The CBA is done - formerly the CBA is not done thread

[flavum]

Surprised no major moves have been made yet. I thought things would've happened quickly once this thing was resolved.

 

The next 7 days will probably be very active. Non tenders tomorrow, the meetings next week ending with the rule 5 draft next Thursday morning. Hopefully it won't be a dud.

Edited December 1, 2016 by flavum

[bmags]

Surprised no major moves have been made yet. I thought things would've happened quickly once this thing was resolved.

 

I don't know, while nothing dramatic, some changes directly affect the major market teams (increase in multiple offender tax) that they will want to figure it out before moving.

[Y2Jimmy0]

Best write-up I've seen on Player Compensation:

Teams that lose a free agent who rejects a qualifying offer will still get a draft pick. The details: For most teams, that pick would be a sandwich pick immediately following the competitive-balance picks that are awarded after the second round. However, if that team comes from the 15 smallest markets and is receiving revenue-sharing money, and it loses a free agent who signs a contract worth at least $50 million, that pick would follow the first round. And if the team losing that player is over the luxury-tax threshold, the pick would follow the fourth round.

 

http://www.espn.com/espn/now?nowId=21-0595981839814890747-4

 

h/t sss larry for finding

 

 

Some were speculating that teams would try to do 2 years deals for under $50 million but my interpretation of the rule is that if you sign a player with a QO, you are losing your 3rd round pick unless you are a tax team, then you lose your 2nd and 5th rounders. I think this happens regardless of the contract that the player signs.

[bmags]

Some were speculating that teams would try to do 2 years deals for under $50 million but my interpretation of the rule is that if you sign a player with a QO, you are losing your 3rd round pick unless you are a tax team, then you lose your 2nd and 5th rounders. I think this happens regardless of the contract that the player signs.

 

Right, the $50mill only affects what the losing team receives, but they don't receive a pick from the signing team.

[Chisoxfn]

How does it screw Sox?

We will likely be lumped into the large market players and thus, if it is based on market size, will get treated like the bigger spending clubs vs. the clubs we more or less fit in with from a revenue perspective.

[Y2Jimmy0]

We will likely be lumped into the large market players and thus, if it is based on market size, will get treated like the bigger spending clubs vs. the clubs we more or less fit in with from a revenue perspective.

 

 

IT helps the Sox actually. They can sign free agents now and only lose a 3rd round pick for doing so in future years. They also have a $5 million cap on international spending. The Sox have been spending their entire bonus pools but they are often in the $3 million range. They never go over though. Now that nobody is allowed to go over, I would expect the White Sox to spend the entire $5 million annually on international amateurs.

[Chisoxfn]

Didn't see it in here, but new CBA is going to get rid of the All Star game driving home field advantage.

[Chisoxfn]

Another change in the new CBA is that the 15 day DL will now be a 10 day DL. I like it.

[Chisoxfn]

IT helps the Sox actually. They can sign free agents now and only lose a 3rd round pick for doing so in future years. They also have a $5 million cap on international spending. The Sox have been spending their entire bonus pools but they are often in the $3 million range. They never go over though. Now that nobody is allowed to go over, I would expect the White Sox to spend the entire $5 million annually on international amateurs.

The qualifying pick doesn't really help the Sox because we aren't a team that will largely play in the big free agent market, so it helps the bigger spenders more then the lower spenders. Further, the fact that the compensation is paid based upon market size also hurts the Sox when you look at it from that perspective, because what we will give up vs. a team like the Royals/Indians will be more and akin to what the Dodgers / Yankees / Cubs would give up (again, not exactly fair given our revenue's, which are much more middle-market in size). I do agree that the international cap is a move that is beneficial for the Sox.

[Dick Allen]

I'm pretty sure Adam Dunn is the only player the White Sox have ever signed that would cost the Sox a draft pick with the new rules, assuming he would have been given a QO.

[Buehrle>Wood]

We will likely be lumped into the large market players and thus, if it is based on market size, will get treated like the bigger spending clubs vs. the clubs we more or less fit in with from a revenue perspective.

Yeah I did indeed misinterpret that initial tweet. I thought compensation was decided on what team was signing your player away.

[Y2Jimmy0]

I'm pretty sure Adam Dunn is the only player the White Sox have ever signed that would cost the Sox a draft pick with the new rules, assuming he would have been given a QO.

 

 

That's not true. If you sign a player with a QO offer attached, you are still giving up the 3rd round pick regardless of the contract that you sign them for. The only thing that changes is the compensation that the other team receives in return.

[Y2Jimmy0]

The qualifying pick doesn't really help the Sox because we aren't a team that will largely play in the big free agent market, so it helps the bigger spenders more then the lower spenders. Further, the fact that the compensation is paid based upon market size also hurts the Sox when you look at it from that perspective, because what we will give up vs. a team like the Royals/Indians will be more and akin to what the Dodgers / Yankees / Cubs would give up (again, not exactly fair given our revenue's, which are much more middle-market in size). I do agree that the international cap is a move that is beneficial for the Sox.

 

 

Now they have incentive to do so though. If Fowler were on the FA market last season and all they had to give up was their 3rd rounder, they would have ponied up and paid it. In the future, I think they are much more likely to pay for free agents with a QO by losing a 3rd round pick rather than a 1st rounder. There won't be that many players receiving the QO though because teams are most likely going to trade their impending FA's.

[Dam8610]

Didn't see it in here, but new CBA is going to get rid of the All Star game driving home field advantage.

 

I keep seeing this. What's the new determinant?

[Dick Allen]

I keep seeing this. What's the new determinant?

Best record of the combatants. They play entirely different schedules.

[Buehrle>Wood]

Best record of the combatants. They play entirely different schedules.

Pretty stupid.

[Y2Jimmy0]

Pretty stupid.

 

 

Not as stupid as it was before. All Star Game winner hosting was dumbest thing in sports.

[Buehrle>Wood]

Not as stupid as it was before. All Star Game winner hosting was dumbest thing in sports.

It was great for business.

[bmags]

Regardless of the different leagues, you can't convince me that best record is not the single best determinant.

[Buehrle>Wood]

Regardless of the different leagues, you can't convince me that best record is not the single best determinant.

Interleague record is better.

[Rowand44]

Regardless of the different leagues, you can't convince me that best record is not the single best determinant.

Agreed.

[Iwritecode]

Best record of the combatants. They play entirely different schedules.

 

While true, baseball is unique in that even if they made a balanced schedule and every team played every other team the same amount of times there is no guarantee they'll face the same starting pitcher each game.

 

In all the other sports if you take out factors like injuries and trades, you know that you'll be facing more or less the same team every time you play them.

 

Anyways, teams within the same division don't even play the same schedule, yet hardly anyone ever says a word about that. Was it fair that the Sox had to play the Cubs for 4 games but the Indians got to play the Reds instead?

[bmags]

While true, baseball is unique in that even if they made a balanced schedule and every team played every other team the same amount of times there is no guarantee they'll face the same starting pitcher each game.

 

In all the other sports if you take out factors like injuries and trades, you know that you'll be facing more or less the same team every time you play them.

 

Anyways, teams within the same division don't even play the same schedule, yet hardly anyone ever says a word about that. Was it fair that the Sox had to play the Cubs for 4 games but the Indians got to play the Reds instead?

 

Right. We are talking about a 162 game schedule. If you are tops after that haul you deserve the spoils.

[hi8is]

This is where I draw the line. Awful, just awful!!!

 

In another wrinkle, via Sherman (on Twitter), the league will ban incoming MLB players from using smokeless tobacco, with existing players grandfathered in.

 

Likely this is what the issue was that almost caused a walk out.

[Y2Jimmy0]

Really good info about the new CBA from Jeff Passan: http://sports.yahoo.com/news/the-inside-de...-082559072.html

 

International $$ can be traded. Teams like the Padres get no amnesty and still can't spend more than $300,000 on a player for next 2 years. They do however, still get a pool amount of $5.75 million and they can trade it.