SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
|
Boras
Nov 10, 2017 8:45:27 GMT -5
Post by fenwaythehardway on Nov 10, 2017 8:45:27 GMT -5
Maybe, maybe not. One economic theory - espoused by Marvin Miller and others - is that a company is going to charge whatever it can command for its goods or services, regardless of what its expenses are. That nice 16-ounce Sam Adams draft might cost the bar only $2 because the bar buys large quantities of beer. But if the bar can get you to pay $7 for it, that's what you're going to pay. If you'll pay $8, then the bar will charge you $8, even if the bar's costs to purchase the beer and pay the bartender haven't gone up. Other economists say that of course if wages go up, a business is going to charge customers more to cover its costs. That's the argument righties often make when they're trying to stop an increase in the minimum wage.
There's no question that the costs of BB tickets, broadcast rights and sponsorships have risen tremendously since player salaries began spiraling upward with the advent of free agency. Whether there's a cause-effect there is open to argument. Shape of the earth: experts differ!
|
|
|
Boras
Nov 10, 2017 8:51:35 GMT -5
dd likes this
Post by fenwaythehardway on Nov 10, 2017 8:51:35 GMT -5
It's way harder to feel bad for players getting paid $100 million instead of $200 million. That's the only point I was making. If you want to stick up for the 'working man', stick up for the right ones. The ones with 9 figure contracts are not them. If you're angry at Boras for trying to push a $100m player to a $200m player, you're sticking up for multi-billionaires. There's no particularly righteous side to take here. If you're angry about minor leaguers and marginal players getting screwed over, well, take it up with the player's union. Scott Boras has very little influence over how the masses of professional baseball players are treated. He works for his clients, that's his job.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Nov 10, 2017 9:00:58 GMT -5
It's way harder to feel bad for players getting paid $100 million instead of $200 million. That's the only point I was making. If you want to stick up for the 'working man', stick up for the right ones. The ones with 9 figure contracts are not them. If you're angry at Boras for trying to push a $100m player to a $200m player, you're sticking up for multi-billionaires. There's no particularly righteous side to take here. If you're angry about minor leaguers and marginal players getting screwed over, well, take it up with the player's union. Scott Boras has very little influence over how the masses of professional baseball players are treated. He works for his clients, that's his job. No I'm not. Maybe we should give JD Martinez $240 million a year and then get rid of everyone else on the team. Because if you don't want that, you're rooting for the billionaires? Obviously there is a team budget limit for every team, especially with the CBA penalties that reduce future talent. Why can't you root for that same amount of money to be spread out to field a better team? I mean a better team is what every fan wants, isn't it? No one is saying that the salaries for top players should go down so the owners can keep more of their money. The salaries for top players should go down so that we can have more top players. Why is that not a legitimate fan response instead of 'rooting for billionaires'? I guarantee that Boras was heavily involved in the CBA negotiations so to keep it rigged in favor of the elite players. That is in his best financial interests.
|
|
|
Boras
Nov 10, 2017 10:06:10 GMT -5
Post by Chris Hatfield on Nov 10, 2017 10:06:10 GMT -5
Part of Boras' job is to be the bad guy and deflect the negative reaction away from the players. Do you really think that a player who wants to sign an extension is suddenly going to be like "oh crap, I signed with Scott Boras, never mind then"? If you sign with Boras, you the player do not want to sign an extension. Scott Boras does not tell his clients what to do. He can offer advice, sure, but at the end of the day, the client decides. In 2004, Jason Varitek told Boras to get a contract done with the Red Sox. He did. Any of Boras' clients could do the same. It's not like it's some system where Boras drafts his clients and they become represented by him against their will. I'd go with that also.. The players.. Many at least.. Forget where they came from and get far too greedy after getting a huge chunk of change in their pockets and it goes to their heads after a couple of seasons. The owners? Many were born that way, or at least earned their way up the ladder from many decades of hard work. Again, what does maximizing your earning potential in a profession where you have like a 10-year window to do so, if you're lucky, have anything to do with "forgetting where you came from?"
|
|
|
Boras
Nov 10, 2017 10:10:29 GMT -5
Post by fenwaythehardway on Nov 10, 2017 10:10:29 GMT -5
If you're angry at Boras for trying to push a $100m player to a $200m player, you're sticking up for multi-billionaires. There's no particularly righteous side to take here. If you're angry about minor leaguers and marginal players getting screwed over, well, take it up with the player's union. Scott Boras has very little influence over how the masses of professional baseball players are treated. He works for his clients, that's his job. No I'm not. Maybe we should give JD Martinez $240 million a year and then get rid of everyone else on the team. Because if you don't want that, you're rooting for the billionaires? Obviously there is a team budget limit for every team, especially with the CBA penalties that reduce future talent. Why can't you root for that same amount of money to be spread out to field a better team? I mean a better team is what every fan wants, isn't it? No one is saying that the salaries for top players should go down so the owners can keep more of their money. The salaries for top players should go down so that we can have more top players. Why is that not a legitimate fan response instead of 'rooting for billionaires'? I guarantee that Boras was heavily involved in the CBA negotiations so to keep it rigged in favor of the elite players. That is in his best financial interests. Who is "we"?
|
|
|
Boras
Nov 10, 2017 10:12:28 GMT -5
Post by jimed14 on Nov 10, 2017 10:12:28 GMT -5
No I'm not. Maybe we should give JD Martinez $240 million a year and then get rid of everyone else on the team. Because if you don't want that, you're rooting for the billionaires? Obviously there is a team budget limit for every team, especially with the CBA penalties that reduce future talent. Why can't you root for that same amount of money to be spread out to field a better team? I mean a better team is what every fan wants, isn't it? No one is saying that the salaries for top players should go down so the owners can keep more of their money. The salaries for top players should go down so that we can have more top players. Why is that not a legitimate fan response instead of 'rooting for billionaires'? I guarantee that Boras was heavily involved in the CBA negotiations so to keep it rigged in favor of the elite players. That is in his best financial interests. Who is "we"? Snark is cool. The Red Sox. Bad habit.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Nov 10, 2017 10:13:04 GMT -5
If you're angry at Boras for trying to push a $100m player to a $200m player, you're sticking up for multi-billionaires. There's no particularly righteous side to take here. If you're angry about minor leaguers and marginal players getting screwed over, well, take it up with the player's union. Scott Boras has very little influence over how the masses of professional baseball players are treated. He works for his clients, that's his job. No I'm not. Maybe we should give JD Martinez $240 million a year and then get rid of everyone else on the team. Because if you don't want that, you're rooting for the billionaires? Obviously there is a team budget limit for every team, especially with the CBA penalties that reduce future talent. Why can't you root for that same amount of money to be spread out to field a better team? I mean a better team is what every fan wants, isn't it? No one is saying that the salaries for top players should go down so the owners can keep more of their money. The salaries for top players should go down so that we can have more top players. Why is that not a legitimate fan response instead of 'rooting for billionaires'? I guarantee that Boras was heavily involved in the CBA negotiations so to keep it rigged in favor of the elite players. That is in his best financial interests. I guarantee that Boras had nothing to do with the CBA negotiations. If Boras represented only elite players, you might be on to something. But he does not. Here's a list that may or may not be 100% accurate, but it's a list: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Boras Do you think that Boras isn't trying to maximize what Willie Bloomquist gets paid? What Ollie Perez gets paid? His job is to advocate for his clients and get them into the best possible situation, which 99% of the time is going to mean getting them paid as much as possible. That is literally the job of every agent. Boras does this better than anyone. And yet he's a villain destroying the fabric of the game. Again, I don't get it. He's not holding a gun to a GM's head and forcing him to sign a guy for twice what he's worth. As Don C mentioned above, it's about competence. If Boras fleeces your favorite team's GM because he's excellent at his job and the GM is a dope, that's not Boras' fault.
|
|
|
Boras
Nov 10, 2017 10:15:49 GMT -5
Post by jimed14 on Nov 10, 2017 10:15:49 GMT -5
No I'm not. Maybe we should give JD Martinez $240 million a year and then get rid of everyone else on the team. Because if you don't want that, you're rooting for the billionaires? Obviously there is a team budget limit for every team, especially with the CBA penalties that reduce future talent. Why can't you root for that same amount of money to be spread out to field a better team? I mean a better team is what every fan wants, isn't it? No one is saying that the salaries for top players should go down so the owners can keep more of their money. The salaries for top players should go down so that we can have more top players. Why is that not a legitimate fan response instead of 'rooting for billionaires'? I guarantee that Boras was heavily involved in the CBA negotiations so to keep it rigged in favor of the elite players. That is in his best financial interests. I guarantee that Boras had nothing to do with the CBA negotiations. If Boras represented only elite players, you might be on to something. But he does not. Here's a list that may or may not be 100% accurate, but it's a list: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Boras Do you think that Boras isn't trying to maximize what Willie Bloomquist gets paid? What Ollie Perez gets paid? His job is to advocate for his clients and get them into the best possible situation, which 99% of the time is going to mean getting them paid as much as possible. That is literally the job of every agent. Boras does this better than anyone. And yet he's a villain destroying the fabric of the game. Again, I don't get it. He's not holding a gun to a GM's head and forcing him to sign a guy for twice what he's worth. As Don C mentioned above, it's about competence. If Boras fleeces your favorite team's GM because he's excellent at his job and the GM is a dope, that's not Boras' fault. He's the guy who exposes how rigged the CBA is for elite players. I have said multiple times that I don't blame him for it. I have a problem with the CBA. And as a Red Sox fan, I'd rather the team field a better team rather than a worse team and with an equal budget, we can have a better team if the top players get less money. That doesn't mean that I'm rooting for the billionaires. It means I'm rooting for the Red Sox to be a better team. I'm not sure how much more clear I can make my point. In really basic terms, the Red Sox will have an easier time extending their star players if JDM were signed for less money. I think that's a reasonable fan opinion and not rooting for billionaires. I mean no one has complained about Papi getting a fraction of what the Red Sox are now trying to pay to replace him. They already signed Hanley to replace him for way more than he ever got and now they're trying to get JDM or Stanton to help replace him.
|
|
|
Boras
Nov 10, 2017 10:22:20 GMT -5
Post by Chris Hatfield on Nov 10, 2017 10:22:20 GMT -5
I guarantee that Boras had nothing to do with the CBA negotiations. If Boras represented only elite players, you might be on to something. But he does not. Here's a list that may or may not be 100% accurate, but it's a list: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Boras Do you think that Boras isn't trying to maximize what Willie Bloomquist gets paid? What Ollie Perez gets paid? His job is to advocate for his clients and get them into the best possible situation, which 99% of the time is going to mean getting them paid as much as possible. That is literally the job of every agent. Boras does this better than anyone. And yet he's a villain destroying the fabric of the game. Again, I don't get it. He's not holding a gun to a GM's head and forcing him to sign a guy for twice what he's worth. As Don C mentioned above, it's about competence. If Boras fleeces your favorite team's GM because he's excellent at his job and the GM is a dope, that's not Boras' fault. He's the guy who exposes how rigged the CBA is for elite players. I have said multiple times that I don't blame him for it. I have a problem with the CBA. And as a Red Sox fan, I'd rather the team field a better team rather than a worse team and with an equal budget, we can have a better team if the top players get less money. That doesn't mean that I'm rooting for the billionaires. It means I'm rooting for the Red Sox to be a better team. I'm not sure how much more clear I can make my point. In really basic terms, the Red Sox will have an easier time extending their star players if JDM were signed for less money. I think that's a reasonable fan opinion and not rooting for billionaires. Not trying to be a jerk when I say this, but in other words, you're basically being a homer then? You realize you root for a team that has had one of the top 6 payrolls in the game every year this century? I can't imagine if you were a Rays or A's fan. No rational Red Sox fan should ever complain about the CBA for reasons affecting the team. None.
|
|
|
Boras
Nov 10, 2017 10:34:40 GMT -5
Post by jimed14 on Nov 10, 2017 10:34:40 GMT -5
He's the guy who exposes how rigged the CBA is for elite players. I have said multiple times that I don't blame him for it. I have a problem with the CBA. And as a Red Sox fan, I'd rather the team field a better team rather than a worse team and with an equal budget, we can have a better team if the top players get less money. That doesn't mean that I'm rooting for the billionaires. It means I'm rooting for the Red Sox to be a better team. I'm not sure how much more clear I can make my point. In really basic terms, the Red Sox will have an easier time extending their star players if JDM were signed for less money. I think that's a reasonable fan opinion and not rooting for billionaires. Not trying to be a jerk when I say this, but in other words, you're basically being a homer then? You realize you root for a team that has had one of the top 6 payrolls in the game every year this century? I can't imagine if you were a Rays or A's fan. No rational Red Sox fan should ever complain about the CBA for reasons affecting the team. None. If wanting your team to be better makes you a homer, then I guess so. I realize the Red Sox have a huge payroll, but they will soon be extremely limited and forced to make hard decisions because they don't have an unlimited budget. And those will be harder decisions if they go to $200 million for JDM. I still don't know how that means that I root for billionaires. I root for the Red Sox. I don't want the Red Sox to have a smaller payroll. I just don't want them to be forced to count on guys like a Grady Sizemore because they ran out of budget space.
|
|
|
Boras
Nov 10, 2017 11:40:13 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Oregon Norm on Nov 10, 2017 11:40:13 GMT -5
The issues do revolve around the CBA, and they're real market issues. That's why teams have to be smart and whip out the spreadsheets to examine the long-term implications of their spending decisions. It's called due diligence, and if you fail to do that you end up jammed against the cap with stranded assets. That's where our favorite team finds themselves.
None of that has anything to do with Boras separate from the fact that he will absolutely not take pity on FOs that put themselves in a bind. He spoke up clearly during the previous round of CBA negotiations when it resulted in an ever-hardening cap. It was self-interest no doubt, but informed by his intimate knowledge of how foolish GMs can be with other people's money. He didn't need a crystal ball to see where this was going.
|
|
|
Boras
Nov 10, 2017 14:37:07 GMT -5
Post by umassgrad2005 on Nov 10, 2017 14:37:07 GMT -5
While some of the minor league rules need adjusting, like 25 dollars for food per day. They don't have to eat ramen noodles everyday either. They should be paid for spring training and always have a place to stay paid for by the team. Even if it's a one star type place. I would love to see them basically double the current rates on top of that. At the same time the lawsuit demanding a living wage of like 45,000 to 60,000 a year is crazy in my opinion. The idea of a living wage is basically dead in this Country and I see no reason why minor leaguers should get one for 6 months of playing a game. Nevermind look at the money given out in the draft and international market. In no way are all minor leaguers equal. 17 players taken in the draft got over a $100,000. When you average that out over the average minor league career the numbers look a lot better. Some got a lot more. While only 8 players got $5,000 or less out of 43 players. Then if you make the majors you move into the what top 10% income bracket in this Country even if you make the minimum. It's really hard to feel bad for players getting paid to play a game. It's way harder to feel bad for players getting paid $100 million instead of $200 million. That's the only point I was making. If you want to stick up for the 'working man', stick up for the right ones. The ones with 9 figure contracts are not them. I feel bad for working people that struggle while working full-time at Walmart. I don't feel bad for people living the dream of getting paid to play baseball. I don't care if they are making 100 million, 200 million, 500,000 or a 1,000. I would bet a ton of these guys in the minors would play for free. For love of the game and a chance to earn huge amounts of money if they make the majors. The idea that they are being exploited is funny. I don't know the exact numbers, but I would assume the average person doesn't come close to spending 25 dollars a day on food. That's 175 dollars a week. That's around the take home pay for minimum wage workers in some states. Root for the average workers with no other choices, not the guys choosing to chase a dream , that could make them filthy rich. It's no different than people out of College doing unpaid internships so they can get a chance at a huge paying job.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Nov 10, 2017 14:46:16 GMT -5
It's way harder to feel bad for players getting paid $100 million instead of $200 million. That's the only point I was making. If you want to stick up for the 'working man', stick up for the right ones. The ones with 9 figure contracts are not them. I feel bad for working people that struggle while working full-time at Walmart. I don't feel bad for people living the dream of getting paid to play baseball. I don't care if they are making 100 million, 200 million, 500,000 or a 1,000. I would bet a ton of these guys in the minors would play for free. For love of the game and a chance to earn huge amounts of money if they make the majors. The idea that they are being exploited is funny. I don't know the exact numbers, but I would assume the average person doesn't come close to spending 25 dollars a day on food. That's 175 dollars a week. That's around the take home pay for minimum wage workers in some states. Root for the average workers with no other choices, not the guys choosing to chase a dream , that could make them filthy rich. It's no different than people out of College doing unpaid internships so they can get a chance at a huge paying job. From the Senne lawsuit, here's how much the Complaint alleged that players make: $1,100 per month for Rookie and Short-Season A; $1,250 per month for Class-A; $1,500 per month for Class-AA; and $2,150 for Class-AAA. These are paid out over the season, but not during the offseason, spring training, extended spring training, instructs, or fall leagues. If we call it a six-month season, that's $6,600 up to $12,900. Could you live on that for a year?
|
|
|
Boras
Nov 10, 2017 15:28:23 GMT -5
Post by umassgrad2005 on Nov 10, 2017 15:28:23 GMT -5
I feel bad for working people that struggle while working full-time at Walmart. I don't feel bad for people living the dream of getting paid to play baseball. I don't care if they are making 100 million, 200 million, 500,000 or a 1,000. I would bet a ton of these guys in the minors would play for free. For love of the game and a chance to earn huge amounts of money if they make the majors. The idea that they are being exploited is funny. I don't know the exact numbers, but I would assume the average person doesn't come close to spending 25 dollars a day on food. That's 175 dollars a week. That's around the take home pay for minimum wage workers in some states. Root for the average workers with no other choices, not the guys choosing to chase a dream , that could make them filthy rich. It's no different than people out of College doing unpaid internships so they can get a chance at a huge paying job. From the Senne lawsuit, here's how much the Complaint alleged that players make: $1,100 per month for Rookie and Short-Season A; $1,250 per month for Class-A; $1,500 per month for Class-AA; and $2,150 for Class-AAA. These are paid out over the season, but not during the offseason, spring training, extended spring training, instructs, or fall leagues. If we call it a six-month season, that's $6,600 up to $12,900. Could you live on that for a year? I said I favor double those numbers and having the guys paid for things like spring training. At the same time the idea that they should get a living wage is funny. I think the lawsuit wants 45,000 to 60,000 a year minimum for all minor leaguers. When in College I made way less than that and had all the money I needed. I lived at home, which if you see above I said everyone should have a place to stay paid for by team. The guys like Owens and Brentz being stuck in the minors all these years got big signing bonus. The team gives them money for food and other benefits. So yea these guys have no problem living off what they make. You really can't debate that, it's been going on for decades. You are basically arguing they should get more. When I was in College I couldn't afford the toys my friends could working a regular job full-time. That was my choice so I could make more in the future. Same with these guys. When you add in the benefits like 25 dollars a day for food and the money they get for housing, even the lower tier is making over minimum wage on a federal level. It's a part -time job and a players choice. Why should a fringe baseball player with a 1% chance of playing in the majors get more than a minimum wage job? Millions apon millions of Americans work more than one job to make ends meet. They have no choice, Baseball players do. Nevermind the players the Sox really like have got sizable bonus's so they can spend 100% of there time practicing and getting better. Went back and looked a player like Beeks, lower pick in 12th round. He's getting close to majors. Thing is he got $150,000 signing bonus. Another guy in Shepard that gets talked about got 90,000. There is only one guy in to 2014 class still in the system Cole Strugeon that got $10,000 that fits what your talking about. Even then he has got $2,500 extra per year. Most of the guys that spend a long time in the minors got a good size bonus. You just can't overlook that.
|
|
|
Boras
Nov 10, 2017 15:38:13 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Nov 10, 2017 15:38:13 GMT -5
From the Senne lawsuit, here's how much the Complaint alleged that players make: $1,100 per month for Rookie and Short-Season A; $1,250 per month for Class-A; $1,500 per month for Class-AA; and $2,150 for Class-AAA. These are paid out over the season, but not during the offseason, spring training, extended spring training, instructs, or fall leagues. If we call it a six-month season, that's $6,600 up to $12,900. Could you live on that for a year? Why should a fringe baseball player with a 1% chance of playing in the majors get more than a minimum wage job? Millions apon millions of Americans work more than one job to make ends meet. They have no choice, Baseball players do. No, everyone has a choice of going to college in America and further their education and careers. That's the opportunity you get in America. If people work 2 different jobs and forced to work that much, it probably was because they made poor choices in their lives. I'm all for everyone getting paid more, including ballplayers and regular people. Really, the owners should pay more. You're arguing that the owners should collect more if they don't pay their minor league players more.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Nov 10, 2017 15:44:52 GMT -5
At the very least, giving prospects that we want to develop into major league players access to healthy food for all meals instead of being forced to eat garbage fast food because that’s all they could afford is a no-brainer. I did that in college when I’d get 6 biscuits from KFC for $1.99. I must have been the picture of healthy then.
|
|
|
Boras
Nov 10, 2017 16:20:28 GMT -5
Post by umassgrad2005 on Nov 10, 2017 16:20:28 GMT -5
Why should a fringe baseball player with a 1% chance of playing in the majors get more than a minimum wage job? Millions apon millions of Americans work more than one job to make ends meet. They have no choice, Baseball players do. No, everyone has a choice of going to college in America and further their education and careers. That's the opportunity you get in America. If people work 2 different jobs and forced to work that much, it probably was because they made poor choices in their lives. I'm all for everyone getting paid more, including ballplayers and regular people. Really, the owners should pay more. You're arguing that the owners should collect more if they don't pay their minor league players more. Everyone has a choice, but not everyone can handle college. Not really, people have different skills and different area offer different types of Jobs. You get the jobs in Western Mass aren't equal to Boston right? Nevermind some of the poorer states. Also someone in Boston looks at money a lot different than westeran mass. In my area having a 4 year college degree and working two part-time jobs happens all the time. It has nothing to do with poor life choices. It's an area that was built around Mill jobs and 95% are all gone. No more places like General Electric employing 10,000 people that included my grandfather and my wifes dad. No more paper mills except the one that prints our federal money paper. We had a crap load of paper mills when I was younger. How am I arguing the owners should get more? Once again you are talking one part of my argument and overlooking the rest like I never said it. I clearly said double the pay, increase the money for food and provide housing. That's owners spending millions more a year. I don't see why a fringe player should be making a living wage of 45,000 to 60,000 for 6 months of work though. In most cases you can argue the fringe players are making a bad life choice chasing a dream and a very slim chance of being rich. That's there choice though.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Nov 10, 2017 17:47:40 GMT -5
Why should a fringe baseball player with a 1% chance of playing in the majors get more than a minimum wage job? Because the minimum wage should also be much higher.
|
|
|
Boras
Nov 11, 2017 17:28:20 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by jmei on Nov 11, 2017 17:28:20 GMT -5
Blaming Scott Boras for the Red Sox budgetary constraints is ***-backwards.The Red Sox have enough income to support an annual player salary expenditure level well in excess of what they currently spend (or are projected to spend this year), even under the new CBA (whose marginally increased restrictions on spending have been grossly exaggerated). If J.D. Martinez is asking for more money than he's worth, don't pay him. Is Boras supposed to just offer up his client on a woefully under-market deal?
|
|
|
Boras
Nov 11, 2017 19:44:49 GMT -5
Post by umassgrad2005 on Nov 11, 2017 19:44:49 GMT -5
Blaming Scott Boras for the Red Sox budgetary constraints is ***-backwards.The Red Sox have enough income to support an annual player salary expenditure level well in excess of what they currently spend (or are projected to spend this year), even under the new CBA (whose marginally increased restrictions on spending have been grossly exaggerated). If J.D. Martinez is asking for more money than he's worth, don't pay him. Is Boras supposed to just offer up his client on a woefully under-market deal? So you think raising the tax for going over 237 million from 50% to 95% for a team like the Dodger is not huge? Even for the Red Sox next year anything over 237 million is what 72.5%, compared to the old 50%. The draft picks and loss of international money might be marginally increased restrictions. Like we showed this year and you get extra international money. The extra tax can rather quickly wipe out your net revenue. That is a new massive restriction on future spending above the 237 million level. When you add it all together there is nothing marginal about it. Never mind the restrictions on placed on the 197 tax line for losing and signing free agents. Which will keep a bunch of team below that level. The new restrictions had the Red Sox drop below last year to reset the tax and reports say the Yankees will do the same this year. Out of the top 3 spending teams only the Dodgers don't seem to care. That's a huge change, when you start limiting the top spending teams.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Nov 11, 2017 21:57:51 GMT -5
The Red Sox generated $80M in net income last year. Add to that the net incomes of NESN and related Fenway Sports Group operations, and Henry and co. could easily spend in excess of $300M in combined player salary and luxury tax without blinking an eye.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Nov 11, 2017 22:52:02 GMT -5
...and they and every other team have ownership in something that's making them all even wealthier, MLBAM. That link is way out of date with the revenue undoubtedly topping $1 billion, and perhaps by multiples. It's bringing in piles of cash as buy-ins such as the ones described here have proliferated. It's been broadly adopted by a wide range of franchises, sports and otherwise, which require absolutely rock solid streaming services. As mentioned in the TechDirt article, it is the gold standard. Separate from any licensing, Disney is now the majority owner of the underlying technology company - BAMTech - which they paid $1.58 billion to acquire an additional 42% of. The Forbes article has the valuation of MLBAM at $15 billion. I believe the profits from all of that are separate from any calculations in the CBA. Nobody in MLB ownership is walking around with a begging bowl. These people are rolling in cash.
|
|
|
Boras
Nov 11, 2017 23:19:19 GMT -5
Post by jimed14 on Nov 11, 2017 23:19:19 GMT -5
The Red Sox generated $80M in net income last year. Add to that the net incomes of NESN and related Fenway Sports Group operations, and Henry and co. could easily spend in excess of $300M in combined player salary and luxury tax without blinking an eye. So just give JDM $80 million a year? I mean you have to admit that there is a logical team salary limit that they will always reach. They have kept a ton of salary in AAA to keep it off the tax limit so I don't think anyone can call them cheap. Why is everyone arguing to get rid of Castillo then? I'm one of the only people who want to keep him for depth. Everyone else wants to dump his contract. You must be rooting for the billionaires.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Nov 12, 2017 10:39:28 GMT -5
Nobody in MLB ownership is walking around with a begging bowl. Not until it's time to build a new stadium.
|
|
|
Boras
Nov 12, 2017 11:38:44 GMT -5
Post by p23w on Nov 12, 2017 11:38:44 GMT -5
Amazing disconnect between the business of baseball and the game. I will always love the game. Baseball as a business if fraught with legal and technical issues that are of little interest. How I miss the days of hot stove discussions when men drank cocoa and talked about the game between the white lines.
|
|
|