Balta1701

“Not quite as active across the board trade market”

The Red Sox also got 2 prospects in the Brewers’ top 20 including their third round pick from last summer who was a guy that slumped in his last year but had a strong showing after being drafted - thus he’s probably gained relative value over the last few months. For the even weaker White Sox system this might be like including Sean Burke (Futuresox #13, their 3rd round pick in 21) and either Rodriguez (Futuresox #10) or Burger (higher ranked but less flexibility in position than the guy Boston acquired who can play the middle infield spots, notably both that guy and Burger had Achilles injuries). I would agree that if the White Sox gave up those 2 players in addition to Kimbrel, they should get a decent player in return for the negative value player in Kimbrel, just as Milwaukee did with their negative value player here. Notably, Renfroe is about a 2 WAR player most years, but he’s also Arb2 so some money is being paid to him the next 2 years and he’s not all that spectacular. If the White Sox moved Burger and Burke, they’d be expecting a much better return than that, so the Brewers are adding some solid talent here to clear that contract, with a limited MLB return.

All right now this part is important - there are 2 issues here. First, this poster misplaced the blame for the lack of a targeted revenue distribution- to my understanding that mostly goes to the players not the owners. Making that work typically involves a cap and floor, and the owners even offered a version of that earlier this year knowing that it would be rejected. For about 15 years, the Players’ share of revenue was actually thought to be growing, which is even sustainable long-term as if league revenue is growing at 10% a year, the amount going to ownership could grow at 4% a year and the owners would be quite happy with that, while the rest would go to the players and their total share would grow over time. However, around 2010 when the rebuilds hit and fewer teams started competing, players salaries stagnated and the players’ share shrank, so this backfired thanks to the owners new technique for controlling spending. To my eyes, the players would have been better off with this setup, but… The details of the audit matter, and the poster is correct that the owners have not shown a willingness to do that.

They likely also are strongly concerned about the luxury tax level, and they only have $13 million in space right now, if there’s not a big change until next offseason.

It is worth noting that there is a reason why this is true - the White Sox not only traded away a starter last year, but they did so while having an extremely weak minor league system and a lineup that is extremely injury prone. That means they don’t have quality players to step in when people get hurt, and they have to have other options.

https://courses.lumenlearning.com/wm-microeconomics/chapter/profit-maximization-under-monopolistic-competition/

No I do not. I understand that more people attend games if ticket prices are lower. I also believe that there are a variety of other entertainment options or even ways to enjoy baseball (Streaming) that people can choose to spend their money on. I think baseball is a much better game when costs are rising rapidly because a lot of teams are trying to compete and get better. I think that perpetually rebuilding franchises like the Pirates and a perpetual upper class are not a good thing for the sport. How much fun was the last 10 years of playoff free white Sox baseball? It was affordable. Costs went down exactly like you wanted. We ok with the results? I for one might have been so satisfied that I repeatedly asked for the GM to be publicly tarred and feathered after 2016 as firing him wasn’t enough. Costs are going up again now so is this winning a bad thing?

Forbes publishes estimates for teams every year that generally aren't terrible, they do a pretty strong job of predicting whether the White Sox have money to spend. They show them clearing $140 million in profits over those 2 seasons, which is entirely plausible with their $80 million payrolls. They show a $40 million loss in 2020 due to COVID, which is also entirely reasonable. 2021 numbers will be next year.

Yes, because that's dictated by economics. What happens if baseball raises their prices? Fewer people come to games, changing the balance between ticket sales and revenue. If they raise their ticket prices too high - fewer people buy tickets or concessions or parking, and revenue drops. We have seen this be relevant for the White Sox in the last decade - they actually cut their ticket prices in 2011-2015 because they were seeing attendance drop so rapidly and they wanted to keep people in the ballpark. They were fairly affordable for a number of years because of this.

That's not how economics works. If the Owners could make more money by raising prices right now (or in 2019 pre-COVID), do you think they would keep their prices lower than that level out of some generosity in their hearts?

Frankly, the players are. They're they ones looking at the Pirates having a payroll less than Max Scherzer and saying "This is a problem for us" and that also happens to be a problem for baseball. They're the ones looking at teams like Oakland, who could be solid and beat the White Sox in the 2020 playoffs selling off players for money and saying "This is not good for us" and that also happens to be bad for baseball. They're the ones looking at a guy like Bryant being kept in the minor leagues for service time reasons when he's good enough to be in the big leagues and saying "This is a problem for us" and that is a problem for baseball also.

it's a darn shame there is only one type of beer on Earth.

If I refuse to negotiate fairly, and both sides get blamed by people who haven't paid attention...I have won this fight. I've dragged the public halfway my direction without giving an inch, while halfway breaking the sport in the process.

Or he got their money request.

And when an organization as skillful and well run as the White Sox can only clear $70 million a year in each of 2019 and 2018, clearly things are too player friendly. The ownership can’t be expected to even be motivated to come into work most days for that pittance. They barely put on pants for that money.

They are $13 million below the previous luxury tax line, so it is a potential issue.

Not exactly surprising, but gosh this does make the Dodgers tougher if you hit them in the playoffs.

Official

And IMO - he’s worth $16 million to Rick Hahn, but to no one else.

Craig Kimbrel is just not worth $16 million in this market.

If Kimbrel was flipped for Segura, the White Sox would be able to spend up to $17 million/year on Conforto while still remaining under the previous luxury tax line for next year. If Conforto's deal went over that, they would have to move salary. They would also be unable to add salary at the trade deadline while remaining under the tax line without moving salary. That would effectively be a 4/$68 million (and change) limit on Conforto's deal with the White Sox, or 5/$85. Of course, the tax line is likely to change somehow, but they're surprisingly close to the old one.

I think a majority of MLB teams sure seem to be betting against any sort of salary floor next year.

Why?

Important to point out somewhere - right now Spotrac has the White Sox at $15.3 million below the current luxury tax line next year counting Leury. Because their contracts expand and they must pay benefits, they hit the current tax line below $190 million in payroll. If they move Kimbrel for no return under the current rules they have just over $31 million remaining to spend total, including the trade deadline.