Locked Out of Baseball

We're more than seven weeks into the baseball lockout and I haven't blogged about it yet.  I know!  Right?!  Part of the reason for that is because there's simply been no progress made towards actually resolving it.  Although, the two sides have finally started talking and exchanging proposals, so it looks like the ball may finally start moving.  And it needs to soon if Spring Training is going to start on time!

The fact that we're in a lockout wasn't at all unexpected.  The players and owners were (and still are) so far apart on the core economic issues that everyone saw one coming.  The challenge will be coming up with a new CBA that they're both happy with, which won't be easy.  The owners liked the one that just expired.  The players didn't.

There's obviously some common ground to be found if the sides are both willing to compromise.  So far, that's not the case.  The owners have made some concessions, but not enough to satisfy the players, who are holding firm on what they want.  For now at least.  We'll see what's in their counterproposal that's set to be delivered on Monday.

A deal will be reached eventually.  Everybody knows that.  Will both sides be totally happy with it?  Probably not.  But that's actually the sign of a good CBA.  Neither side gets everything they want, but they can both live with it.  That's likely what'll happen here, too.

While I won't even pretend to know the ins and outs of labor law, there are some of what Tom Verducci calls the "math equations" that they both agree on and can easily be hammered out.  On the other issues, however, is where the real negotiating needs to take place.  In an ideal world, they'd meet somewhere in the middle on those big-ticket items.  Especially when there are obvious solutions out there!

Some things do seem sort of inevitable.  The universal DH was used during the pandemic-shortened 2020 season and turned out not to be the end of the world.  We were subjected to pitchers "hitting" for one final time in 2021, but pretty much everyone agrees that there will indeed be a DH in both leagues next season.

Likewise, playoff expansion, unfortunately, also seems likely.  The owners want 14 teams.  The players countered with 12.  I'm not a fan of playoff expansion at all, but, given that it's going to happen, 12 teams is less drastic, so I'll say that's the less-bad choice.  That way the 1- and 2-seeds in each league would get first-round byes while the 3- and 4-seeds host the best-of-three Wild Card Series.

Frankly, playoff expansion seems like an on-ramp to a full-scale expansion to 32 teams.  MLB hasn't expanded since 1998, and there's been way too much talk about it recently for it not to be on the radar.  The question is Montreal and who else?  But, side-track aside, 16 teams in each league split into four divisions of four with a six-team playoff field would allow each division winner to either host a Wild Card Series or get a bye (yes, that's exactly how the NFL used to do it).

Unfortunately, things are a little more complicated on those bigger issues.  Players want some major changes to the core economics, particularly when it comes to free agency and salaries, as well as concerns about service time manipulation and competitive balance.  Let's tackle those issues one at a time and come up with a workable solution for each...

Free Agency: This is probably the biggest sticking point for the players.  For years, players haven't been eligible for free agency until after their sixth season.  They'd like that to be earlier.  Likewise, the draft-pick compensation attached to certain free agents has severely limited the market for those players.  That's been the biggest source of frustration, as it's clearly been the thing preventing some free agents from getting jobs in recent offseasons.  The draft pick compensation has got to go.

Player Salaries: Stars are still gonna get paid.  The massive contracts signed by Max Scherzer and Corey Seager prior to the lockout (as well as the megadeals for Mike Trout, Bryce Harper and Manny Machado, among others) are misleading, though.  Because the vast majority of MLB players (78 percent) play at or just above the league minimum, no matter how good they are.  This is another thing driving some older free agents out of the game, since owners can pay younger players less.  The union would like to see those younger players compensated based on their actual value instead of having to wait out their years of team control before finally getting paid what they deserve.

Service Time: Kris Bryant is the poster child for service time manipulation, but he's not the only one.  It's become so commonplace (and so obvious) that it's a big sticking point with the players.  Unfortunately, it doesn't look like there's an easy solution to it, though.  In one of their offers, the owners proposed an age-based system for free agency rather than doing it based on service time.  That could theoretically make those players free agents earlier.

Competitive Balance: Competitive balance has become a major problem over the past several years.  Too many teams are trying to take a page out of the Astros' and Cubs' book and voluntarily being uncompetitive so that they can stockpile draft picks.  Worse yet, they take the money they receive from revenue sharing and pocket it instead of investing it back into their teams.  Which is unfair to fans who have to watch their team actively try to not win.  It's unfair to the players, too.  Because those teams are intentionally keeping a low payroll, which means they won't be in the market for veteran free agents.  They'll stick with the young guys, who are cheaper.

I've been saying that there's an easy solution to the tanking problem: a salary floor.  The owners actually included a salary floor in their December proposal, but the players rejected it.  Even though the players want tanking to be addressed, they don't think that's the answer.  Their fear is that once a salary floor's in place, a salary cap won't be too far behind.  And a salary cap will forever be a non-starter with the MLBPA.

In their latest proposal, the owners also offered another way to address tanking: an NBA-style draft lottery.  I think this may actually be the way to go if the players are unwilling to accept a salary floor (which I think they should).  The owners proposed three teams.  The players countered with eight.  Do you meet in the middle and go five with the caveat that the same team can't pick first in back-to-back years?

Regardless of how this week's negotiations pan out, we're finally getting some movement after six weeks of nothing.  How much the latest round of proposals moves the needle remains to be seen, but at least they're talking, which is an important and necessary step.  MLB has never lost regular season games because of an offseason work stoppage, and I really don't think they will now either.  My guess is they get a deal done sometime in the middle of February.