Official CBA Negotiation Thread

Some of you all may prefer to see the Mets and Phillies 19 times a year, but I'm more excited to see Braves-White Sox, Braves-Athletics, etc. each year. Yes, there will also be Braves-Royals and Braves-Tigers, too, but I'd gladly change 2 Marlins series for those.
 
WaitingFor2017 said:
One of my bigger wishes is coming true:

In 2023, there will be less divisional games, and each team will play at least one series against every team in baseball.

I just get tired of seeing the Phillies, Marlins, Mets, and Nationals almost 20 games each season.
Click to expand...

So MLB is adding 10 interleague series a year for each team. I wonder how many division games they subtract from each rival? That's 30 games minimum (or maybe they do some 2 and 2) being taken away from divisional rivals. So perhaps it's 32 games and you take away 8 games from each divisional rival?
 
The Chosen One said:
So MLB is adding 10 interleague series a year for each team. I wonder how many division games they subtract from each rival? That's 30 games minimum (or maybe they do some 2 and 2) being taken away from divisional rivals. So perhaps it's 32 games and you take away 8 games from each divisional rival?
Click to expand...

Under the old system, the interleague strength of schedule seemed to come into play quite a bit. As I understand it, every team will play one series with each team in the other league. It will eliminate most of the strength of schedule issues.
 
cajunrevenge said:
I dont understand how this is possible. Are they going to define down to the inch where defensive players can lose up? Why not force batters to swing at the first pitch while we are at it.
Click to expand...

I know, next they are going to define where a hitter has to stand or where a pitcher has to maintain contact with something. Probably going to make runners have to run within a designated area. Baseball is so dumb.
 
cajunrevenge said:
I dont understand how this is possible. Are they going to define down to the inch where defensive players can lose up? Why not force batters to swing at the first pitch while we are at it.
Click to expand...

It's likely they will require 2 infielders on each side of 2nd. So it essentially takes away overloading on the right side of the infielder with a guy play essentially playing shallow right. What this won't do is take away the SS playing almost up the middle and taking away plays that were hits 15+ years ago. So it will be more aesthetically pleasing to the people who get all but hurt when they see nobody on the left side of the field when a powerful lefty comes up. But in reality, the SS taking balls hit up the middle and turning them into outs has much more of an effect on the game imo and that's not going away.
 
Looks like 10 teams will have salaries under 100 million. Don't you get 100 million from the TV deal by itself?

4 teams under 50 million.

Ownership sucks. At least sign some 1 year Free agents you can flip for young players later in the year. They need a way to kick the pirates owner out. Just under 25 million, really?
 
Russ2dollas said:
Looks like 10 teams will have salaries under 100 million. Don't you get 100 million from the TV deal by itself?

4 teams under 50 million.

Ownership sucks. At least sign some 1 year Free agents you can flip for young players later in the year. They need a way to kick the pirates owner out. Just under 25 million, really?
Click to expand...

I keep hoping there will be a CBA where there's a salary cap and a salary floor. I'd like to see more parity. Look at the NFL. It's difficult for teams to stay on top year after year and teams on the bottom can rocket to the top quickly.
 
striker42 said:
I keep hoping there will be a CBA where there's a salary cap and a salary floor. I'd like to see more parity. Look at the NFL. It's difficult for teams to stay on top year after year and teams on the bottom can rocket to the top quickly.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Before the NFL salary cap the Super Bowl consisted of one team(usually from the NFC) beating the other team in a blowout.
 
striker42 said:
I keep hoping there will be a CBA where there's a salary cap and a salary floor. I'd like to see more parity. Look at the NFL. It's difficult for teams to stay on top year after year and teams on the bottom can rocket to the top quickly.
Click to expand...

I think MLB has good parity. We don't have any 3 peats or stuff like that going on.

There are teams that try to win that don't make the playoffs, at least before the stupid expansion.

I don't think MLB has a parity problem as defined by who gets into playoffs and who wins. I think they have a 25% of the league isn't trying problem.

No cap, no floor. Minimum should 1,000,000, making the floor 26 million. Then it should go up to 2,000,000 quickly. If you can't swing a 50million payroll get out.
 
That why I thought it was funny the players were holding out for higher tax threshold. It literally only benefits a few teams and a few players and only divides the haves and haves not more. They should have been holding out for a salary floor even if it capped the salary ceiling. Would bring more players to a higher salary while not hurting the superstars earning potential.
 
bravesfanMatt said:
That why I thought it was funny the players were holding out for higher tax threshold. It literally only benefits a few teams and a few players and only divides the haves and haves not more. They should have been holding out for a salary floor even if it capped the salary ceiling. Would bring more players to a higher salary while not hurting the superstars earning potential.
Click to expand...
It’s no surprise the players executive board (Scherzer, etc.) all voted no and basically all the rank and file players from each team voted yes. Your highest paid players hate the tax because that’s what impacts them the most.

Players didn’t do much to solve their long term problems with this CBA, in my opinion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top