You say, 'then they invest the required money in players to keep their fans interested.' I'm saying fans would be more interested if they JUST SAY NO to mega, multi-year contracts for guys who fail miserably shortly after signing the contracts. When Adam Dunn is hitting about .160 and Rios is loafing after fly balls you start to wonder how much better life would be as a fan if they were not making all that money. Maybe I could park for 5 bucks and not spend 30 bucks on three beers in a nine-inning game.

 

So you would be happier if Travis Ishikawa was hitting about .160 & Casper Wells was loafing after fly balls, because they only make $500,000? That be a better experience for a fan?

You say, 'then they invest the required money in players to keep their fans interested.' I'm saying fans would be more interested if they JUST SAY NO to mega, multi-year contracts for guys who fail miserably shortly after signing the contracts. When Adam Dunn is hitting about .160 and Rios is loafing after fly balls you start to wonder how much better life would be as a fan if they were not making all that money. Maybe I could park for 5 bucks and not spend 30 bucks on three beers in a nine-inning game.

 

You say that like what is happening this season is going according to plan. Do you think the Yankees fans are okay with their 5 world championships over the past 15 years? Maybe not, they're currently experiencing the end part of some big contracts.

I just want to keep repeating it over and over and over until somebody notices!

 

 

But I'm saying there should NOT be the demand. I keep reading about guys who are "untradeable." These guys are the ones fans and owners were drooling over shortly before they became untradeable. JUST SAY NO. Don't sign guys to long-term deals and maybe I can go sit in a box seat for 20 f***ing dollars and not have to pay 20 bucks to park!!!! And not pay 15 bucks for an All American hot dog and beer! Baseball was not invented as an elitist game, folks.

You literally have no idea how business works.

 

Teams don't even make the majority of their money off ticket sales, so even if the white sox had a 20 mill payroll you'd be paying what you are now.

You literally have no idea how business works.

 

Teams don't even make the majority of their money off ticket sales, so even if the white sox had a 20 mill payroll you'd be paying what you are now.

 

That would be obscene price gouging. So they'd charge 60 bucks for a halfway decent seat with a 20 million payroll? And 10 bucks for beer and 5 for a hot dog? Nice.

That would be obscene price gouging. So they'd charge 60 bucks for a halfway decent seat with a 20 million payroll? And 10 bucks for beer and 5 for a hot dog? Nice.

 

A team willing to do something that ballsy would be the type of team to sign Ozzie Guillen to a three year contract...

That would be obscene price gouging. So they'd charge 60 bucks for a halfway decent seat with a 20 million payroll? And 10 bucks for beer and 5 for a hot dog? Nice.

 

Yes. Just as the Marlins do. The money would just go to the ownership group instead of payroll.

So you would be happier if Travis Ishikawa was hitting about .160 & Casper Wells was loafing after fly balls, because they only make $500,000? That be a better experience for a fan?

 

No, I'm saying baseball inflation and insanity pays Kemp 22 million a year. I happen to think he should be paid about 7-8 million a year in today's prices.

No, I'm saying baseball inflation and insanity pays Kemp 22 million a year. I happen to think he should be paid about 7-8 million a year in today's prices.

 

You really need to Google like "basic macroeconomics" or something before you make these claims.

 

1. Charging the most people will pay for a product is not price gouging, it's capitalism. McDonald's does it too. So does Best Buy.

 

2. Kemp makes $22m because that's how much money they needed to pay for him to agree to sign him. Free agent contracts happen because they accept the highest bid (or near it). You can't just say "this guy is worth 8 mil" and expect to get him. You have to pay the price that the market sets, which equals the hihgest amount that SOME team is willing to pay. No one decides this arbitrarily, it becomes an auction.

No, I'm saying baseball inflation and insanity pays Kemp 22 million a year. I happen to think he should be paid about 7-8 million a year in today's prices.

 

 

Matt Kemp before this season was one of the best hitters in baseball. Just 2 years ago he was a HR shy of being a 40-40 guy with a .324/.399/.586 stat line.

 

He was worth every penny when he signed. The Dodger couldn't foresee injury issues from a player who had no injury history.

Matt Kemp before this season was one of the best hitters in baseball. Just 2 years ago he was a HR shy of being a 40-40 guy with a .324/.399/.586 stat line.

 

He was worth every penny when he signed. The Dodger couldn't foresee injury issues from a player who had no injury history.

 

I'll stop now. I can't get my point across. My final statement in regard to your post: I am saying NO PLAYER should get that kind of money. That owners should ASSUME the injury issues will happen or something will happen.

 

I was trying to make the point that teams CONSTANTLY are trying to dump players almost immediately after signing them to huge contracts. My solution: DON'T SIGN THEM TO BIG CONTRACTS TO BEGIN WITH. Since I can't get my point across, I'll stop.

I'll stop now. I can't get my point across. My final statement in regard to your post: I am saying NO PLAYER should get that kind of money. That owners should ASSUME the injury issues will happen or something will happen.

 

I was trying to make the point that teams CONSTANTLY are trying to dump players almost immediately after signing them to huge contracts. My solution: DON'T SIGN THEM TO BIG CONTRACTS TO BEGIN WITH. Since I can't get my point across, I'll stop.

 

The alternative is not having Matt Kemp

 

BUT greg, there is evidence that teams are trying to avoid this by signing their young stars to long-term deals when they are still cheap. But there is a cost to this, too -- even more risk of ineffectiveness.

Edited July 19, 201312 yr by Eminor3rd

I'll stop now. I can't get my point across. My final statement in regard to your post: I am saying NO PLAYER should get that kind of money. That owners should ASSUME the injury issues will happen or something will happen.

 

I was trying to make the point that teams CONSTANTLY are trying to dump players almost immediately after signing them to huge contracts. My solution: DON'T SIGN THEM TO BIG CONTRACTS TO BEGIN WITH. Since I can't get my point across, I'll stop.

 

You are making a philosophical argument, as in "These players do not provide $22 million worth of value to the economy."

 

I'm fine with that, but there are going to be inefficiencies throughout any economic system. Beyond that, these guys ARE worth $22 million to someone because someone paid it.

I'll stop now. I can't get my point across. My final statement in regard to your post: I am saying NO PLAYER should get that kind of money. That owners should ASSUME the injury issues will happen or something will happen.

 

I was trying to make the point that teams CONSTANTLY are trying to dump players almost immediately after signing them to huge contracts. My solution: DON'T SIGN THEM TO BIG CONTRACTS TO BEGIN WITH. Since I can't get my point across, I'll stop.

 

There will always be an owner ready to flash his cash in order to have the best available players.