1337 replies to this topic

[SportsGuy]

MLB, MLBPA Agree To New Collective Bargaining Agreement
https://www.mlbtrade...-agreement.html

[SportsGuy]

Sounds like they are getting rid of the AS game winner hosts the WS rule. Thank god.

It will now be best record.

Also, the DL will be 10 day instead of 15.

[Mackus]

They've basically eliminated, or at least neutered, the QO system as now teams only gain and lose 3rd round picks for making the offer, which are not very valuable at all.  It'll still be there, but there is now very little disincentive for a team signing a player that was given the offer, nor very little incentive for making the offer to a player you hope signs elsewhere (like Wieters).

 

Also a hard bonus cap for international signings at $5M.  This may be great news for the Orioles and any other teams that refused to even dip their toes into the higher priced waters.  Same pool of talent will be available, not just a markedly lower amount of money being thrown at all the players and the same maximum bonuses allowed to be offered.

[RShack]

Sounds like they are getting rid of the AS game winner hosts the WS rule. Thank god.
 

 

So we can look forward to a return to AS games in which millionaire ballplayers horse around with each while not taking the game seriously...

[Mackus]

So, like every year in recent memory.

 

I respect most people's differences of opinion, but I find the argument that the players and managers played harder when the game "meant something" to be laughably out of touch with reality.

[Mike in STL]

Sounds like they are getting rid of the AS game winner hosts the WS rule. Thank god.

 

 
So we can look forward to a return to AS games in which millionaire ballplayers horse around with each while not taking the game seriously...

I'm pretty sure the style of the game hasn't changed in about 40 years.

[SportsGuy]

The idea that an exhibition game meant something was always an awful rule.

[SportsGuy]

They've basically eliminated, or at least neutered, the QO system as now teams only gain and lose 3rd round picks for making the offer, which are not very valuable at all.  It'll still be there, but there is now very little disincentive for a team signing a player that was given the offer, nor very little incentive for making the offer to a player you hope signs elsewhere (like Wieters).

 

Also a hard bonus cap for international signings at $5M.  This may be great news for the Orioles and any other teams that refused to even dip their toes into the higher priced waters.  Same pool of talent will be available, not just a markedly lower amount of money being thrown at all the players and the same maximum bonuses allowed to be offered.

Does the QO stuff go into effect this offseason?

 

EDIT:  According to Morosi, this goes into effect next offseason.

 

That makes sense since the offers were made based off of the idea of getting a first rounder.

[Mackus]

Unless you're going back to the 60s or 70s with Pete Rose potentially destroying someone's career while taking the game super seriously, are anyone's fondest All-Star Game moments clutch hits or plays to decide close games?

 

Is it just me that when thinking of the All Star Game mostly thinks of Kruk batting righty with a backwards helmet as Randy Johnson sails a heater ten feet behind him?  ARod switching spots to let Cal play short in his final game?  Bonds lifting Torii Hunter over his shoulder after Torii climbed about 3 feet over the wall to bring a HR back?  Schilling telling A-Rod he'd be getting all fastballs and then striking him out?

 

I don't think a clutch homer or double play would be anywhere near my top 10 All-Star Game moments.

[Mackus]

Does the QO stuff go into effect this offseason?

 

EDIT:  According to Morosi, this goes into effect next offseason.

 

That makes sense since the offers were made based off of the idea of getting a first rounder.

 

Good clarification.  I hadn't heard either way and was just assuming it was already in place.

[DJ MC]

As Deadspin points out in their article:

 

Players on the winning team will be rewarded with cash bonuses, which will be, for the vast majority of them, a much bigger incentive than home-field advantage for their league’s eventual champion ever was.

 

Definitely a good decision.

 

I wouldn't be surprised if the owners let the five years go and try another tack on free-agent compensation. That has pretty much been the MO since 1976. They try something, the players convince them to get rid of it, and they try something else, then want something stronger, then try something else, then the players convince them to get rid of it...

[SportsGuy]

Jon MorosiVerified account‏@jonmorosi

Important clarification: Change to FA compensation structure goes into effect for 2017-2018 offseason; prior rules apply to existing class.

[DJ MC]

HBT: Winners, losers of the new CBA

[RShack]

I'm pretty sure the style of the game hasn't changed in about 40 years.

 

I'm pretty entirely sure you're mistaken...I've watched it nearly every year... before the WS home field was riding on it, it had reached the point where players were treating it as a joke... which is a huge part of why they attached WS home field advantage to it...

[RShack]

So, like every year in recent memory.

 

I respect most people's differences of opinion, but I find the argument that the players and managers played harder when the game "meant something" to be laughably out of touch with reality.

 

Did you watch the game in the years leading up to the change?

 

If the answer is yes, why weren't you paying attention?  

 

It's become fashionable for people to diss the tie-in... but when they did it, I was glad... IMO, it's one of about two things that Bud did right...

[Pedro Cerrano]

I haven't seen any noticeable difference in the all-star game before and after the home field rule was instituted.

[RShack]

I haven't seen any noticeable difference in the all-star game before and after the home field rule was instituted.

 

Before they established the rule, the managers didn't care either... their main goal wasn't winning the game... their main goal is to make sure everybody got to play in 9 innings... which is why they had to call the 2002 game a tie... it went into extra innings and they had no players left...

[Mackus]

The quality of play had absolutely nothing to do with the decision to make home field advantage contingent on the outcome.  It was the way the game was managed, with the intent of getting every player into the game, that led to both teams being out of available pitchers and forcing the game to end in a tie.  And a small percentage of people were outraged that a tie was possible so they mistakenly changed the rule to "fix" a problem that didn't exist.

[SportsGuy]

I haven't seen any noticeable difference in the all-star game before and after the home field rule was instituted.

That's because there hasn't been one.

[RShack]

The quality of play had absolutely nothing to do with the decision to make home field advantage contingent on the outcome.  It was the way the game was managed, with the intent of getting every player into the game, that led to both teams being out of available pitchers and forcing the game to end in a tie.  And a small percentage of people were outraged that a tie was possible so they mistakenly changed the rule to "fix" a problem that didn't exist.

 

The tie triggered it, but if you didn't see the players clowning around before that, then you weren't watching very closely...

 

Also, I'd like to know where your claim comes from that only "a small percentage" of people were bothered by it...