MLB makes big push for salary cap, floor with public statement outlining labor negotiations with MLBPA

That particular tweet also mentioned that the league “accepted” two proposals from the MLBPA. One that would give players earlier access to free agency and another that would eliminate the qualifying offer.

Advertisement

The term “accepted” there is a bit misleading as negotiations are still very much in the preliminary stages. Instead, that statement likely serves more as the league saying, “We’ll agree to those two stipulations if you agree to what we’re proposing.”

MLB’s latest CBA proposal explained

So, what is MLB proposing? The league would like a salary cap of $245.3 million and a salary floor of $171.2 million. Both figures have been previously reported. If those figures were accepted by the MLBPA, eight teams would need to reduce payroll next season to get under the cap, including the Dodgers, New York Yankees and Boston Red Sox. Twelve teams would need to increase spending to meet the salary floor, including the Miami Marlins, Milwaukee Brewers and Tampa Bay Rays.

The league also wants to eliminate deferred compensation in contracts. This is likely due to the Dodgers’ strategy of deferring costs until later in order to employ more premier talent now. A whopping $680 million of the team’s 10-year, $700 million contract with two-way superstar Shohei Ohtani is deferred, allowing the Dodgers to continue to add major free-agent talent to pair with Ohtani. That contract — and other deferred deals — is a big reason the team has been able to win two straight World Series titles.

Advertisement

The league also wants to set up a “Cornerstone Player” provision, which would reportedly cap free-agent offers at five years if a player decided to switch teams in free agency. Players that opt to remain with their team would be eligible for a six-year contract, per ESPN’s Jesse Rogers. MLB did not confirm the five-and-six year restrictions on its website or in its tweets.

Of the two policies MLB claimed it “accepted,” one comes with some important stipulations. The league allowing players to reach free agency sooner than usual applies to players 30 years old. Those players would hit free agency after five years instead of six. It’s unclear exactly when the clock starts on those players, however. Additionally, players 30 and over aren’t the ones who typically set the free-agent market, so it’s unclear how much that change would be truly beneficial to the players.

The elimination of the qualifying offer — in which teams can place one-year deals on certain free agents and receive draft compensation if that player leaves — seems straightforward enough. As does the league’s willingness to increase the minimum salary.

How did MLBPA respond to MLB’s latest CBA proposal?

Following MLB’s tweets, the MLBPA was quick to respond. In a statement to Rogers, the union said accused the league of trying to “reduce player compensation by billions” with its new proposal. The MLBPA added that many of MLB’s new offers are “designed to look like ‘improvements’ but are of little or no value.”

Advertisement

The full MLBPA statement read:

“After making a series of proposals to reduce player compensation by billions of dollars, eliminate fundamental rights with a salary cap, and destroy the amateur entry process, Major League Baseball and team owners are now attempting to distract from the true impact their plan would have on baseball.

“These misleading offers are designed to look like ‘improvements’ but are of little or no value, given they are expressly conditioned on agreement to the league’s cap system which eliminates the free market, and ensures gains for one player only come at the expense of another. The league also introduced a litany of additional restrictions on player rights – limiting salaries, contract length, performance, award, and signing bonuses.

“While MLB claims to be acting in the interest of fans, their proposals thus far are entirely consistent with owners’ long-held goals: suppressing player salaries and maximizing club profits. Owners’ attempts to pit players against players are nothing new, but they’ve failed in the past and will fail again now, because PA members remain unified. We are committed to achieving a fair deal that protects the rights of all players, promotes competition, and leaves our game better for future generations.”

The union’s response shouldn’t come as a surprise. For decades, the MLBPA has fought against the implementation of a salary cap. It was a key factor in the 1994 strike, which resulted in 948 total games being canceled — including the 1994 World Series.

In the MLBPA’s first proposal to the league, the union pushed for multiple incentives aimed at raising player pay and holding owners accountable for not trying hard enough. The MLBPA’s first proposal included an “integrity tax,” essentially a salary floor, an increased minimum salary for players and penalties for teams that did not use revenue-sharing payments to increase team payroll, among other offers.

Advertisement

While the league intimated it was on board with a few of those ideas Thursday, that comes with a massive caveat that nothing has officially been decided on just yet. Given that, and the MLBPA’s response, the league’s statements likely have more to do about trying to win the PR battle ahead of what should be an extremely contentious negotiating period.

Thursday’s response by the league didn’t help much where that is concerned. MLBPA head Bruce Meyer reportedly still expects a work stoppage Dec. 1, when the current CBA expires, per USA Today’s Bob Nightengale.