Changes to Baseball in the CBA

In Uncategorized by myles78 Comments

The owners and the MLBPA came to an agreement, and there is a new 5-year collective bargaining agreement. Baseball is about to change some.

The winning league of the all-star game no longer gets homefield advantage in the World Series. It now goes to the team with the best record. This is a great change.

The 15-day DL is now the 10-day DL. This is a very good change as well, and a boon for the players.

The regular season will be lengthened by 5 days, to give more off days. I think this is a slightly bad thing for fans (would have preferred 2 or 3 days), but it's better for the players and probably slightly better for quality.

There is now a "phi base" between 2nd and 3rd that players must avoid. Weird change, but we'll see how it plays out.

The Athletics are being phased out of revenue sharing over the next 4 years. Hard to see this as anything other than punishment to the owners for the dump they play in.

The dirt on the warning track is being replaced with trampolines. It'll take some getting used to, for sure, but this is an unequivocal benefit to the game.

The compensation system is being drastically overhauled. Signing FAs will now only cost either a 2nd and 5th rounder or a 3rd rounder, depending on some spending/market thresholds.

Players will now run the opposite way around the bases in the 5th inning.

Teams have pledged to get to pre-1980s levels of emissions by 2021.

Major League Baseball no longer acknowledges the state of Montana.

Smokeless tobacco is now banned in clubhouses, though current players are grandfathered in.



Share this Post


  1. Rizzo the Rat

    You can’t leave first until you chug a beer.
    Any man scoring has to chug a beer.
    Chug a beer at the top of all odd-numbered innings.
    And the fourth inning is the beer inning.

      Quote  Reply

  2. Payne Hertz

    Who’s going to play Phi base? Wasn’t that the reason to expand the roster?

    And what about the 17 minute break after the 9th in extra inning games?

      Quote  Reply

  3. berselius

    Rizzo the Rat:
    You can’t leave first until you chug a beer.
    Any man scoring has to chug a beer.
    Chug a beer at the top of all odd-numbered innings.
    And the fourth inning is the beer inning.

    Hey, we know how to play softball

      Quote  Reply

  4. cerulean

    No mention of the changes in indentured servitude for immigrants? (The American Ninja Warrior-style obstacle course—with bonus crocodiles and pythons—remains the same despite the rumors of a new final wall challenge.)

      Quote  Reply

  5. dmick89

    Looks like the current offers for Fowler are in the range I expected. The Cubs should definitely sign him if that continues. If he gets more than 4/60ish, I’d probably pass.

      Quote  Reply

  6. Wenningtons Gorilla Cock

    Myles: Myles: I had one about the new CBA, but thought it wasn’t funny enough to pass muster

    Muster ————–> passed

      Quote  Reply

  7. berselius


    You would think that the biggest takaway from Davis’s success might be that you can find a dominant reliever from a mid range starter but ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

      Quote  Reply

  8. dmick89

    I hope the Cubs don’t give up too much to get Davis. I think Davis is a great closer and probably worth what they might give up, but with two closers still available, I’d rather just spend the money and save the players for a deal for a starter.

      Quote  Reply

  9. cerulean

    For the record—kudos to Hahn for absolutely fleecing the BoSox. Damn. The Red Sox are effectively paying Sale $111M for 3 years. And they gave up the top prospect in all of baseball and a plausible SynderChapman. Crazy.

      Quote  Reply

  10. cerulean


    I was a joke. I wouldn’t be shocked to see him go three or four innings, maybe even a spot start, but I wonder about his health. I think he’d be effective enough, but I like him the superutility pitcher role.

      Quote  Reply

  11. cerulean

    Considering the Cubs defense, I am curious about Ryan Williams and his seemingly elite sinker. (I wonder what the spinrate on it is.) He is a darkhorse candidate for an effective MLB pitcher. Maybe he could work with Cyle on a good change.

      Quote  Reply

  12. cerulean

    Rizzo the Rat,

    Just sign Jansen and be done with it.

    Do a prospect swap with LAD of Happ for De Leon.

    Sign Ross for depth and maybe a Blevins for that lefty bullpen piece.

    Trade Soler for another lefty plus a decent prospect.


      Quote  Reply

  13. Perkins


    I’m curious how trading for a second closer in 6 months is preferable to just paying money for Jansen or Chapman. That seems at odds with the front office’s MO.

    I get wanting to extract value from Soler and clear the outfield logjam, but this is curious unless there’s also a SP coming back from the Royals as part of a bigger deal.

      Quote  Reply

  14. dmick89

    Perkins: I’m curious how trading for a second closer in 6 months is preferable to just paying money for Jansen or Chapman. That seems at odds with the front office’s MO.

    Yeah, I’d rather pay Chapman over $100 million and 6 or more years than give up a top prospect to get another closer at this point. Not that I want them to pay Chapman that much, but the Cubs just won the World Series. They have the money. They don’t have an endless supply of talent to trade away for closers who have little team control left.

      Quote  Reply

  15. Perkins


    Yeah, if Chapman (or Jansen) costs only money, that seems far preferable. And they have to be flush with cash from the World Series revenue, shitloads of merch, and what they’re going to rake in from ticket sales in 2017.

    Also, whoever said tickets would increase by “a fuckload,” winner winner, chicken dinner. My season tickets are going up by 20%. I had been thinking of trying to get better seats, but not now.

      Quote  Reply

  16. dmick89

    If it’s just Soler, that’s fine. I’d make that trade, but I’d also go out and re-sign Fowler. If you’re letting Fowler walk without signing another outfielder, it would be nice to have Soler around as depth. That came in handy this past season and would likely again.

      Quote  Reply

  17. Smokestack Lightning

    dmick89: If it’s just Soler, that’s fine. I’d make that trade,

    Yeah, I’d do straight-up. There’s the Soler of our dreams and the Soler of reality, and the latter has just not been very good or healthy thus far. If there were a clear path to playing time for him, I’d be a little more willing to roll the dice one more year and see if he can break out, but at this point he’s buried in the depth chart and on the fast track to getting traded for Chris Coghlan by midseason. Better to get a Wade Davis for him while the Cubs still can.

      Quote  Reply

  18. Author

    I wouldn’t trade both Happ and Soler for Davis. I’m not sure I would trade Happ straight-up for Davis (though I could be persuaded, probably). I’m fine with Soler + a lotto ticket or two.

      Quote  Reply

  19. dmick89

    I wouldn’t trade Happ straight up for Davis. Trading Soler is about as far as I’d be willing to go. I’m just surprised the royals couldn’t get more for him. If they’d waited until the deadline the Cubs would have given them their top 5 prospects.

      Quote  Reply

  20. JonKneeV

    Trading Soler for one year of Wade Davis is the epitome of selling low. Idk why they’re doing this now. I think you could still get an elite reliever for Soler mid-season unless he’s had a season ending injury or sucks to the tune of .180/.200/.350.

    If he bounces back like we’ve seen flashes of, you could get a starter for him.

    The trade might work out just fine for the Cubs because Soler might not be very special. But he’s still young with relatively few plate appearances at the MLB level and could turn into someone much better than he has showed thus far.

      Quote  Reply

  21. dmick89


    The only time they’d not have sold low on Soler is after the 2014 season. He could become something special, but more than likely what you’ve seen is what he’ll be. I’m not overly thrilled about a second trade for a closer in 5 months, but I don’t think giving up Soler costs the Cubs anything other than depth. That of course proved valuable this past season.

    I like the trade less if they don’t acquire another decent outfielder.

      Quote  Reply

  22. Edwin

    Rizzo the Rat: You can, just as you can win a lot of money by buying a bunch of lottery tickets

    I heard the best way to get rich is to invest in gold. Lots and lots of gold. The price might go to an all time high someday. It’s a proven fact that at somepoint, gold was cheaper than it is today. And I’m not just saying this because I sold my soul to the powerful Gold lobby.

      Quote  Reply

  23. Smokestack Lightning

    Ian Desmond —————-> Coors Field

    5 years/70MM and the loss of the #11 overall pick.

    Good to see the Rox add some offense. They always struggle to hit the ball.

      Quote  Reply

  24. Rizzo the Rat


    I doubt they acquire another outfielder. They already acquired Jay and the outfield is looking really crowded even with Soler leaving (especially if Baez gets regular playing time, and I think he should).

      Quote  Reply

  25. Perkins

    Rice in limbo:

    I thought he’d be part of a package for a cost-controlled starter, but I might be in the camp that is overvaluing Soler.

    I was hoping for that as well, but in retrospect I don’t know if that was realistic since the 2014-2015 offseason. Soler had a great half season in 2014, and a great postseason in 2015, but beyond that he’s been more potential than performance.

      Quote  Reply

  26. Rizzo the Rat

    My main concerns with the Cubs for 2017:

    Rotation depth, especially if one or more starters goes down

    The proposed Jay/Almora platoon in CF (Heyward should start there)

      Quote  Reply

  27. Edwin

    I’m actually not sure that Baez should get more starting time. He still struggles at the plate, especially against RHP, so anything less than elite defense and he’s basically a replacement player. I like having him as a solid bench/platoon/spot starter, and as a late game sub. I’m not sure I like the idea of him getting 500+ PA a season though.

      Quote  Reply

  28. cerulean

    The Cubs’ outfielders, ranked by my expectation of value per game played at that position:


    And Happ is waiting in the minors, for now.

    This doesn’t include La Stella or Baez or Contreras or Strop (hehe) and also doesn’t factor in Candelario should an infielder and an outfielder go down.

    The Bryant-Zobrist-Baez versatility means they have far more depth than we are giving credit.

      Quote  Reply

  29. JonKneeV


    He’s 24 years old and has improved his plate approach each year. If he produces at the same rate as last year he’s a very valuable player on offense.

    One of his top comps on offense is Rickie Weeks. If Baez is close to Weeks with his bat and continues being Baez on defense, you have to get him in your lineup every day.

      Quote  Reply

  30. Edwin


    I’m not sure his plate approach has actually improved. His O-Swing% was 42.9% last year, up from 39% the prior two seasons. His big thing last sesason was that his O-Contact% went from about 48% to 62%. His Swinging Strike% was better at 14.4%, but that’s still a lot of swing and miss. His BB% has also dropped every single season, and his ISO is only about .150 so far.

    That being said, I feel like I have a terrible track record on Cubs prospects, so who knows.

      Quote  Reply

  31. Edwin


    Maybe. It just seems to me like it’s putting an awful lot of high value on defense. Like I said, anything short of “special defense” or if the offense dips into “below subpar”, his value takes a nose-dive real fast.

      Quote  Reply

  32. cerulean

    Also, Candelario, Zagunis, and Hannemann are all close if a lot of injuries happen—I assume Andreoli is gone in the Rule 5. Whether any of them stick is another story. However, if one of them does impress, there is a possible trade chip.

      Quote  Reply

  33. cerulean


    His defense is special. Where he loses value on defense seems to be on some decision making. Better decisions typically come with learning not to force plays that won’t be close, which for him are few.

      Quote  Reply

  34. dmick89

    If they don’t extend Davis, odds are they’re going to give up even more to acquire another closer next year because the odds are pretty good that Edwards is going to walk a lot more batters than he did in his call up this season.

      Quote  Reply

  35. dmick89

    dmick89: At the same time, it kind of irritates me the Cubs have given up this much for two closers over the last 5 months.

    Especially with two closers still available on the free agent market.

      Quote  Reply

  36. Smokestack Lightning

    Smokestack Lightning,

    It is a pretty weak return for Davis in my opinion. At the same time, it kind of irritates me the Cubs have given up this much for two closers over the last 5 months.

    Yeah, I’m fine with the deal in ye olde proverbial vacuum, but I still hate this sort of trade in principle and would rather have just seen the Cubs spend money on Jansen or Chapman.

    Otoh, money can now be spent elsewhere, and Davis, if healthy, should be every bit the equal of Jansen and Chapman.

      Quote  Reply

Leave a Comment