I think what the players need to argue for is a system that incentivized teams to not suck. There is basically no demand for good players from about half the league right now. As someone pointed out, that’s somewhat rational, because there is no economic benefit from winning 75 games as opposed to 71.
Suppose that for teams that did not exceed the luxury tax, and who spent at least half the luxury tax, but didn’t make the Division Series, there was a set of perks that helped you get better sooner. Let say that if you won at least 72 games, you got an extra 3rd round pick, and teams that won 81 games additionally got an extra 2nd round pick. Suddenly being .500 with a $105 million payroll gets you a big benefit relative to going 70-92 with a $80 million payroll. Add to that system a clause that says if you lost more than 95 games while not spending at least half the luxury tax threadhold, you lose your 2nd round draft pick, and if you lose 100 games with a skimpy payroll you lose your 3rd round pick too, and the incentive to not suck gets even bigger.
The penalties for losing incentivize even very low payroll to teams to spend, day, $60 million instead of $50 million.