The next CBA and the future of MLB
Posted: Sat Mar 12, 2022 9:07 pm
496F687D74786F79711A0 wrote:
Yep. Meet the new CBA, same as the old CBA.
I disagree. In fact, the owners approving it 30-0 tells me this one is still going to work in their favor.
We already know the owners wised up and quit throwing huge contracts at guys past their primes, the "getting paid for what they did" kind of Pujols contract. Someone finally woke them up, "why am I paying this guy for something he never did, and never will do for me?"
In three seasons, Bryan Reynolds has 10.6 WAR, has been paid league minimum, and entering his first year of arbitration. Had a 6 WAR season last year. Another fellow has 13.3 WAR in those same three seasons, posted a 6.6 WAR last year and was paid $1,714,238. The difference between the two is while Reynolds hits arbitration for the first time, that other fellow signed an extension for 338 million. That fellow is Tatis Jr.
I think with the incentives to play younger players sooner rather than trying to save that year of control due to the bonus pool, we're going to see more younger players hitting FA sooner. Good players. Reynolds types, who (reportedly) turned down extension offers.
What I think a lot of owners are going to realize, including some of the richer teams, that there's really no reason to pay 338 million to a young guy who, though one of the most dynamic players in the game, has already shown that this might be a huge albatross contract ala Pujols, because of his shoulder issues. Right now, Tatis Jr. is an enormous bargain, even with missing 32 games, and being subpar for how many others, especially down the stretch when San Diego faltered to a 2012 Piratesque type of finish?
There are going to be more younger players hitting FA, and a much larger and much more quality pool of them. I think the players thought they were looking out for the top earners, the Scherzers and Coles. They actually inadvertantly did what they supposedly were intending to do, help that mid tier guys get their money. And they will. Except those mid tier guys will be 25, 26, 27 and not 31, 32, 33.
Hope I'm alive to see it happen, but I honestly think this CBA backfired on the players. There are going to be a lot of Reynolds every year in FA classes. When there's one Reynolds, there's a huge 100 million plus contract waiting. When there are 20 Reynolds, then what?
I think this CBA is going to help the small market teams. They won't really be penalized for playing young guys, because if they're ROY types, they'll get paid from a bonus pool, and the fans will enjoy seeing those young phenoms. Sure it will be the same old same old, "enjoy them while they're here" type of thing. But when those guys hit FA with a whole bunch of other phenoms, the FA pool won't be comprised of a few top guys, a few legit bounce back guys, and the rest reclamation projects and dumpster dives. Those are the 30 something guys I think we'll be seeing fewer and fewer of.
I think the new status quo is going to be the only guys getting the massive contracts and still playing well into their 30's are the elite pitchers, and pure designated hitters.
The 10-15 year career journeymen, the mid 30's fading stars? I think their days are numbered. They will be replaced by guys 10 years younger.
When you can take 338 million over ten years and instead of paying one elite 6.6 WAR guy you can pay five 4-6 WAR type players instead, you may not have the sizzle anymore but you'll have the steak.
I think that's why the players wanted a universal DH. It didn't create anymore jobs like some people think. It just created what I think outside of pitching will be the only 300 million dollar contract type players, but I don't think the players realized that. When that FA class has a lot of Reynolds, you keep your Tatis Jr., someone will just get them 2-3 Reynolds instead.
Small market teams will now be able to field their best teams, and I think in a few years the FA market will be higher quality, but more affordable just from the sheer numbers.
2023 Pirates....look out world!!!!
My comment was referencing Bob Nutting's spending. It won't change with this new CBA.
As for the owners spending on younger, quality players instead of the 30-somethings, that's probably a good call, but Nutting still probably won't take part in that. What he got from a young Polanco for the money he paid him will be etched in his mind forever. I can imagine Nutting forcing whoever his GM is to deal away his best players in their third or fourth years to both avoid the higher contracts, even though there will be the bonus pool.
If there will be more younger players eligible for that money, there's less to go around, as you suggest. If other owners are paying more to their younger players, will Nutting feel the pressure to do the same? He might, but he won't care. He sets his own value for players, market be damned.
Yep. Meet the new CBA, same as the old CBA.
I disagree. In fact, the owners approving it 30-0 tells me this one is still going to work in their favor.
We already know the owners wised up and quit throwing huge contracts at guys past their primes, the "getting paid for what they did" kind of Pujols contract. Someone finally woke them up, "why am I paying this guy for something he never did, and never will do for me?"
In three seasons, Bryan Reynolds has 10.6 WAR, has been paid league minimum, and entering his first year of arbitration. Had a 6 WAR season last year. Another fellow has 13.3 WAR in those same three seasons, posted a 6.6 WAR last year and was paid $1,714,238. The difference between the two is while Reynolds hits arbitration for the first time, that other fellow signed an extension for 338 million. That fellow is Tatis Jr.
I think with the incentives to play younger players sooner rather than trying to save that year of control due to the bonus pool, we're going to see more younger players hitting FA sooner. Good players. Reynolds types, who (reportedly) turned down extension offers.
What I think a lot of owners are going to realize, including some of the richer teams, that there's really no reason to pay 338 million to a young guy who, though one of the most dynamic players in the game, has already shown that this might be a huge albatross contract ala Pujols, because of his shoulder issues. Right now, Tatis Jr. is an enormous bargain, even with missing 32 games, and being subpar for how many others, especially down the stretch when San Diego faltered to a 2012 Piratesque type of finish?
There are going to be more younger players hitting FA, and a much larger and much more quality pool of them. I think the players thought they were looking out for the top earners, the Scherzers and Coles. They actually inadvertantly did what they supposedly were intending to do, help that mid tier guys get their money. And they will. Except those mid tier guys will be 25, 26, 27 and not 31, 32, 33.
Hope I'm alive to see it happen, but I honestly think this CBA backfired on the players. There are going to be a lot of Reynolds every year in FA classes. When there's one Reynolds, there's a huge 100 million plus contract waiting. When there are 20 Reynolds, then what?
I think this CBA is going to help the small market teams. They won't really be penalized for playing young guys, because if they're ROY types, they'll get paid from a bonus pool, and the fans will enjoy seeing those young phenoms. Sure it will be the same old same old, "enjoy them while they're here" type of thing. But when those guys hit FA with a whole bunch of other phenoms, the FA pool won't be comprised of a few top guys, a few legit bounce back guys, and the rest reclamation projects and dumpster dives. Those are the 30 something guys I think we'll be seeing fewer and fewer of.
I think the new status quo is going to be the only guys getting the massive contracts and still playing well into their 30's are the elite pitchers, and pure designated hitters.
The 10-15 year career journeymen, the mid 30's fading stars? I think their days are numbered. They will be replaced by guys 10 years younger.
When you can take 338 million over ten years and instead of paying one elite 6.6 WAR guy you can pay five 4-6 WAR type players instead, you may not have the sizzle anymore but you'll have the steak.
I think that's why the players wanted a universal DH. It didn't create anymore jobs like some people think. It just created what I think outside of pitching will be the only 300 million dollar contract type players, but I don't think the players realized that. When that FA class has a lot of Reynolds, you keep your Tatis Jr., someone will just get them 2-3 Reynolds instead.
Small market teams will now be able to field their best teams, and I think in a few years the FA market will be higher quality, but more affordable just from the sheer numbers.
2023 Pirates....look out world!!!!
My comment was referencing Bob Nutting's spending. It won't change with this new CBA.
As for the owners spending on younger, quality players instead of the 30-somethings, that's probably a good call, but Nutting still probably won't take part in that. What he got from a young Polanco for the money he paid him will be etched in his mind forever. I can imagine Nutting forcing whoever his GM is to deal away his best players in their third or fourth years to both avoid the higher contracts, even though there will be the bonus pool.
If there will be more younger players eligible for that money, there's less to go around, as you suggest. If other owners are paying more to their younger players, will Nutting feel the pressure to do the same? He might, but he won't care. He sets his own value for players, market be damned.