NonSports Forum

Net54baseball.com
Welcome to Net54baseball.com. These forums are devoted to both Pre- and Post- war baseball cards and vintage memorabilia, as well as other sports. There is a separate section for Buying, Selling and Trading - the B/S/T area!! If you give an opinion of a person or company your full name needs to be in your post. Contact the moderator at leon@net54baseball.com should you have any questions or concerns. Enjoy!
Net54baseball.com
Net54baseball.com
Shop Ebay Promotions
Vintage Memorabilia
Pre WWII-(Pre 1942) Baseball
Post WWII (1942-1980) Baseball
Modern (1980-present) Baseball

Go Back   Net54baseball.com Forums > Net54baseball Postwar Sportscard Forums > Watercooler Talk- ALL sports talk

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 01-14-2019, 03:49 PM
steve B steve B is offline
Steve Birmingham
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: eastern Mass.
Posts: 5,137
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yastrzemski Sports View Post
When you have a union, the interests of the majority have to be represented. So the elite players you mentioned above made nice money and will be fine. Mookie Betts made $2 mil his first 3 years in baseball - total, $10 mil last year and $20 next year - because heís a huge talent. But for a majority of the players your first 7 years under team control are difficult and most players donít have that kind of leverage to negotiate but at the same time canít leave. So they are at the mercy of the team. Then when free agency comes around most players are 30 and teams donít want them. It was different a few years ago when a 30 year old could get $50-100 mil and never had to worry about money. Mike Moustakas is a perfect example. Heís had a decent career and is a very good player. Last year he took a 1 yr $5.5 mil deal and this year he hasnít signed yet and no one seems to be throwing offers out there. They would rather bring up kids from the farm. If Betts was a free agent right now he would be looking at $30+ mil per year instead of $20. If Moustakas had negotiating power 5 years ago he could have had the chance to get a big multi year deal. And thatís where the next CBA is going to lead. Players are going to be free agents much sooner in their career.
The unions in Sports really haven't looked out for the average players interests for quite some time. The big stars? Sure, the everyday players even the merely just above average aren't helped at all. There's always a way around the CBA. Like the collusion, or the period a few years ago where players who were solid everyday players were being cut outright and new teams would sign them to a minor league contract. That happened a lot right when they got to the point where the pay tiers/arbitraton kicked in.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 01-15-2019, 05:11 AM
Yastrzemski Sports Yastrzemski Sports is offline
Adam Yastrzemski
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Cooperstown, NY
Posts: 161
Default

If you want to see something truly eye opening take a look at the free agent tracker. There are a ton of 28-35 year old players who are not yet unsigned - a lot of familiar names of players who have been productive but are now replaceable. Come spring, many of these guys are going to have to take minor league deals, sign for 1 year at close to minimum or retire and start a new career as the rosters fill up. The players know whatís going on and itís only a matter of time before theyíve had enough.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 01-15-2019, 03:25 PM
steve B steve B is offline
Steve Birmingham
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: eastern Mass.
Posts: 5,137
Default

I suppose if I was an owner, I'd move along an average or slightly better player who is at a point where they'll get a couple million. Especially if I can replace them with a guy from the minors at half a million.

Although fan popularity should count for something, it didn't help Daubach or any other guys in a similar situation.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 01-15-2019, 03:42 PM
mckinneyj mckinneyj is offline
Jim
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Dedham, MA USA
Posts: 238
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by steve B View Post
I suppose if I was an owner, I'd move along an average or slightly better player who is at a point where they'll get a couple million. Especially if I can replace them with a guy from the minors at half a million.

Although fan popularity should count for something, it didn't help Daubach or any other guys in a similar situation.
Yeah, if I have to pay a handful of millions more to keep a young star/difference maker (Mookie Betts?) then I'm going to want some older vet on the downside of his career (Kimbrel?) to take a haircut as his production declines or I'll look elsewhere at a cheaper price.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 01-15-2019, 04:31 PM
AGuinness AGuinness is offline
Garth Guibord
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 476
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by steve B View Post
I suppose if I was an owner, I'd move along an average or slightly better player who is at a point where they'll get a couple million. Especially if I can replace them with a guy from the minors at half a million.

Although fan popularity should count for something, it didn't help Daubach or any other guys in a similar situation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mckinneyj View Post
Yeah, if I have to pay a handful of millions more to keep a young star/difference maker (Mookie Betts?) then I'm going to want some older vet on the downside of his career (Kimbrel?) to take a haircut as his production declines or I'll look elsewhere at a cheaper price.
You guys are really hitting at home with the Red Sox players...

I have found my opinions on team/players to be an interesting dichotomy: on one hand, I really appreciate value and economic efficiency and I enjoy looking at how teams are effectively built and the value of getting a player on a good contract; on the other hand, I think the players are the game, so to speak, and deserve every penny they can get.
The current system seems to be in place to keep costs down, so I don't begrudge any player - from Mike Trout and Mookie to any Quad-A guy or player heading to Japan or Kyler Murray - from trying to get as much as they can before their time is up on the playing field. In the end, I want to see the great talent on the field, even though I appreciate how teams are constructed, etc.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 01-18-2019, 01:04 PM
steve B steve B is offline
Steve Birmingham
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: eastern Mass.
Posts: 5,137
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AGuinness View Post
You guys are really hitting at home with the Red Sox players...

I have found my opinions on team/players to be an interesting dichotomy: on one hand, I really appreciate value and economic efficiency and I enjoy looking at how teams are effectively built and the value of getting a player on a good contract; on the other hand, I think the players are the game, so to speak, and deserve every penny they can get.
The current system seems to be in place to keep costs down, so I don't begrudge any player - from Mike Trout and Mookie to any Quad-A guy or player heading to Japan or Kyler Murray - from trying to get as much as they can before their time is up on the playing field. In the end, I want to see the great talent on the field, even though I appreciate how teams are constructed, etc.

For me the Red Sox thing is mostly because that's the team I follow. Daubach was a favorite of many people, and to my thinking he got jerked around a lot. Of course it's always possible the owners knew something the fans couldn't, like a lingering health problem or something like that. They have moved a few players who haven't done all that well later on.

There were other players treated the same way during that time, from many teams, even future hall of famers.

https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...018-story.html


The previous Red Sox owners were worse, they hurt the team for years by basically ignoring the draft and making things difficult for the plyers they drafted. One year they had a high pick, the guy before and after him got signing bonuses in the six figures, the offer to their draftee? 5000. he wouldn't sign despite the probability that he wouldn't get much more being picked lower the next season, if at all and said he'd never play for the team.


I figure the value of a player to the team businesswise, is also partly the merchandising. I don't know enough about how the pay for that happens exactly, but I do know the team gets a cut of the licensing.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 01-18-2019, 03:23 PM
packs packs is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 5,127
Default

Personally, I'm glad that players are seeing their salaries drop. How many times do you have to see a guy like Homer Bailey make 20 plus mil a year for being a bum?

Now that ownership is no longer bidding against themselves, I believe that young talent will sign extensions during their preliminary contracts a la Mike Trout and we may begin to see a return to the days when great players spend their careers in one city fearing a volatile free agent market.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 01-18-2019, 04:32 PM
AGuinness AGuinness is offline
Garth Guibord
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 476
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by packs View Post
Personally, I'm glad that players are seeing their salaries drop. How many times do you have to see a guy like Homer Bailey make 20 plus mil a year for being a bum?

Now that ownership is no longer bidding against themselves, I believe that young talent will sign extensions during their preliminary contracts a la Mike Trout and we may begin to see a return to the days when great players spend their careers in one city fearing a volatile free agent market.
I think it's easy for fans to hold contracts against players, but I'd rather see players get more money. The alternative is for the record revenues to line the pockets of the owners, rather than the talent that produces the game we love.

I also think that players staying with a single team their whole career is fairly far down the list of priorities I have for the game and what I'd like to see. I suppose there is a very minor amount it would matter, but that argument has always seemed more of a media-driven narrative to help fill air time rather than any point with substantial merit. And it doesn't bother me in the least that some of my favorite players today and from the past, including David Ortiz, JD Martinez, Pedro, etc., spent time with other teams during their careers.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 01-18-2019, 07:08 PM
packs packs is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 5,127
Default

I would be hoping that decreasing expenses would mean more purchasing power for the fans. Every year there are stories about how much it costs to see a game and I can’t help but think part of that has to do with inflated salaries.

Players feeling like free agency is a risky proposition would lend to increased competition as teams remain strong with a core group of players that stay together for more than 3 or 4 seasons. Maybe that’s not on the forefront of your mind if you like a team with purchasing power but it would be if you love, say, the A’s.

Last edited by packs; 01-18-2019 at 07:40 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 01-18-2019, 07:44 PM
AGuinness AGuinness is offline
Garth Guibord
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 476
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by packs View Post
I would be hoping that decreasing expenses would mean more purchasing power for the fans. Yankee Stadium is an insanely expensive place but youíre paying for an insanely expensive team. Every year there are stories about how much it costs to see a game and I canít help but think part of that has to do with Jacoby Ellsbury making 20 plus while playing worse than I do when he can even get on the field.

Players feeling like free agency is a risky proposition would lend to increased competition as teams remain strong with a core group of players that stay together for more than 3 or 4 seasons.
I remember reading in recent years how players salaries and ticket/concession prices basically have no relationship. A quick google search shows some stories going back 15 years about how they're not related - even if it seems like they may be when watching Ellsbury from the stands.

It seems the current system has already created an environment where free agency is a risky proposition, but the result seems to be that there are extreme haves and have-nots - a bunch of teams that are tanking, not trying to win and barely participating in free agency, and another group of really great teams, who are playing hard ball as they know they don't have competition for players (a la JD Martinez one year ago, and perhaps Harper/Machado/Kimbrel this year).
Reply With Quote
Reply



Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
For the 19th Century/Japan baseball buffs- TV/Web report on founder of Japanese Baseball Archive Net54baseball Sports (Primarily) Vintage Memorabilia Forum incl. Game Used 0 05-23-2007 04:07 PM
For the 19th Century/Japan baseball buffs- TV/Web report on founder of Japanese Baseball Archive Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions 0 05-23-2007 03:24 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:58 AM.


ebay GSB