Tucker to Dodgers

[Major League Ready]

I don't have a strong opinion on this one but keeping them separate seems like it would make sure the talent was distributed as intended.  However, the current system allows the league to provide teams with slightly different bonus pools.  If they combine the two drafts, the larger bonus pool would be an interesting opportunity for more parity because, that advantage now applies to the entire draft.    

[old nurse]

On 1/17/2026 at 7:25 AM, Major League Ready said:

I don't think this is remotely true.  Most league‑wide decisions require a ¾ vote.   Some require unanimous consent, especially when they materially change the economic rights of individual clubs.

Asked Copilot and got this .....

1. The MLB Constitution protects club property rights
Local revenues are considered club property, and stripping them would likely require unanimous approval or a constitutional amendment — not just a majority.

2. High‑revenue teams would never agree
Teams like the Dodgers, Yankees, Red Sox, Cubs, and Mets generate enormous local revenue.
They would fight any attempt to redistribute all of it.

Even reaching the 23‑owner threshold would be nearly impossible.

3. The MLBPA would immediately challenge it
The union would argue that such a change alters the economic landscape in ways that affect player salaries, requiring negotiation under the CBA.

4. Antitrust exemption limits
MLB’s antitrust exemption is narrow and does not protect owners from lawsuits over internal economic coercion.
A forced revenue seizure could trigger legal challenges from within the league.

5. Broadcast contracts
Local TV deals are individually negotiated legal contracts.
Owners cannot simply vote to void them.

 Red Sox, Cubs and Mets are over 200 million a year behind the Yankees and Dodgers. The vote threshold might not be impossible to reach. It may hurt the Yankees and Dodgers more than them 

[Major League Ready]

13 hours ago, old nurse said:

 Red Sox, Cubs and Mets are over 200 million a year behind the Yankees and Dodgers. The vote threshold might not be impossible to reach. It may hurt the Yankees and Dodgers more than them 

You make an interesting point.  I assembled a chart to try to envision how this would work.  (see below)  Let’s say the other teams were really ruthless and went after the top 7 given they need 8 votes to veto.  If you took 100% of the revenue from the teams above the 7th ranked team in revenue you would gain $703M.  (see below)  The effect would be to know 4 teams back considerably.  If you look at the bottom teams, there are 14 teams that have the most significant disadvantage.  $703M divided between 14 teams is $50M/Team.  I guess the question becomes would that 2nd tier of teams feel it was advantageous for them to knock back those 4 teams when they would be to bring 14 teams closer to their revenue level.   Of course, they would all have to agree or they would not have 8 votes.  

They might be wiser to only go after the top 4 teams in terms of securing the necessary votes.  That would produce a significantly smaller pool of roughly $342M or $24.4M team.  Of course, the teams would have to pay player benefits out of that pool of money.  The net would be around $21.6M/Team.  Not real impactful but it would help. This would require the owners flat out take the money away from the Dodgers and Yankees.  I am not sure that a 75% majority would be willing to take it from them given $21M team is not going to produce parity or anything close to it..

			LA  vs
		REV	League	Aggregate
1	Los Angeles Dodgers	752	0	258
2	New York Yankees	728	24	234
3	Chicago Cubs	584	168	90
4	Boston Red Sox	574	178	80
5	Philadelphia Phillies	519	233	25
6	Atlanta Braves	510	242	16
7	Houston Astros	494	258	0
8	San Francisco Giants	448	304	703
9	New York Mets	444	308
10	San Diego Padres	432	320
11	Los Angeles Angels	410	342
12	Texas Rangers	406	346
13	Toronto Blue Jays	387	365
14	Seattle Mariners	379	373
15	St Louis Cardinals	373	379
16	Baltimore Orioles	366	386
17	Cleveland Guardians	336	416
18	Milwaukee Brewers	335	417
19	Arizona Diamondbacks	328	424
20	Pittsburgh Pirates	326	426
21	Washington Nationals	325	427
22	Cincinnati Reds	325	427
23	Minnesota Twins	324	428
24	Kansas City Royals	324	428
25	Detroit Tigers	320	432
26	Colorado Rockies	318	434
27	Miami Marlins	317	435
28	Tampa Bay Rays	297	455
29	Chicago White Sox	277	475
30	Athletics	257	495

[Twodogs]

On 1/15/2026 at 7:06 PM, SteveLV said:

I am glad this happened.  This "game" is so rigged it is not even funny now.  The best FA goes to the returning World Champs who are outspending everyone and embarrassing the concept of competitiveness.

2027's work stoppage cannot come fast enough.

Our collective angst over the 25th and 26th spots on a lousy roster are laughable in the context of this move.

Carry on.

I feel like the Dodgers are trying to force the work stoppage.  Under the current system the Luxury tax gets more and more punitive every year a team goes over the threshold, higher percentages every year and they will also start to lose draft picks if this keeps up.  The Dodgers are pulling out all the stops to try and win as much as possible and then they are going to ask for a full blown reset after the work stoppage similar to a Donald Trump Bankruptcy.  You can only build a building so tall before it can no longer stand on its own.  I feel like the Dodgers are playing everyone and if there is a work stoppage they will get their way once again.  The thing the Dodgers fear the most is if MLB and the players agreed to continue the current CBA for another 4 years and then revisit it.  I think the Dodger brass would be very much against that.  Tucker at 60 mill per season???  I mean they are trying to force the stoppage so they can get a full reset.  Look to see who benefits the most by a work stoppage.  Its not the Twins, its not the fans, it wont be the players.  It'll be the ginormous franchises such as the Dodgers that will benefit the most.

[Twodogs]

On 1/17/2026 at 8:56 AM, Dave Borton said:

When I look at Tucker and now Bichette's contract, I just can't get my arms around these.

$60MM/yr for Tucker
$42MM/yr for Bichette

Really? Man, I am getting old.

Yeah .266 with 22 homeruns in RF is now 60 million???  Max Kepler must feel he is at least worth half of that??  Ha ha

At least Bichette played a premium position?  At one point in time at least.

[Twodogs]

On 1/18/2026 at 8:59 AM, Major League Ready said:

The owners were talking about an international draft during the last CBA.  I understood that to be separate from the Rule 4 draft which I think makes sense.  Combining them complicates the process and makes it more difficult to change down the road.  Are there any issues you are thinking of that a separate international draft would not resolve? 

I really like having all of the international players having to go through the draft system.  Only weird thing would be like with Japan, a team has to pay them for the rights to a player?  How would that work in a draft?  But yes this wild wild west methodology of acquiring international players needs to stop and there must be a draft of some sort.  Combined or separate, I don't care.  This would help parity quite a bit I feel.

[Major League Ready]

1 hour ago, Twodogs said:

I really like having all of the international players having to go through the draft system.  Only weird thing would be like with Japan, a team has to pay them for the rights to a player?  How would that work in a draft?  But yes this wild wild west methodology of acquiring international players needs to stop and there must be a draft of some sort.  Combined or separate, I don't care.  This would help parity quite a bit I feel.

The Japanese players are an entirely different situation.  We are not talking about 16 y/o kids.  They are already playing in a professional league.  There could perhaps be some tweaks to that system but it should remain separate because that situation is so different from signing international amateurs.  I am with you that an international draft would be a far better system for those amateurs.

[Eris]

On 1/17/2026 at 9:40 AM, tony&rodney said:

Last season the Dodgers had a ridiculous number of injuries and struggles and they still won the World Series.

While this is true, the Dodgers only won game 7 because an ex-Twin didn’t get an appropriate lead off of third in a critical situation. (Referring to Isiah Kiner-Falefa as an ex-Twin is probably pushing the boundaries of what it means to be an ex-Twin, but this is TD)

[Vanimal46]

Tucker for 2026 will receive a $1 million salary with a $64 million signing bonus. He will still count as $57 million on the books for LA this year. The much larger problem is they have solved their state's high tax problem by issuing these ridiculous signing bonuses. So Kyle Tucker, a Florida resident, can assume 99.9% of his earnings right now in a no income tax state. These are the loopholes that need to be cut out in the next CBA... A cap on signing bonus, and a cap on deferrals. Paying Ohtani and Tucker a combined $3 million salary is a joke.