6 minutes ago, poppysox said:

Just answering the man's question.

Sure, but this affects the players' day to day lives. This doesn't affect a single owners' cash flow. Hell some of them probably lost more in their investment funds this year than a strike will cost them.

Edited February 24, 20224 yr by chitownsportsfan

1 hour ago, bmags said:

every team spends $200 million in the nfl. The median MLB team spent $140 million last year and the lowest team spent $40M. MLB is also more dependent on in game revenue than the NFL where it's broadcast deals cover blanket the revenue. So reducing the top spenders who are making the most is cutting a lot of potential money from going to players since the thrifty teams have shown they don't spend shit even if you give them more shared revenue.

I still don't see how raising the threshold does anything more than cause greater disparity for the players and the teams. There is no reason that the cap should be higher than an NFL cap. It wouldn't help the vast majority of players or teams.

11 minutes ago, ptatc said:

I still don't see how raising the threshold does anything more than cause greater disparity for the players and the teams. There is no reason that the cap should be higher than an NFL cap. It wouldn't help the vast majority of players or teams.

It has to be because there are not a ton of teams that will spend. 12 teams last year had a payroll under $100 million. The average team payroll thanks to the Dodgers was $132 million. Do NFL teams average over $70 million under the cap? 

43 minutes ago, Harold's Leg Lift said:

Sure they could but the goal isn't to just win it's to not give up anything.  

Well that’s short-sighted and ridiculous. 

 

 

If these assholes didn't sit on their hands for a couple months and got down to business we wouldn't be rushing up on a deadline

 

7 minutes ago, ptatc said:

I still don't see how raising the threshold does anything more than cause greater disparity for the players and the teams. There is no reason that the cap should be higher than an NFL cap. It wouldn't help the vast majority of players or teams.

Some forum members simply think that no matter how much the players make...they should get more.  Jerry makes tons of money so he is a greedy owner, etc.  For all we know he might give every dime he makes to White Sox Charities.  I would fully support raising the minimum wage along the line that is currently being offered by the owners.  However, I look at our major league payroll and don't see anyone being underpaid IMO.  I just want this to be over and start the fun.  If the owners want to pay the players demands...fine.  If not...fine.  I am very tired of rich guys arguing about money.

2 minutes ago, poppysox said:

  However, I look at our major league payroll and don't see anyone being underpaid IMO.

The issue that they're after is to protect the guys who get a few cups of coffee, never to get a sniff of the big leagues again.

I don't know what the numbers are, but I would venture to guess that the vast majority of players get < 1 year of service time in their lifetimes.

I'm sorry, but making foodstamp money playing 5+ years in the minors, then finally "making it" and making a quarter of a million dollars over the course of 3 years until you run out of options and get released.... then get cast out into the "real world" where none of the skills that you've been honing for the past 25 years have any real value?

I'll disagree with you and say those guys are underpaid.

14 minutes ago, Tnetennba said:

 

But it’s equally the MLBPA’s fault!

7 minutes ago, JoeC said:

The issue that they're after is to protect the guys who get a few cups of coffee, never to get a sniff of the big leagues again.

I don't know what the numbers are, but I would venture to guess that the vast majority of players get < 1 year of service time in their lifetimes.

I'm sorry, but making foodstamp money playing 5+ years in the minors, then finally "making it" and making a quarter of a million dollars over the course of 3 years until you run out of options and get released.... then get cast out into the "real world" where none of the skills that you've been honing for the past 25 years have any real value?

I'll disagree with you and say those guys are underpaid.

You do realize I supported raising the wage of the player you describe.

 

Ownership can go to hell. 

I’m going to be honest, but the CBT is not the problem.  In fact, the game desperately needs a hard cap to improve parity.  Set it at $240M or something and then have it grow based on some economic factor each year.  At the same time, there are ways to get the cheap teams to spend more.  I really don’t like the idea of expanded playoffs, but it should encourage less tanking.  Same goes for a draft lottery and increasing the minimum salary for pre-arb players.  But what I’d really like to see is a major shakeup to revenue sharing and to force recipients to actually spend what they receive on player payroll.  It’s complete bullshit that some owners are pocketing that shit.  With those tweaks I think you have something that would work for the players with minimal impact to the owners.  And most importantly, you should have a game with much better parity.

1 hour ago, JoeC said:

The issue that they're after is to protect the guys who get a few cups of coffee, never to get a sniff of the big leagues again.

I don't know what the numbers are, but I would venture to guess that the vast majority of players get < 1 year of service time in their lifetimes.

I'm sorry, but making foodstamp money playing 5+ years in the minors, then finally "making it" and making a quarter of a million dollars over the course of 3 years until you run out of options and get released.... then get cast out into the "real world" where none of the skills that you've been honing for the past 25 years have any real value?

I'll disagree with you and say those guys are underpaid.

Agreed. They should go to college and learn a life skill and avoid that whole baseball scheme. The odds of making real money are so slim versus being a PE teacher, insurance agent, etc. It's a waste of their time.

1 hour ago, poppysox said:

Some forum members simply think that no matter how much the players make...they should get more.  Jerry makes tons of money so he is a greedy owner, etc.  For all we know he might give every dime he makes to White Sox Charities.  I would fully support raising the minimum wage along the line that is currently being offered by the owners.  However, I look at our major league payroll and don't see anyone being underpaid IMO.  I just want this to be over and start the fun.  If the owners want to pay the players demands...fine.  If not...fine.  I am very tired of rich guys arguing about money.

As a 501c3, if he was donating that type of money to White Sox Charities, everyone in the world would know about it...they wouldn't be able to hide it, as it has to be reported publicly.

And surely there are numerous tax advantages to doing so, as well.

2 hours ago, Dick Allen said:

It has to be because there are not a ton of teams that will spend. 12 teams last year had a payroll under $100 million. The average team payroll thanks to the Dodgers was $132 million. Do NFL teams average over $70 million under the cap? 

That still doesn't raise the average salary much when 3 teams will go near the cap.

8 minutes ago, Texsox said:

Agreed. They should go to college and learn a life skill and avoid that whole baseball scheme. The odds of making real money are so slim versus being a PE teacher, insurance agent, etc. It's a waste of their time.

The biggest issue is playing long enough for the health care and pension benefits.

I think it was Scott Carroll, former Sox pitcher and Purdue QB, who all the press was rooting to prolong his career long enough to qualify for those.

He ended up with a 168.3 MLB innings pitched, and I think he qualified based on the number of days on a big league roster.

It used to be 43 days rostered to qualify.

For those who reach ten years, they get something like $7500/month ($90k per year) along with generous health/vision/dental plans for the rest of their lives.

Edited February 24, 20224 yr by caulfield12

3 hours ago, Y2Jimmy0 said:

Well that’s short-sighted and ridiculous. 

Why would they stop now.  They're on a roll.  

2 hours ago, Chicago White Sox said:

I’m going to be honest, but the CBT is not the problem.  In fact, the game desperately needs a hard cap to improve parity.  Set it at $240M or something and then have it grow based on some economic factor each year.  At the same time, there are ways to get the cheap teams to spend more.  I really don’t like the idea of expanded playoffs, but it should encourage less tanking.  Same goes for a draft lottery and increasing the minimum salary for pre-arb players.  But what I’d really like to see is a major shakeup to revenue sharing and to force recipients to actually spend what they receive on player payroll.  It’s complete bullshit that some owners are pocketing that shit.  With those tweaks I think you have something that would work for the players with minimal impact to the owners.  And most importantly, you should have a game with much better parity.

Good luck getting 23 owners to agree. 

10 minutes ago, Harold's Leg Lift said:

Why would they stop now.  They're on a roll.  

It’s not going to work this time. This isn’t Tony Clark’s dumbass running the show anymore. And the real losers are the fans. My dad has friends that haven’t been back to a baseball game since 1994. It’ll happen again. 

Just now, Y2Jimmy0 said:

Good luck getting 23 owners to agree. 

Fair point, but how many owners are abusing the revenue sharing system?   Seems like that’s got to be less than 10.  Other than that, I think it’s mostly stuff they will ultimately agree to in some fashion other than a hard cap (but that’s due to the players).

1 minute ago, Chicago White Sox said:

Fair point, but how many owners are abusing the revenue sharing system?   Seems like that’s got to be less than 10.  Other than that, I think it’s mostly stuff they will ultimately agree to in some fashion other than a hard cap (but that’s due to the players).

There are 14 small market clubs that currently reap the benefits of this system. They aren’t going to do anything to change that 

12 hours ago, BigHurt3515 said:

If these assholes didn't sit on their hands for a couple months and got down to business we wouldn't be rushing up on a deadline

It was always going to be a last-day situation.  Just the way it is.  Frankly, I am happy the owners have come down hard on "a deadline is a deadline."  Nothing is going to be agreed on in a month or two that can't be settled in the next few days.  The only people who will be hurt are the fans and the young guys hoping to make a spring impression.  A few low-level FA's might find it hard to find a landing spot as well.