Talk of the impending lockout has dominated the conversation in baseball circles, with folks bracing for a winter filled with uncertainty. Plenty of the conversation has centered around the owners wanting a salary cap. Meanwhile, the players have shown zero willingness whatsoever to entertain such a possibility. But what are some other topics being discussed behind the scenes?
I polled six agents to get a read on it all: the issues shaping MLB’s labor negotiations, the potential impact on free agency and the under-the-radar trends changing the sport. Here’s what they told me.
Which MLB labor issue isn’t getting enough attention?
- Agent takeaway: Agents repeatedly pointed to salary arbitration, revenue definitions and international talent acquisition as issues receiving too little public attention.
Seth Levinson of ACES: "If the concern is that small-market clubs cannot compete with big markets, then we must first understand that small markets receive billions of dollars in subsidies through central revenues, local revenue sharing, and the redistribution of luxury tax proceeds.
Beyond the finances, the MLBPA has identified additional paths to level the playing field. For instance, the argument is that despite the subsidies, small-market clubs cannot afford to acquire high-end talent in free agency and must rely heavily on the draft. Generally speaking, why not allow small-market teams to pick at the top of the draft to ensure they can acquire young, talented, and affordable players? Brilliantly run clubs like Tampa and Milwaukee should not suffer draft position as a result of their success, while big-market clubs reap the benefits of their failures. Does anyone believe it would be fair for the Mets to have the first pick in the draft, which is a possibility?
Additionally, there has been an influx of professional Japanese players, who have immediately contributed at the big-league level. History has shown that most, if not all, of these enormously talented players sign with big-market clubs. Why not make those players subject to a draft or available only to small market clubs?"
Agent 2: "Part one is the owners’ current definition of revenue and the resulting significant gap between what the public believes a floor and cap would actually result in player salaries. For example, the current MLB offer wouldn’t actually result in their propagandized public statements about payroll changes.
Part two is the MLBPA has already offered the owners a chance to share their revenues differently in a manner that will continue to benefit small market teams. Part three is the league’s consolidation of TV rights and the massive haul they’ll likely gain from those in 2028. Don’t let the current crying poor about RSNs fool you.
And part four: Why isn’t the public demanding teams open their books to prove financial losses? Everyone is supposed to just blindly trust them?
Agent 3: The idea of an international draft and the infusion of new talent. You have vastly different market sizes and vastly different fanbases and wealth in different cities. There has to be advantages given to the Clevelands and the Kansas Citys of the world so they can compete because the likelihood they’re going to go outbid for a Tarik Skubal is not great. You have the Dodgers having the highest payroll and the best farm system, which allows them to go get Skubal.
The Dodgers and Mets have become the old Yankees and Red Sox. And I think what’s not being talked about enough is how do we level the playing field on the international front, whether that means Japan, Korea, Cuba or whether it means the 12- and 15-year-old kids being signed out of the Dominican. That market is not as well regulated, and that’s how the rich teams are yielding their power and gaining advantages. The international draft is going to be a much bigger issue in this, and I’m in the camp that there is not going to be missed games, and it’s going to be down to how they structure that.
Agent 4: "The central battle of course is the salary cap, but one topic that doesn't get enough attention is how badly the owners would love to get rid of salary arbitration. Aside from the rare player who is approached with a pre-arbitration extension, salary arbitration is the first time a player has the right to negotiate their salary, and MLB would prefer to simply resort to some math equation where you get what you get and don't throw a fit."
Agent 5: "MLB is proposing a 50/50 split of profit with players as part of the cap, but what is the actual definition of profit that they will be splitting? That is important."
Agent 6: "Ownership’s continued interest in using a model or algorithm to determine salaries for arbitration-eligible players deserves a lot more attention. To me, that would be incredibly damaging to players. It takes away their ability to negotiate their own value and reduces a player to a set of statistics plugged into a formula.
Players aren’t just statistical assets. There are things a player brings to an organization: leadership, preparation, accountability, clubhouse presence and the impact they have on the people around them. A system that tries to put an algorithmic value on a human being is inevitably going to miss a significant part of what that player actually brings to an organization."
Why are MLB players so opposed to a salary cap?
- Agent takeaway: All six opposed a salary cap, arguing that it would suppress earnings without guaranteeing greater competitive balance.
Levinson: "It’s impossibly difficult to list the endless reasons in a few sentences. However, let’s start with the fact that we live in an entertainment industry driven by stars. No one goes to the movies to see the co-star. The NFL’s cap does not curtail or impede the exponential growth in the value of star QBs. Similarly, it is reasonable to believe each MLB club will pay its stars and leave the remaining 20 or so roster players to fight over the balance available under the cap.
Consequently, players will be compelled to fight for value below their fair market, despite the clubs' ability to afford and retain players at fair market value. The middle class will be squeezed, and the lower class, like backup catchers, utility infielders, 4th outfielders, all non-leverage relievers, etc., will be essentially squeezed out.
Principally, why would any American choose to limit their earnings while their employer has no such restrictions on its profits? The devil is in the details, and MLB’s proposal eliminates enormous revenue streams from its definition while adding every conceivable expense, making their proposals, which incorporate all of the worst elements of the Cap systems, totally unacceptable and a non-starter. Understandably, it’s difficult to remove salaries from the calculus in determining fairness. However, regardless of the salary, everyone wants to be treated fairly and respectfully. On the other hand, MLB seeks to line its own pockets while pressing its foot on players' necks.
Further, a cap will threaten guaranteed contracts, and players face the real danger of losing vital rights because of the leverage MLB can create with future lockouts. What has MLB ever done that would make any reasonable person think otherwise?
Agent 2: Because it’s fundamentally bad for players in the short and long term. And it’s all about franchise valuations (which are already at record levels), not parity.
Agent 3: A salary cap is good for owners. Period. That’s why they push it. You can’t sell me, ever, on a salary cap. If you think this is something the players are going to give into … think again. It is not good for players.
The owners are marketing it. They are literally putting ads on TV for it. That tells you all you need to know. It’s a very poor read on the situation. A salary cap makes selling teams easier, but given what we've seen in the last couple years with these enormous prices, these owners have plenty of ability to sell these franchises. The Angels were up for bidding in the low $2 billions a couple years ago, lost Shohei Ohtani, and then sold for double that.
Agent 4: MLB argues this would narrow the enormous payroll gap between clubs and improve competitive balance, but in reality, a number of clubs that historically maintain lower payrolls are consistently competing (Rays, Guardians, Brewers) whereas other clubs (like the Mets with monster payrolls) continue to underperform. The main problem with a hard cap is that it would replace baseball's open salary market with an artificial ceiling on aggregate player compensation. Reducing compensation and eliminating fundamental free-market rights for players will not result in a more competitive balance.
Agent 5: It no longer guarantees contracts. Plus the lack of trust in what is being proposed.
Agent 6: How many people would willingly support a rule that limits how much they’re allowed to earn at their job? Players understand that baseball is a business. But when revenues and franchise values continue to grow, it’s difficult to ask players to accept an artificial ceiling on their earning potential. If the goal is competitive balance, there are ways to address that without restricting what an individual player can earn.
What message do agents have for Rob Manfred?
- Agent takeaway: Do not underestimate how aligned the players are against a salary cap.
Levinson: Rob Manfred may be the only person in the hierarchy of MLB and the MLBPA who plays a prominent role in the CBA negotiations today as well as in 1994. My message to Rob is not to let the lessons of the past be lost to time. Inarguably, baseball will suffer substantial, irreparable damage with the loss of games. MLB’s misleading, disingenuous, and specious reasons for a cap today are no different than in 1994. Ultimately, everyone will see through their frivolous facade that this fight is really only about the owners increasing their profits and franchise values.
Agent 2: Right now you have a legacy that includes zero missed games, record revenues, increased attendance and tv viewership, and record franchise valuations. A prolonged work stoppage in aim of a salary cap that players will never agree to will do nothing but harm that legacy. And why act like the game is in a bad spot?
Agent 3: Do not underestimate how aligned the players are against a salary cap. Do not misjudge that. With this likely being his last contract, you don't want to end it with a work stoppage.
Agent 4: Don’t mistake our desire to play baseball for a willingness to give away what generations of players fought to earn. Players should not have to surrender a competitive market for their services in order to make owners compete with one another.
Competitive balance and cost control are not the same thing. If some organizations aren't investing enough in their major-league teams, the solution shouldn't be restricting what other organizations are allowed to invest in players. If baseball's revenues continue to grow, players—the people whose performance creates the product on the field—should participate fairly in that growth.
Baseball has extraordinary momentum. Let's not spend the next several months figuring out how to divide it.
Agent 5: The game is in a great place, what happens over the next few months could continue the momentum or crumble things.
Agent 6: I understand that you’re running a business. Just don’t forget that the players are human beings. That can get lost during labor negotiations when everything becomes about percentages, payrolls and leverage. These decisions affect actual people and their families. If there is a lockout, the league does things like cutting off players' health insurance.
How could a potential Dec. 1 lockout affect MLB free agency?
Agent | Free agency prediction |
|---|---|
Seth Levinson | Winning teams will be aggressive before Dec. 1, but he expects little overall impact on the market. |
Agent 2 | The impact will vary depending on the free agent and the ownership group. |
Agent 3 | Most deals will wait until baseball reopens, although Tarik Skubal could sign early. |
Agent 4 | Teams will race to complete deals in November before the rules could change. |
Agent 5 | The uncertainty will likely slow down free agency. |
Agent 6 | Stars should retain strong markets, while middle- and lower-tier players face more uncertainty; some deals could accelerate. |
Levinson: I fully expect teams motivated to win to be aggressive and proactive before any potential lockout. Winning teams do not want their 2nd or 3rd choice of free agents or to end up with no choice at all. Certainly, some clubs will be apprehensive about proceeding because of the impending unknown system. However, there will never be a CAP, and a cap is simply a poor excuse for Clubs not to spend. Any contract signed before a new CBA takes effect will be grandfathered and will not inure to the detriment of the Club. So, the practical impact on signing free agents should be nil. As the lockout approached in 2022, free agency in November was fast and furious, and it should be no different this time around.
Agent 2: Certain free agents will be impacted more than others. Expect certain ownership groups to operate differently as well.
Agent 3: We saw this in 2021 and there was a big run on players. It was almost a couple billion dollars that got done between Thanksgiving and Dec. 1. The problem is that this free agent class is not as strong as past classes. Skubal is a separator and it wouldn't surprise me if he went early like Corey Seager did.
I think a lot of free agency ends up happening after baseball opens up again. If you had last years players, you might have a bigger run on it. I just don’t think there’s that much strength in this class. It's more likely to be later. How many nine-figure contracts are likely to be handed out besides Skubal?
Agent 4: I think it will mirror what we saw in 2021 and Clubs will be in a sprint to sign free agents in November. Nobody knows exactly what the rules governing future contracts will look like so there may be an effort to lock in deals that's structures could be grandfathered into the new CBA, for example should deferrals be restricted going forward.
Agent 5: Likely slows things down.
Agent 6: "I’m not sure it changes the market dramatically for the biggest free agents. The elite players are still going to have significant demand, and teams know who those players are. Where it gets more complicated is for the middle and lower portions of the market. Those players and their agents may need to be more creative with contract language and structure because you’re negotiating without knowing exactly what the rules of the next CBA will look like. If anything, the uncertainty could accelerate the timeline a little bit. Some players and teams may decide there’s value in getting something done before Dec. 1 rather than waiting to see what happens."
Which under-the-radar trends are reshaping MLB?
- Agent takeaway: Baseball is becoming increasingly engineered by data, but traditional skills like command, feel and well-rounded development are becoming valuable differentiators again.
Levinson: "In my four decades of experience, I've never seen less devotion to developing the player as an elite competitor. The overriding focus is on data for clubs to assess and for players to try and attain. As a result, many of the purely beautiful chess-match like aspects of the game, like hitting behind the runner, bunting, slowing and stopping the running game, navigating a lineup, throwing to the right base, etc., have been lost to launch angle, spin rate, and the myriad of stats that measure most every act on the field. As the great Dustin Pedroia has pointedly and repeatedly said, ‘It takes heart, head and balls to be a champion.’ Regretfully, those traits cannot be measured and are lost on too many decision-makers in the game."
Agent 3: "There’s really low right-handed power in the game right now because of the increase in velocity. The league is so matchup-based, and the league is 75 percent right-handed. How many 30-plus homer right-handed hitters are there? It’s why Pete Alonso is such a good player because a right-handed hitter to hit right-handed pitching is very hard to do right now. So many of the best players are left handed. It’s just crazy how left-handed hitting is outpacing right-handed hitting and that’s something teams are catching onto."
Agent 4: "Scouts are becoming obsolete. There is so much data collection from such a young age now with most stadiums outfitted with Trackman, players attending showcases, tournaments, college games, providing testing results from force plates, mocaps, and so on. Once you plug in these tens of thousands of data points at every level, every night, around the world, we can objectively project a player's trend line with a lot more accuracy.
Therefore, once a player has been identified as having major-league carrying tools and enters a minor league system, MLB is moving from “player development” toward “player engineering.” Every club has a lab, most players that can afford it are seeking off season training at shops like Driveline, Tread, Maven and so on. Clubs, scouts, and even agencies aren't asking only, “How good is this player?” They're asking, “What physical tool can we measurably change, and how much additional MLB value can we manufacture?”
Agent 6: "Strike-throwing is becoming a premium again. For a while, the industry became obsessed with raw stuff—velocity, pitch shape, sweepers, movement profiles. But we’ve reached a point where almost everybody throws hard and almost everybody has access to high-end pitch design. The separator is increasingly becoming who can actually execute that stuff in the strike zone. I think we’re seeing the pendulum swing back toward pitchers who combine high-end stuff with command and the ability to attack hitters."
Which GM and manager would agents choose to run their team?
Agent 2: AJ Preller: "Because he gives a shit and wants to win every year. And understands that he can always find the next prospect (and often does)."
Agent 3: Chris Antonetti: "My answer would depend on what kind of organization I'm running, but Chris Antonetti does a great job. If I'm in a big market, it's hard to argue with the job that Brian Cashman has done."
Agent 4: Ross Fenstermaker (POBO), Jason McLeod (GM), Pat Murphy (Manager): "I believe this blend gives an organization forward-thinking leaders that have demonstrated success in this new age of identifying the best talent while still blending the ability to scout and development. You can have all the data, analytics, and information in the world, but if you don't have leaders that speak "baseball" with the ability to articulate the messaging, the desired results will not follow. There will always be a desire from the Players to receive the messaging from someone who's spent a day in their shoes."
Agent 5: Erik Neander
Agent 6: Matt Kleine, Warren Schaefer: "On the front-office side, I’d pick Matt Kleine, the Brewers’ AGM. He’s an excellent communicator, he’s extremely bright, and one of the things I respect most about him is that he doesn’t bullshit you. He’s also been an important part of building what Milwaukee has become. The Brewers consistently find ways to compete, develop players and maximize their resources, and Matt has been a meaningful part of that success. As a manager, I’ll go out on a limb and say Warren Schaefer. Every player I’ve had play for him has loved playing for him. I’d be fascinated to see what he could do with a more talented roster."
Add us as a preferred source on Google