Official CBA/Labour Talks Discussion Thread III

[Ponchos]

How exactly are players retained in a way that they are not available on the market? There is no franchise tag, or similar mechanism. You're speaking nonsense here.

Maximum of 4 new years for rookie extensions (except maximum of 5 new years for a maximum-salary Designated Player rookie extension – team can have only 1 Designated Player on its roster at any time).

Again I ask you, do you understand what a franchise tag is? What you posted is NOT a franchise tag nor is it even similar.

[TiKusDom]

How exactly are players retained in a way that they are not available on the market? There is no franchise tag, or similar mechanism. You're speaking nonsense here.

Again I ask you, do you understand what a franchise tag is? What you posted is NOT a franchise tag nor is it even similar.

You stated that there are no "similar" mechanisms that keep players from not being available on the open market. yeah there are. A new CBA clause allows teams to have one DESIGNATED player. Sorry it doesn't copy the NFL rules exactly , make you dont see the similarity unlike most who will. This will allow teams to sign and keep the rookie scale player one year longer than someone without that designation. Comprende? No more sign and trades too ill throw that in there, meaning teams with bird rights will almost be guaranteed to retain their own free agents. Going back to my point that with less available players in the free agent market with teams having more ability to retain them, this will drive up the value of existing free agents.

[Ponchos]

You stated that there are no "similar" mechanisms that keep players from not being available on the open market. yeah there are. A new CBA clause allows teams to have one DESIGNATED player. Sorry it doesn't copy the NFL rules, make you dont see the similarity unlike most who will.

Designating a player does NOT take them off the market. I will say it again, it does NOT take them off the market. It gives teams something they can OFFER a player (note they are NOT forced to take it).

Franchise tags take the player completely off the market. Do you understand the difference.

[TiKusDom]

You stated that there are no "similar" mechanisms that keep players from not being available on the open market. yeah there are. A new CBA clause allows teams to have one DESIGNATED player. Sorry it doesn't copy the NFL rules, make you dont see the similarity unlike most who will.

Designating a player does NOT take them off the market. I will say it again, it does NOT take them off the market. It gives teams something they can OFFER a player (note they are NOT forced to take it).

Franchise tags take the player completely off the market. Do you understand the difference.

Like i said, you claimed that there are no "similar" mechanisms that keep players from not being available. Having a DESIGNATED PLAYER who you can offer one more year is that mechanism to the NBA. I never said that the NBA has exactly the same franchise tag mechanism as the NFL. Teams now have the ability to keep their rookies longer and keeping them off the market longer. You made the claim there are no similar mechanisms, there is the ability for an NBA team to chose a single player to a "maximum-salary Designated Player rookie extension".

[Ponchos]

Ok so your position is that the ability to offer an additional year is similar to an NFL franchise tag. Really? It's similar? You've really gone off the deep end just trying to prove me wrong on something bud.

Anyhow, I have to get up for work in 5 hours, so I'm off to bed for real! Continue to spew nonsense to nobody in particular. Have fun.

Teams now have the ability to keep their rookies longer and keeping them off the market longer.

Compared with the old CBA? False.

[TiKusDom]

Ok so your position is that the ability to offer an additional year is similar to an NFL franchise tag. Really? It's similar? You've really gone off the deep end just trying to prove me wrong on something bud.

Anyhow, I have to get up for work in 5 hours, so I'm off to bed for real! Continue to spew nonsense to nobody in particular. Have fun.

Teams now have the ability to keep their rookies longer and keeping them off the market longer.

Compared with the old CBA? False.

Wrong again. Designated players WILL be able to be extended to longer than the previous rookies under the CBA were allowed.

[Ponchos]

Ok so your position is that the ability to offer an additional year is similar to an NFL franchise tag. Really? It's similar? You've really gone off the deep end just trying to prove me wrong on something bud.

Anyhow, I have to get up for work in 5 hours, so I'm off to bed for real! Continue to spew nonsense to nobody in particular. Have fun.

Teams now have the ability to keep their rookies longer and keeping them off the market longer.

Compared with the old CBA? False.

Wrong again. Designated players WILL be able to be extended to longer than the previous rookies under the CBA were allowed.

Psst. You're confusing rookie contract with rookie extension perhaps?

Old CBA: 5 years.

Proposal: 5 years max (if you put the tag on, which you can only do for one rookie on your roster.)

See how you can't sign a rookie for longer like you claimed?

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz for super real.

[TiKusDom]

[

Psst. You're confusing rookie contract with rookie extension perhaps?

Old CBA 5 years.

Proposal 5 years max (if you put the tag on)

See how you can't sign a rookie for longer like you claimed?

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz for super real.

Nice little fix there, it was never 6 years years. The teams with designated rookies will be able to keep them longer relative to other players and thus having removing them from the free agent pool for longer periods than other teams. Player option in the 5th year will not be allowed for contracts over the average salary , meaning the player cant bolt after 4 years. See the difference? Combine that with the fact that there will be no sign and trades, giving them exclusive rights to give the player the maximum bird right salary this means teams will have far greater ability to retain their designated players. The current system does not limit demand on players in fact it is going to drive their value up .

[Ponchos]

I just can't quit you.

Wrong again. Designated players WILL be able to be extended to longer than the previous rookies under the CBA were allowed.

Soooo you're admitting you we're wrong about that? You can say it. I know you can. Man up.

[TiKusDom]

I just can't quit you.

Wrong again. Designated players WILL be able to be extended to longer than the previous rookies under the CBA were allowed.

Soooo you're admitting you we're wrong about that? You can say it. I know you can. Man up.

Nope, they will not have the option of opting out in the 5th year if the salary of their contract in the first year is higher than the average league salary. Meaning teams will in fact longer retaining ability than before. Read the proposals jesus this is becoming a joke.

[Ponchos]

I just can't quit you.

Wrong again. Designated players WILL be able to be extended to longer than the previous rookies under the CBA were allowed.

Soooo you're admitting you we're wrong about that? You can say it. I know you can. Man up.

Nope, they will not the option of opting out in the 5th year if the salary of their contract in the first year is higher than the average league salary. Meaning teams will in fact longer retaining ability than before.

But we both know that's not what you originally meant (it's even kind of a laughable stretch). Tell you what, It will just be our dirty little secret (and anyone who has a brain that reads what you wrote).

[TiKusDom]

But we both know that's not what you originally meant (it's even kind of a laughable stretch). Tell you what, It will just be our dirty little secret (and anyone who has a brain that reads what you wrote).

you are so desperate to cling on to semantics you dont even realize that the new CBA offers owners better abilities to retain players than before. I dont blame you , from the looks of it you dont even know what is being offered or what has been put on the table. You thought the previous cba offered rookies 6 year extensions? i read that before you managed to edited it after looking it up

Team and player options are prohibited in new contracts with first-year salaries that exceed the average player salary.

[theonlyeastcoastrapsfan]

Could a team that signed a designated player, get another designated player in a trade?

[C Court]

Today, Doug Smith commented on the new MLB CBA here, with references to the NBA situation:

Well they do share revenues and don’t have a salary cap of any form.

They do maximize profits from internet media, which is huge for them and not something the other sports do particularly well.

There is a level of competitive balance – look at the teams that are in the playoffs each year and, please, for the love of all that’s good in the world, get past the myopic American League East parochial view and put the blame where it should have been all those years – on Blue Jays ownership and management.

But what’s most important, in light of what’s going on in that sport I used to cover, is that the talks on this new deal began quietly, without any fanfare and quite a while ago.

They did not leave things until the last minute, they appear to have puttered around on their version of “system” issues for months, if not years, behind the scenes and in the true method of collective bargaining.

They didn’t not hold public bargaining session or give month-by-month updates; they did not call each other names, suggest that what one side wanted was never going to happen. They did it professionally and on their own and everyone came away happy.

There are those of us who used to think baseball was the most screwed up of all the sports when it came to relations between the union and the owners. The players were militant to a huge degree, the owners were unwavering in what they wanted. They got to the brink and beyond on almost every occasion.

Now? Not so much.

They’ve got it right. Everyone else has it wrong.

Odd, isn’t it? Good, but odd.

[Fairview4Life]

The MLB situation was different, in that one side wasn't trying to make massive changes to the system (just small changes that royally **** small markets). Anytime one side tries to drastically change the CBA there's going to be a lockout or strike, it's almost unavoidable.

[C Court]

^^ Agreed. The Doug is also suggesting that MLB enjoys a healthy level of competitive balance without a cap or salary limits. Plus they have a revenue sharing system.

[dacrusha]

When you have a salary cap, it tends to drive salaries up for lower/mid tier players, which is a huge burden on small markets in NBA and NHL.

MLB has got it right where even the small markets are happy; those owners can just pocket equalization payments, rather than being forced to pay huge salaries to middling players just to "play ball" with cap requirements.

[ATLTimekeeper]

So the MLB is a feasible model for the NBA to follow, but the NFL/NHL isn't.

I'm all in favour of a minor league system for the NBA that would allow teams to develop players slowly while remaining competitive. The NCAA steals from players anyway, I'd rather remove the age limit and allow those kids that are good enough to sign with teams at the age of 16 and go right into a development pipe.

[J-Roc]

MLB is a joke. They've conveniently setup a situation where a large market team like NY or Boston or both will always be "in it". That gets the ratings. Then in the other divisions, mid market teams battle it out, and of course in playoff series, anyone can win. The good thing is that most of the league's fans don't mind NY and Boston because they're not their concern. But for Toronto, Baltimore and inevitably Tampa, it's a joke. And it's not the system the NBA should strive for.

[I_Like_Dirt]

Any team that wins in the playoffs has to beat the big guns, JRoc. The Blue Jays and Orioles wouldn't compete in any division. They might squeak into the playoffs if they lucked into being in an awful division, but to be the best, you've got to beat the best. The thing about MLB is that they've got a very limited playoffs and it's very tough to get in. That has its negatives, since good isn't good enough, but it also has its positives since big teams don't generate way more revenue due to lots of playoff dates other teams don't get.