1 hour ago, Texsox said:

If you are a top shortstop prospect are you going to sign with the Padres? Dodgers? 

I agree free agency is the biggest reason we have non competitive teams. But it is veteran, MLB ready players at their prime that is the problem. Some third round shortstop picking an organization that he has the best chance to advance in, or has a knack for developing shortstops, isn't going to be as big an issue as Seager moving. 

What’s the ROI on a 1st round pick in the draft vs. the average nine figure free agent?  Do you actually think the expensive free agent provides the better return on dollar spend?

9 minutes ago, Jack Parkman said:

I hold teams to a different standard. If they're not willing to spend to that level, if the team warrants it, ownership should not be allowed in the club. 

I've told you a million times that I think sports franchises are hobbies for billionaires so my view is that ownership should be willing to pour money from their personal bank account into the product on the field. They should be willing to run the teams at a modest deficit during competitive windows. They can make up their losses when the team is re-building. 

I don't think it's unreasonable to ask that owners have an obligation to maximize a contention window when one presents itself. 

 

MLB owners are, um, completely ass backwards when it comes to the business of sports. They should be more willing to split up money in revenue sharing. They've lost the forest from the trees. 

The one thing that I disagree about with the MLBPA is the salary cap, and I think that a cap and floor would be good for middle tier veterans and younger players. The stars will still get theirs. 

The floor and cap would be the one thing that would change the whole game. That us the one thing we can agree on.

But the players will never agree to it.

Edited March 10, 20224 yr by ptatc

1 minute ago, Chicago White Sox said:

What’s the ROI on a 1st round pick in the draft vs. the average nine figure free agent?  Do you actually think the expensive free agent provides the better return on dollar spend?

BTW I'd have no problem replacing arbitration with fWAR calculation if and only if the fWAR calculation was based on the open market value(in terms of $/fWAR) AND everyone with at least 162 games of experience gets paid accordingly. 

4 minutes ago, ptatc said:

The floor and cap would be the one thing that would change the whole game. That us the one thing we can agree on.

But the players will never agree to it.

I don't understand why not. The only players that are helped by the status quo are the top 10%. They're throwing everyone else under the bus. 

A floor would do more for them than keeping the league theoretically uncapped. 

The other thing is that 3-5 teams are over the tax at a given time, and that's it. 

If 30 teams had to spend at least $100M that would do a hell of a lot more for player salaries than those few teams with incredibly high payrolls. 

Edited March 10, 20224 yr by Jack Parkman

1 hour ago, Texsox said:

That's how free agency works. I guess we can keep accepting the buy your freedom through labor approach of the current system. 

Do you want like 15 teams including five super teams because that’s what you’re going to get if your argument is simply let capitalism dictate a major sports league?  Teams like the Pirates would have zero chance of lasting in the long-run under your scenario.  But hey, if even worse parity and 400 less major league jobs is what you’re after it’s a great plan!

 

14 minutes ago, ptatc said:

They have been left behind because they aren't part of the union.

I am always a bit surprised the players don't negotiate a  large amount of money for the oldtimers pension fund.  The old times who built this game are in some cases living in poverty while in the middle of the road today players have unimaginable wealth.  I am aware they don't have any obligation to do so but it certainly would seem to be the right thing to do.

1 minute ago, poppysox said:

I am always a bit surprised the players don't negotiate a  large amount of money for the oldtimers pension fund.  The old times who built this game are in some cases living in poverty while in the middle of the road today players have unimaginable wealth.  I am aware they don't have any obligation to do so but it certainly would seem to be the right thing to do.

Agreed. Those that were part of the union should have more benefits. 

6 minutes ago, poppysox said:

I am always a bit surprised the players don't negotiate a  large amount of money for the oldtimers pension fund.  The old times who built this game are in some cases living in poverty while in the middle of the road today players have unimaginable wealth.  I am aware they don't have any obligation to do so but it certainly would seem to be the right thing to do.

Doesn’t baseball have a big pension fund paid for by the all star game? Was there a time when players didn’t qualify?

1 hour ago, Jack Parkman said:

I completely understand the merits of a draft for competitive balance. 

I want Amateurs to get paid more too, that is the whole point. 

I don't like the idea of surplus value as I view it as exploitation. 

You don’t like the idea of surplus value?  Should players reimburse owners when they underperform their contract?

2 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

Doesn’t baseball have a big pension fund paid for by the all star game? Was there a time when players didn’t qualify?

Apparently the MLB pension plan dates back to the late 1940s and would qualify as extremely generous. It only takes a little over a month in the bigs to qualify and full benefits are like $7500 a month, scaled by how long you were in the league. Everyone who had 10 years of service after 1970 qualifies for full benefits, and people with shorter stints just earn less.

https://sabr.org/research/article/a-home-run-by-any-measure-the-baseball-players-pension-plan/

1 hour ago, Tnetennba said:

 

Honestly at this point fuck them all.  The moment we start losing games it’s very clear that neither side gives a fuck about the fans.

10 hours ago, Balta1701 said:

Doesn’t baseball have a big pension fund paid for by the all star game? Was there a time when players didn’t qualify?

Today the top pension is $255M but it is my understanding that Ernie Banks died in poverty.  Ernie was one of those that built the game into the money maker it is today.

Edited March 10, 20224 yr by poppysox

2 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

Honestly at this point fuck them all.  The moment we start losing games it’s very clear that neither side gives a fuck about the fans.

Scherzer isn't necessarily the best spokesman for the players at this point in time.  

4 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

You don’t like the idea of surplus value?  Should players reimburse owners when they underperform their contract?

In that arrangement, they could do with an escrow type system where a certain percentage of player salaries are put into a pool and distributed according to performance. 

While acknowledging that MLB players should have to earn their reputation, I think that the main issue that happens now is that players don't get paid the best during their best seasons. 

3 minutes ago, poppysox said:

Scherzer isn't necessarily the best spokesman for the players at this point in time.  

I'd rather hear from Tim Anderson or other above average non-superstars getting paid a lot less. 

Edited March 10, 20224 yr by Jack Parkman

30 minutes ago, Jack Parkman said:

BTW I'd have no problem replacing arbitration with fWAR calculation if and only if the fWAR calculation was based on the open market value(in terms of $/fWAR) AND everyone with at least 162 games of experience gets paid accordingly. 

Didn’t you literally argue last week that using fWAR instead of arbitration was evil?

3 minutes ago, Jack Parkman said:

In that arrangement, they could do with an escrow type system where a certain percentage of player salaries are put into a pool and distributed according to performance. 

While acknowledging that MLB players should have to earn their reputation, I think that the main issue that happens now is that players don't get paid the best during their best seasons. 

But many if them get paid more for their bad seasons toward the end of contracts so it even out somewhat.

9 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

Didn’t you literally argue last week that using fWAR instead of arbitration was evil?

Because of the way they were doing it. 

This is a non exploitative way to pay for performance. MLB's formulas were using it to suppress wages. 

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/mike-trout-is-a-430-million-bargain/

Mike Trout was worth $79M in 2018 based on fWAR. In this system he would have gotten every penny. 

This is what I mean by open market WAR values. 

Fangraphs says "Player X was worth $50M in 2021" Player X gets paid $50M the next year. He earned it. 

 

Edited March 10, 20224 yr by Jack Parkman

1 minute ago, ptatc said:

But many if them get paid more for their bad seasons toward the end of contracts so it even out somewhat.

Yeah, but free agency isn't what it used to be. Unless a player is a top 25% player they are likely to be journeymen rather than have earned security. 

6 minutes ago, ptatc said:

But many if them get paid more for their bad seasons toward the end of contracts so it even out somewhat.

Sure, but that is bad for both sides. 

 

2 minutes ago, Tnetennba said:

 

Ok, for all of you armchair lawyers out there.......MLB has an anti-trust exemption. Do the others in the big 4 have one as well? If not, what protections does MLB have that the other three leagues do not? 

I'm pleading ignorance here. 

Edited March 10, 20224 yr by Jack Parkman

5 minutes ago, Tnetennba said:

 

Damn this would be sweet if Congress actually did something about this.

Great post by Heyman.

Cal