There is a sense of baseball reaching a new golden age with the rise of many exciting new players and teams like the Cubs with championship expectations.
But this new age may have a real problem. The golden goose may get strangled in the players union and owners contract negotiations.
The MLB players union is going to take a hard line tact in the new CBA negotiations.
The current collective bargaining agreement expires 12-1-2016.
The players and agents are ticked off by the current CBA "service time" requirements
for free agency. The Cubs sat Bryant in the minors for 12 days which gave them an
extra year of control. The union wants to drastically change those rules, retroactively.
This CBA is going to get hot under the collar because the owners are starting to realize
that the Dodger billion dollar cable deals are not going to happen in the future.
The owners will press for economic concessions from the players to off-set cable TV
viewer and contract declines.
This could get drawn out and nasty.
The owners have established a series of spending caps for June draft and international signings. This was done to level the playing field for small market teams. The idea that a competitive balance through restricted spending will create a better baseball product throughout the league.
Draftees still get their million dollar bonus money for being first round selections, and teams have found ways to pay second and third rounders more money than slot values. So this part of the agreement may not get tweaked at all. It is the control aspect of the player development years that is at issue. A team can control a high schooler for 6 years and college players for 5 years. If they get to the major league roster, their base salary is $507,000. Not bad for a 20-something young man, but since many of them start their careers with break out seasons, their agents believe that teams are getting bargain basement value from non-arbitration eligible players.
More teams are filling roster spots with young, controllable players because they are cost effective with more upside than veteran free agents. And fans like to gravitate toward home grown rookie talent.
The union could demand that service time concept be eliminated all together. Teams would have a set amount of years to develop and promote a player to the major league roster or the player automatically becomes a free agent. Since most teams have a minor league system of a) rookie ball, b) low Class A, c) high Class A, d) Class AA, and Class AAA, the union could say that 5 years is the maximum amount of control time for any player. Ownership could counter saying that the 5 years would not give the team any return on development investment in a player even if they are promoted each step every year. A team would like 5 years of major league control of a player. But the union would not agree to 10 years of team exclusivity.
Opt-outs are becoming popular with player and player agents. Perhaps the minor league player could "opt-out" of team control if he is not being promoted or developed by a team, or he is blocked at the major league service after a certain amount of years. The union wants to get its members to the majors as fast as possible in order to earn major league pay (and pay dues). Owners and general managers do not want to "rush" players to the majors. And some veterans may not like the idea of forced promotion of minor league talent because that could affect their standing on a roster or in the free agent market.
The new CBA will be a show down between two factions at the economic cross road of the game.
