation rule, but even if Type B status still exists, what is the point of accumulating picks anymore with the draft being capped? Better off having fewer picks in that case.

I am not a fan of the expanded playoffs, for a few reasons. 1) It waters down the playoffs by allowing inferior teams a chance to make it. 2) A playoff series in baseball should never be determined by a one game sudden death. Playing 162 games and then having your season come down to one game is ridiculous. Might as well play rock, paper, scissors to see who advances. 3) We will inevitably come to a situation where the Wild Card team wins 95 games and the second Wild Card team wins 87 (for example). Why should the 2nd Wild Card team get a chance to make the playoffs when they finished 8 games behind the real Wild Card team?

The only real benefit to expanded playoffs is it gives more teams a chance to make the playoffs, and it makes winning the division mean more since winning the wild card is essentially pointless (you'd have to play a sudden death game anyway).

It just annoys me that MLB does these stupid things like home field being determined by the All-Star game, and a cap on draft spending, and expanded playoffs, etc, while not doing a damn thing about the Yankees spending $200M. Personally, I was fine with the way baseball was prior to these CBA changes, but if they had to change things, the difference in team payroll should have been the main focus.

Post #8 » by **Cyrus** » Sat Nov 19, 2011 7:42 pm

Weems wrote:Yep. It's not good. You could only hope we'll be luxury tax spenders if opportunity calls for it.

Free agent comp is the same?

Comp is same in one sense, but the Type B and Type A has been modified...so it harder to get type A status unless your elite...not sure about Type B.

Kaizen · Post #9 » by **Kaizen** » Sat Nov 19, 2011 7:46 pm

Great post Bradley. I agree with everything you said. This one game playoff nonsense is so dumb.

Post #10 » by **Cyrus** » Sat Nov 19, 2011 7:55 pm

Here is even more "News", that will make you even angrier:

@jaysonst Jayson Stark
There have been lots of rumblings there will also be a tax on teams that spend too little on big-league payroll. Looking forward to details

So a floor limit, basically can't be too cheap with your major league roster, or get taxed. I wonder what the tax rates are at, and what's the floor.

DKnobler
@DKnobler DKnobler
Worst part of draft bonus system in new CBA is that teams can lose future picks for spending too much. Hurts low-revenue teams the most.

So not only will you get taxed for spending too much on the draft, but you can lose draft picks... What? How does this make sense?

There will be Type B free agents this offseason, clarifies Sherman in a tweet. (They stay the same).

Lesser Type As such as Kelly Johnson, Octavio Dotel, and Takashi Saito will be made Type Bs in the new CBA, tweets Sherman. The players' teams will still get compensation, but the players' markets will not be hurt by the cost of a draft pick.

So Kelly Johnson, is going to be a Type B free agent not a Type A.

Kaizen · Post #11 » by **Kaizen** » Sat Nov 19, 2011 8:05 pm

This new CBA has screwed the Jays every way possible. I can not believe how bad this deal really is for us. It keeps getting worse and worse.

How does spending money on the draft hurt the game? It honestly makes zero sense to restrict spending on the draft while allowing teams to go crazy on their team payroll.

Avenger · Post #12 » by **Avenger** » Sat Nov 19, 2011 8:06 pm

I've said it before and a lot of sensible people have said it before, any limits and restrictions on draft spending will hurt baseball. One of the few incentives for a multi sport 14 year old athlete to taking up baseball full time is that he can become a multi millionaire at the age of 17/18, if you take that away you're losing a lot of athletes to Basketball and Football where the money is not much worse but the fame and the glory is unmatched.

MLB constantly talks about the decline of black players, you think taking away the only incentive to focus on Baseball will help draw the next Justin Upton?

The limits on international free agent spending is even worse, the only reason these kids are being coached, nurtured and taken care of is that their handlers have a hope for a big pay day. If you take the money out, its gonna hurt player development and you'll have fewer potential MLB'er and definitely fewer stars. You can obviously fix this by MLB as a collective entity investing money in player development(coaching, facilities, living expenses for these kids) in Latin America but when has MLB ever done anything so pro active?

Weems · Post #13 » by **Weems** » Sat Nov 19, 2011 8:20 pm

I'm okay with Kelly Johnson's reclassification and the salary floor.

Avenger · Post #14 » by **Avenger** » Sat Nov 19, 2011 8:25 pm

Weems wrote:I'm okay with Kelly Johnson's reclassification and the salary floor.

why? Kelly Johnson is now gonna be more expensive to resign and so the Jays are less likely to have a good 2nd basemen in 2012

Weems · Post #15 » by **Weems** » Sat Nov 19, 2011 8:28 pm

Purely from a fairness standpoint. I like Johnson.

no homo

Michael Bradley · Post #16 » by **Michael Bradley** » Sat Nov 19, 2011 8:29 pm

Yeah this seems designed to hurt teams like the Jays, Rays, Pirates, etc, who have taken advantage of the compensation rule and have spent tons on the draft in recent years. This must have been why Paul Godfrey was so against going overslot. The Jays and other teams must have really pissed Selig and others off.

I seriously don't see any benefit to this draft system. None. It hurts the small market teams and actually helps the big market teams because now teams like the Rays and Jays can't spend record numbers on the draft to compensate for the MLB payroll. So the Yankees can sign CC, Tex, and AJ in one off-season, but god forbid the Jays spend $11 million on the draft. That is killing the game. Please.

SharoneWright · Post #17 » by **SharoneWright** » Sat Nov 19, 2011 9:42 pm

Wow, don't like the lux tax on the Amateur Draft one bit.

I guess you could hope it will moderate signing bonuses somewhat...

They could have just created hard slots and eliminated the "need" for this.

baulderdash77 · Post #18 » by **baulderdash77** » Sat Nov 19, 2011 10:17 pm

Good news in the new CBA for us:

Type A relievers won't require the signing team to forfeit a draft pick this season. Get on the FA reliever train.

Bad news in the new CBA for us:

No Type A or Type B comp next year. If you want comp, you have to tender $12 million starting next year. I guess no more gaming the system for comp picks anymore AA.

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2011/11/t ... picks.html

dagger · Post #19 » by **dagger** » Tue Nov 22, 2011 1:39 am

Well, it's annoying on the one hand to lose measures that the old CBA afforded the Jays, but at the same time, it places even more emphasis on the need to spend at the major league level since it is essentially uncapped from where the Jays are starting.

flatjacket1 · Post #20 » by **flatjacket1** » Tue Nov 22, 2011 1:41 am

dagger wrote:Well, it's annoying on the one hand to lose measures that the old CBA afforded the Jays, but at the same time, it places even more emphasis on the need to spend at the major league level since it is essentially uncapped from where the Jays are starting.

Just not on one of the weakest free agent classes in recent memory.