If no MLB deal will ST occur with minor leaguers?

[High heat]

The MLBPA and MLB appear so far apart in negotiations on new CBA and Spring Training appears in serious jeopardy.  If no agreement is made are the minor leagues going to go on with playing the current ST schedule?  

Is the full Twins coaching staff going to show up and coach and work with the minor leaguers? 

[bean5302]

The expectation is, yes.

[Twinsrtheworst]

Definitely hopefull..  Tickets bought, flight booked, room secured.  Just need players.

[USAFChief]

Start spring training, open to whichever players show up. Same for the regular season. 

 

The MLBPA will cave within a week of opening day.

[Trov]

That might depend on what the lawyers for the MLB think if their will be possible legal issues.  I doubt for spring training games there will be, but no one on the MLB 40 man rosters can be there, and only minor league contract guys can be.  Where the real question comes in is if the lockout continues to end of spring, will the teams look to use minor league replacement players, which would under cut the minor leagues and what if any legal implications that might have. 

[Cap'n Piranha]

14 minutes ago, Trov said:

That might depend on what the lawyers for the MLB think if their will be possible legal issues.  I doubt for spring training games there will be, but no one on the MLB 40 man rosters can be there, and only minor league contract guys can be.  Where the real question comes in is if the lockout continues to end of spring, will the teams look to use minor league replacement players, which would under cut the minor leagues and what if any legal implications that might have. 

I don't think it would undercut the minors at all for MLB to play the regular season with non-40 man players.  The AAA roster becomes the MLB roster, AA becomes AAA, A+ to AA, A- to A+, and complex/EST to A-.  There would be no complex team, true, but MLB can go ahead and expand the draft in June to be 40-50 rounds in order to fill out org charts (if somehow the MLBPA is not back), and would any fans bemoan the lack of a team that features 17-19 year olds not yet ready for A- baseball?

[AceWrigley]

Hmmm. I guess it would be baseball as usual just without major leaguers (those on the 40-man rosters). I still think national scale collective bargaining agreements should be under federal registration with each side being taxed for the periods of expired contracts. This would help provide motivation to get deals done before they expire.

[Cap'n Piranha]

1 hour ago, USAFChief said:

Start spring training, open to whichever players show up. Same for the regular season. 

 

The MLBPA will cave within a week of opening day.

I am completely sure that the owners are right now planning a system to take the place of the MLBPA.  Were it me in charge, it would be something like the following;

• All players are under team control until the offseason after they turn 29
• Minimum salary starts at $1.5M, and is paid to any player on the active roster, or will be 26 at any point during the regular season
• Raises of 10% every year for every player on the active roster, unless they will be 27 or older at any point during the regular season
• All salaries for players pre-FA change every year based on 50% of revenue (example: baseball's revenues are $10B in 2021, and increase to $10.2B in 2022--increase of 2%.  This means all pre-FA salaries go up 1%, meaning the minimum is now $1.515M)
• Arbitration based on average of WAR and WAR/game kicks in for all players turning 27, 28, or 29 during the regular season
• The offseason after a player turns 29, they enter free agency.  They have one instance of restriction added to them, whereby the team that player is coming from can match any offer.  The player can then choose which organization they want to sign with, however; if the player chooses the new team, that team must agree to surrender their next available first round pick.  If they decline, the original organization must sign the player to the deal (here's an example of how that would work--say Byron Buxton is a free agent, and signs a 6 year, $100M offer from the Yankees.  The Twins have the option to match that.  If they do not, Buxton is signed to the Yankees.  If they do, Buxton can choose to sign with the Twins or the Yankees; if he chooses the Yankees, the Yankees must agree to send the Twins their next available first round pick.  If the Yankees don't want to do that, the Buxton is signed to the Twins for 6 years, $100M).
• No team can sign more than 2 restricted FAs in a single offseason, or more than 3 in a 3 year span of offseasons
• No player can sign a deal with a maximum AAV more than 60% of the payroll floor from the prior season (defined as 26 multiplied by the minimum salary)
• No team can have active free agent contracts worth more in maximum AAV than 250% of the payroll floor from the prior season (unless the floor decreases after all contracts have been signed)

This completely eliminates service-time shenanigans, reduces the need for bitter pre-FA processes, allows teams to build up cores (and gives them some ability to retain them), levels the playing field in FA, and dramatically increases pay for the vast majority of players, while ensuring that any revenue windfalls MLB realizes are shared with the players.  While losing all the premier players right now would hurt for 2-5 years, owners can soften that blow by reducing costs to the fan until the next generation of stars has taken their place.

[bean5302]

2 hours ago, Trov said:

That might depend on what the lawyers for the MLB think if their will be possible legal issues.  I doubt for spring training games there will be, but no one on the MLB 40 man rosters can be there, and only minor league contract guys can be.  Where the real question comes in is if the lockout continues to end of spring, will the teams look to use minor league replacement players, which would under cut the minor leagues and what if any legal implications that might have. 

It wouldn't impact the minors. Since MLB eliminated a bunch of minor league teams in the restructuring, it would be easy to just promote players up a level and backfill. There's plenty of talent to fill out another rookie league.

[Rosterman]

Every team still has around 150 players on the payroll and you can be sure they tap any number of others looking for some sort of contract. It would hurt drastically the "independent" leagues. 

 

Two questions. Would the "scabs" as people might call them get credit for major league service (pension, etc.).

 

And, when settled, are contracts pro-rated for mixxed games of players in the assoication.

 

 

[MN_ExPat]

5 hours ago, Cap'n Piranha said:

I am completely sure that the owners are right now planning a system to take the place of the MLBPA.  Were it me in charge, it would be something like the following;

• All players are under team control until the offseason after they turn 29
• Minimum salary starts at $1.5M, and is paid to any player on the active roster, or will be 26 at any point during the regular season
• Raises of 10% every year for every player on the active roster, unless they will be 27 or older at any point during the regular season
• All salaries for players pre-FA change every year based on 50% of revenue (example: baseball's revenues are $10B in 2021, and increase to $10.2B in 2022--increase of 2%.  This means all pre-FA salaries go up 1%, meaning the minimum is now $1.515M)
• Arbitration based on average of WAR and WAR/game kicks in for all players turning 27, 28, or 29 during the regular season
• The offseason after a player turns 29, they enter free agency.  They have one instance of restriction added to them, whereby the team that player is coming from can match any offer.  The player can then choose which organization they want to sign with, however; if the player chooses the new team, that team must agree to surrender their next available first round pick.  If they decline, the original organization must sign the player to the deal (here's an example of how that would work--say Byron Buxton is a free agent, and signs a 6 year, $100M offer from the Yankees.  The Twins have the option to match that.  If they do not, Buxton is signed to the Yankees.  If they do, Buxton can choose to sign with the Twins or the Yankees; if he chooses the Yankees, the Yankees must agree to send the Twins their next available first round pick.  If the Yankees don't want to do that, the Buxton is signed to the Twins for 6 years, $100M).
• No team can sign more than 2 restricted FAs in a single offseason, or more than 3 in a 3 year span of offseasons
• No player can sign a deal with a maximum AAV more than 60% of the payroll floor from the prior season (defined as 26 multiplied by the minimum salary)
• No team can have active free agent contracts worth more in maximum AAV than 250% of the payroll floor from the prior season (unless the floor decreases after all contracts have been signed)

This completely eliminates service-time shenanigans, reduces the need for bitter pre-FA processes, allows teams to build up cores (and gives them some ability to retain them), levels the playing field in FA, and dramatically increases pay for the vast majority of players, while ensuring that any revenue windfalls MLB realizes are shared with the players.  While losing all the premier players right now would hurt for 2-5 years, owners can soften that blow by reducing costs to the fan until the next generation of stars has taken their place.

Hmmm... It's an interesting thought at the very least.

[Prince William]

8 hours ago, USAFChief said:

Start spring training, open to whichever players show up. Same for the regular season. 

 

The MLBPA will cave within a week of opening day.

As long as Scott Boras has a finger in the union, the players caving  is not likely

[Brandon]

Could the minor league cities and major league cities sue for not playing games for lost local revenue after putting so much money into the stadiums?  Assuming the lock out continues and delays spring training or the start of the season or both?  just thinking with the Fort Myers site updated at a cost of 40-50 million.  I am sure the tax-payers paid some or all of that.

 

[MN_ExPat]

1 hour ago, Brandon said:

Could the minor league cities and major league cities sue for not playing games for lost local revenue after putting so much money into the stadiums?  Assuming the lock out continues and delays spring training or the start of the season or both?  just thinking with the Fort Myers site updated at a cost of 40-50 million.  I am sure the tax-payers paid some or all of that.

 

That might depend on whether or not that falls under MLB's Anti-Trust exemption.  But then again... not a lawyer, so that is pretty much a full on SWAG.

[twinsfansd]

My question is, what happens to minor league spring training if MLB spring training gets moved back into the time slot when minor leaguers would be using those facilities for spring training?

[MN_ExPat]

13 hours ago, twinsfansd said:

My question is, what happens to minor league spring training if MLB spring training gets moved back into the time slot when minor leaguers would be using those facilities for spring training?

Shouldn't be any real disruption (we're only talking about guys on the 40 Man Roster).

[Squirrel]

On 1/21/2022 at 1:08 PM, Cap'n Piranha said:

All players are under team control until the offseason after they turn 29

Wasn't an age-based FA already nixed? Thought I read that somewhere ... could be wrong. But yeah ... age-based makes the most sense

[big dog]

On 1/21/2022 at 11:08 AM, USAFChief said:

Start spring training, open to whichever players show up. Same for the regular season. 

 

The MLBPA will cave within a week of opening day.

That's exactly my thought. It will also put huge pressure on minor leaguers to decide whether or not to cross the fictional picket lines. Not a good outcome for anyone.

Just settle this.

[Cap'n Piranha]

1 hour ago, Squirrel said:

Wasn't an age-based FA already nixed? Thought I read that somewhere ... could be wrong. But yeah ... age-based makes the most sense

Oh I'm sure it won't happen, because the owners will push for 31, and the MLBPA will push for 25, and neither side will move.  But if we're ever going to get away from service time games, age-related FA (or alternatively years since initial entry to an MLB organization) will have to become the rule.  Unless FA gets capped somehow (non-starter), small market teams will never allow players to hit FA before 29/30, so the only path forward is to let the owners get their way on age, but include substantial increases to the minimum salary as well.

[big dog]

Age-based free agency would have some interesting effects on drafting strategy, that's for sure. Not nearly so much interest in drafting senior prospects unless they were considered close to major-league ready.

[Cap'n Piranha]

7 minutes ago, big dog said:

Age-based free agency would have some interesting effects on drafting strategy, that's for sure. Not nearly so much interest in drafting senior prospects unless they were considered close to major-league ready.

I think that's pretty much how it already goes, for the most part.  That's why I could also see something based around time since initial acquisition.  Perhaps 12 years of control on international signings, 10 for HS draftees, and 7 for college draftees.  That essentially is an age-based system, but will remove the potential sticking point of having to deny a player FA because he's one day too young.

[bean5302]

6 hours ago, Squirrel said:

Wasn't an age-based FA already nixed? Thought I read that somewhere ... could be wrong. But yeah ... age-based makes the most sense

MLB changed their proposal from just plain a29.5 to 6 years or 29.5. Seemed like a big concession, but their original position was ludicrous.

The MLBPA dropped their request for free agency changes altogether from their original request to trade to 6 years or 5 years and 29.5. 

Not sure what the true status is right now.