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.
|
Post by wildcardwillie on Feb 1, 2018 10:41:38 GMT -5
Maybe NFL and MLB should do like the NBA and just have max contracts... at some point these numbers are just getting ridiculous! Players wan't every drop of money, then get upset if you can't build around them. If you pay one guy 40 mil, it kinda hand cuffs you going forward!
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Feb 1, 2018 11:03:20 GMT -5
Maybe NFL and MLB should do like the NBA and just have max contracts... at some point these numbers are just getting ridiculous! Players wan't every drop of money, then get upset if you can't build around them. If you pay one guy 40 mil, it kinda hand cuffs you going forward! Pity the poor owners.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Feb 1, 2018 11:23:56 GMT -5
Maybe NFL and MLB should do like the NBA and just have max contracts... at some point these numbers are just getting ridiculous! Players wan't every drop of money, then get upset if you can't build around them. If you pay one guy 40 mil, it kinda hand cuffs you going forward! Pity the poor owners. Pity the fans who have to deal with dumb contracts that handcuff their favorite team.
|
|
|
Post by Don Caballero on Feb 1, 2018 11:50:18 GMT -5
Pity the medium tier players who have objectively less money gravitating their way.
|
|
manfred
Veteran
Posts: 11,403
Member is Online
|
Post by manfred on Feb 1, 2018 12:14:25 GMT -5
I am not sympathetic to the owners for any number of reasons, but seeing someone like Jansen talk strike because of the slow offseason seems unfair. Free agent contracts have gotten so risky that it makes total sense to think twice. The only guy this off season I would be happy for the Sox to get is JDM. Or, to revise... I might almost be content to sign someone like Lucroy to a 1-year deal as a DH. But the Sox are wallowing in bad contracts. Who thinks a 5-year deal for Darvish, for example, doesn’t have at least a year or two of really bad value?
Edit: or Hosmer? I cannot imagine year 5 of his contract.
|
|
|
Post by wildcardwillie on Feb 1, 2018 12:44:42 GMT -5
Maybe NFL and MLB should do like the NBA and just have max contracts... at some point these numbers are just getting ridiculous! Players wan't every drop of money, then get upset if you can't build around them. If you pay one guy 40 mil, it kinda hand cuffs you going forward! Pity the poor owners. I wasn't looking at it through owners eyes, I was through fans...Owners have plenty of money, just wondering where it stops! remember a few years ago Arod was making as much as the whole Marlins roster or something close I believe. Prob not a great example because they were being cheap! This monster inflation will only hurt the fans in the longrun.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Feb 1, 2018 13:24:30 GMT -5
Pity the medium tier players who have objectively less money gravitating their way. Less than what?
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Feb 1, 2018 13:26:59 GMT -5
I wasn't looking at it through owners eyes, I was through fans...Owners have plenty of money, just wondering where it stops! remember a few years ago Arod was making as much as the whole Marlins roster or something close I believe. Prob not a great example because they were being cheap! This monster inflation will only hurt the fans in the longrun.How?
|
|
|
Post by Don Caballero on Feb 1, 2018 13:29:01 GMT -5
I am not sympathetic to the owners for any number of reasons, but seeing someone like Jansen talk strike because of the slow offseason seems unfair. Free agent contracts have gotten so risky that it makes total sense to think twice. The only guy this off season I would be happy for the Sox to get is JDM. Or, to revise... I might almost be content to sign someone like Lucroy to a 1-year deal as a DH. But the Sox are wallowing in bad contracts. Who thinks a 5-year deal for Darvish, for example, doesn’t have at least a year or two of really bad value? Edit: or Hosmer? I cannot imagine year 5 of his contract. Agreed and besides, are we supposed to feel bad for the players because they're underpaid? They're really not, you could make a point that minor leaguers and rookies and borderline players are underpaid, but not that Mookie Betts is not going to make enough money. I'm legit confused every time I see people talking about owners as these greed filled monsters and players as badass rebels who are sticking it to the man, you could argue that perhaps owners could have smaller profit margins for whatever bolshevik fever dream inspired reasons, but why couldn't the players? Let's all make a deal, owners make less money, do away with guaranteed contracts and players get less and fans have to pay less in order to see the games. Everyone wins and we're officially back to the 1920s! If I should demand that owners pay more to give me a thing I want, why shouldn't I demand that there's less money involved in the whole equation making my hobby cheaper and my life happier? I like money as well, I don't like the idea of having to pay for $50 hot dogs because Betts is good at hitting a ball. This narrative about the players being the poor working class and the owners being exploitative a**holes is so goddamn tired and so unreal in today's world. Mookie Betts won't make a ridiculous amount of money because he's so good at baseball OMG, he will because he's so good at baseball and people care and watch the games. It's not his divine right to make that money, so if contract discussions ever reach a point where it becomes detrimental to the enjoyment of the game causing people to maybe stop caring so much, and we're probably getting close to that, something like a hard max salary (mutually agreed to of course) would ideally be a good solution. Or they could strike and become the NHL. Here's the revenue for every MLB team in 2016. There's a defensible stance that some franchises could have a higher payroll based on how much money they generate, but you could also argue that in 2016 the Dodgers had a higher payroll than 7 teams had for total revenue. If you're going to increase the salary of each team to ridiculous amounts because Albert Pujols could have 2 space rockets instead of 1, why even have teams that can't compete financially? It would lessen the interest in the league overall, leading to less fans watching the game which in turn would lead to Pablo Sandoval having to purchase an exotic island in the indian ocean instead of the pacific. Not sure how he would survive.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Feb 1, 2018 13:34:29 GMT -5
I wasn't looking at it through owners eyes, I was through fans...Owners have plenty of money, just wondering where it stops! remember a few years ago Arod was making as much as the whole Marlins roster or something close I believe. Prob not a great example because they were being cheap! This monster inflation will only hurt the fans in the longrun.How? By not signing players that would make the team better because the budget is spent. Maybe this would make it easier for you to understand. Put the luxury tax at $500 million but limit player contracts to 5 years. The owners would spend way more money and fans wouldn't have to suffer with Albert Pujols playing below replacement level for 5 years. edit - And if you expect the team to only ever give out good and smart contracts, then that team isn't going to sign many good players, if any. The model is that you have to give out stupid way-too-long contracts if you want the best free agents on your team at any given time.
|
|
|
Post by wildcardwillie on Feb 1, 2018 14:03:47 GMT -5
I wasn't looking at it through owners eyes, I was through fans...Owners have plenty of money, just wondering where it stops! remember a few years ago Arod was making as much as the whole Marlins roster or something close I believe. Prob not a great example because they were being cheap! This monster inflation will only hurt the fans in the longrun.How? Ticket Prices and Fenway Franks!!!
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Feb 1, 2018 14:07:59 GMT -5
Ticket Prices and Fenway Franks!!! Ok but how about a reason that hasn't been disproven an infinite number of times?
|
|
|
Post by wildcardwillie on Feb 1, 2018 14:17:36 GMT -5
It handcuffs teams from adding talent, I look at it from a standpoint like the Cleveland Cavaliers, Lebron cries every year about them not having enough talent, but wants max contract, if max was more, no telling what he would want then add a bunch of guys get old and have no trade pieces...Thats why someone like Pedy taking a team friendly discount is huge.
|
|
|
Post by wildcardwillie on Feb 1, 2018 14:21:57 GMT -5
There are many teams that don't operate anywhere near the Cap.. those teams really don't have a chance at adding a 30-40 mil guy. I do get it though if they wanna get big names you gotta spend money, but if you do and it doesn't work out you are screwed!
|
|
|
Post by Don Caballero on Feb 1, 2018 14:26:49 GMT -5
As it stands, the Dodgers spent more money on payroll than 7 teams in the league had for total revenue. If you want to increase that chasm, what's the point of having those teams?
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Feb 1, 2018 14:35:28 GMT -5
By not signing players that would make the team better because the budget is spent. Maybe this would make it easier for you to understand. Put the luxury tax at $500 million but limit player contracts to 5 years. The owners would spend way more money and fans wouldn't have to suffer with Albert Pujols playing below replacement level for 5 years. edit - And if you expect the team to only ever give out good and smart contracts, then that team isn't going to sign many good players, if any. The model is that you have to give out stupid way-too-long contracts if you want the best free agents on your team at any given time. But some team is going to sign these players. You can't blame the system for allowing teams to sign stupid contracts. Organizations should hire people who aren't stupid who won't sign stupid contracts. The problem I'm seeing described - that it's a shame that players are signing large contracts because they're handcuffing teams from making other moves - is not a problem with the game. It's a problem with specific executives.
|
|
redsox04071318champs
Veteran
Always hoping to make my handle even longer...
Posts: 15,666
Member is Online
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Feb 1, 2018 16:32:50 GMT -5
By not signing players that would make the team better because the budget is spent. Maybe this would make it easier for you to understand. Put the luxury tax at $500 million but limit player contracts to 5 years. The owners would spend way more money and fans wouldn't have to suffer with Albert Pujols playing below replacement level for 5 years. edit - And if you expect the team to only ever give out good and smart contracts, then that team isn't going to sign many good players, if any. The model is that you have to give out stupid way-too-long contracts if you want the best free agents on your team at any given time. But some team is going to sign these players. You can't blame the system for allowing teams to sign stupid contracts. Organizations should hire people who aren't stupid who won't sign stupid contracts.
The problem I'm seeing described - that it's a shame that players are signing large contracts because they're handcuffing teams from making other moves - is not a problem with the game. It's a problem with specific executives. Isn't that's kind of what is happening, though? Guys running the FO these days are ivy league SABR types, and they know that free agency is a losing proposition, so those offers are going away. Agents like Boras don't seem to understand that times are now different and team executives no longer are willing to make such stupid mistakes anymore, but Boras keeps acting like his clients are entitled to these stupid deals because they've been so spoiled over the years with so many executives making such bad decisions (which at times are also made on the ownership level). Then the players cry, "Collusion" Guess the only way to avoid that cry is to hand out stupid contracts. The system is so broken. Honestly I feel no sympathy for either side. I don't care to see owners pocket ridiculous profits. Players make so much money that the average working man/woman can't relate to them. We are definitely headed for a showdown and that will further fan apathy for the game.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Feb 1, 2018 16:37:53 GMT -5
You know what would help combat players not living up to their mega Contracts? Steroids..
|
|
|
Post by ramireja on Feb 1, 2018 16:42:26 GMT -5
You know what would help combat players not living up to their mega Contracts? Steroids.. Quick, call Vince McMahon and make your pitch for the XLB!
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Feb 1, 2018 17:20:32 GMT -5
By not signing players that would make the team better because the budget is spent. Maybe this would make it easier for you to understand. Put the luxury tax at $500 million but limit player contracts to 5 years. The owners would spend way more money and fans wouldn't have to suffer with Albert Pujols playing below replacement level for 5 years. edit - And if you expect the team to only ever give out good and smart contracts, then that team isn't going to sign many good players, if any. The model is that you have to give out stupid way-too-long contracts if you want the best free agents on your team at any given time. But some team is going to sign these players. You can't blame the system for allowing teams to sign stupid contracts. Organizations should hire people who aren't stupid who won't sign stupid contracts. The problem I'm seeing described - that it's a shame that players are signing large contracts because they're handcuffing teams from making other moves - is not a problem with the game. It's a problem with specific executives. Then if your team has smart executives, your team will only be able to sign good players for a reasonable contract if there is no competition in singing them, while other teams get the best players by being stupid. It's just such a stupid system. It greatly rewards stupidity in the short term. I mean basically, the Red Sox will soon be in position where their choices are to let all of their players go into free agency leaving them with an absolute disaster of a situation for years or be stupid by re-signing some of them to stupid contracts because some other team will do it.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Feb 1, 2018 17:21:44 GMT -5
You know what would help combat players not living up to their mega Contracts? Steroids.. I hope you never had kids who had professional sports aspirations. Or would you buy them the steroids so they can compete? C'mon.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Feb 1, 2018 17:33:22 GMT -5
But some team is going to sign these players. You can't blame the system for allowing teams to sign stupid contracts. Organizations should hire people who aren't stupid who won't sign stupid contracts. The problem I'm seeing described - that it's a shame that players are signing large contracts because they're handcuffing teams from making other moves - is not a problem with the game. It's a problem with specific executives. Then if your team has smart executives, your team will only be able to sign good players for a reasonable contract if there is no competition in singing them, while other teams get the best players by being stupid. It's just such a stupid system. It greatly rewards stupidity in the short term. I mean basically, the Red Sox will soon be in position where their choices are to let all of their players go into free agency leaving them with an absolute disaster of a situation for years or be stupid by re-signing some of them to stupid contracts because some other team will do it. In your first sentence, you are literally describing how a free market works. If there are multiple bidders, you set how much you are willing to pay for a player. If another team wants to pay that player more, it's their problem because you have judged the player to not be worth that much money. Again, that is not stupid. That is how demand for a scarce commodity works in a free market. If the Red Sox deem their players to all be getting more money than they're worth and let them walk, then that's their decision regarding evaluations of each players. That's not a problem with the system.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Feb 1, 2018 18:14:21 GMT -5
Then if your team has smart executives, your team will only be able to sign good players for a reasonable contract if there is no competition in singing them, while other teams get the best players by being stupid. It's just such a stupid system. It greatly rewards stupidity in the short term. I mean basically, the Red Sox will soon be in position where their choices are to let all of their players go into free agency leaving them with an absolute disaster of a situation for years or be stupid by re-signing some of them to stupid contracts because some other team will do it. In your first sentence, you are literally describing how a free market works. If there are multiple bidders, you set how much you are willing to pay for a player. If another team wants to pay that player more, it's their problem because you have judged the player to not be worth that much money. Again, that is not stupid. That is how demand for a scarce commodity works in a free market. If the Red Sox deem their players to all be getting more money than they're worth and let them walk, then that's their decision regarding evaluations of each players. That's not a problem with the system. Well we're discussing how fans suffer from this. Either the team is stupid or they lose all their good players to stupid teams. And yeah, I'm saying this as a fan of the Red Sox which will be facing these horrible decisions that are coming up in the next 2 years. They can either re-sign their great young core to stupid contracts or lose them without any help coming from the farm system.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Feb 1, 2018 18:24:58 GMT -5
You know what would help combat players not living up to their mega Contracts? Steroids.. I hope you never had kids who had professional sports aspirations. Or would you buy them the steroids so they can compete? C'mon. Would never put steroids into a young developing body unless medically necessary. But i really don’t care if major league players do them or not. I’m basically fine with grown adults doing whatever they please.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Feb 1, 2018 18:35:14 GMT -5
I hope you never had kids who had professional sports aspirations. Or would you buy them the steroids so they can compete? C'mon. Would never put steroids into a young developing body unless medically necessary. But i really don’t care if major league players do them or not. I’m basically fine with grown adults doing whatever they please. That would absolutely encourage every aspiring young athlete to do steroids. You're literally telling them that this is how you become a professional player.
|
|
|