MLB is now locked out and I forgive you if you don't care because it doesn't mean all that much.
Especially as we head toward the holidays, which are typically quiet, and have come off of a especially active period of FA signings, this won't really effect anything for a while. Some Winterfests, some access to off-season facilities for a couple guys, some derailing of what would be occasional GM or manager quotes about the upcoming year to fill time, some weird website changes. You may not notice it at all.
And because of that there isn't really impetus to get anything done for... like 2 months or so. Not until arrangements start to have to be made for pitchers and catchers in mid February. So don't expect any movement for a good 6 weeks, because there doesn't have to be movement.
This has been spurred on by the recent spate (last few years but
not this one) of cool FA periods as teams realize the vast middle that
they've been paying for of sort of expensive veteran players 30+ can be
replaced pretty effectively by guys 22+ under their control. There's a
bit more variability there but it's a TON cheaper. If the rest of your
team is pretty solidly built or if you don't care if you crash to 70
wins instead of 80 because you aren't trying it's a way to save millions.
What are they actually arguing about to address this shift? Not much.
In brief, the players want more money and want it faster - so an increase in the luxury tax cap and a quicker start on FA for younger players.
The owners want to reign in giving the players more money as much as possible, more playoffs and ads as additional revenue sources, and some rules changes that may not work but might make the game move faster.
Both seemingly want the DH, but the players want it more so the owners can negotiate a little off it.
Here's a good run down of everything
A couple owners of course have a more hardline stance, which is why you may have seen earlier proposals that were bad for players once you put them under any scrutiny. The owners offered up a salary floor - which would raise the payroll of a bunch of teams and the money currently in the system - but with a lower and harder cap, which very quickly (a year? two?) would hurt the players as MLB revenues are still going up. The owners also offered up no arbitration at all, which sounds good, but ties it to a weird fixed budget for players under control and stretches control through an age (29.5 yrs) rather than a number of years. The likely effect would be an team having a bunch of very young players, as that's the most efficient way of splitting that money and having a player give the team the most for the least for the longest time. A lot of mediocre 24yo costing something tossed to the curb for complete question mark 19yos costing nothing.
These aren't serious discussions.
If you want to break it down to one thing - they are arguing about the
increase in the luxury tax and everything else is just negotiations
based on that.
Expect an increase in luxury tax (no floor or some very nominal number set only because some owners don't like others not spending), a very slight change in how fast players get to FA, a bump on minumum salaries, DH, expanded playoffs, ads on jerseys