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 thegoodthebadthesox on Nov 12, 2021 1:18:54 GMT -5
I think the solution I'd most like to see is some hybrid of the WAR proposal and NBA elements like a poster noted earlier - mainly, supermax extensions only being available to players who make an All-NBA team or win an award like MVP or DPOY in a particular time frame. This is obviously just a very rough proposal but you have rough "salary bands" that you're eligible for if you achieve a certain WAR or however they want to calculate it. And it'd be rolling, to, so if you have a player like E-Rod that gets unlucky in a season and has a down year by whatever metric they go off of (I know E-Rod had a higher fWAR this year, I'm just making a general example) they'd still be eligible for a higher salary band from their season before. And then obviously winning a Silver Slugger or Gold Glove would make you eligible for the highest salary band and longer contract length.
Obviously there would be a million details that'd need to be ironed out within that, but I think that it does offer a way for compensation to be performance based and a little more structured, while also not screwing a player that had a down year or was unlucky.
|
|
|
Post by ematz1423 on Nov 12, 2021 5:36:37 GMT -5
I just read that the proposal contains the same stupid 29.5 year old threshold for free agency. I also don't care for the WAR based salary idea but if they insist on the 29.5 year old thing we're not probably not going to be seeing a full season in 2022.
|
|
|
Post by costpet on Nov 12, 2021 9:20:25 GMT -5
Total bases for hitters, WHIP for pitchers.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Nov 12, 2021 10:45:30 GMT -5
I think the solution I'd most like to see is some hybrid of the WAR proposal and NBA elements like a poster noted earlier - mainly, supermax extensions only being available to players who make an All-NBA team or win an award like MVP or DPOY in a particular time frame. This is obviously just a very rough proposal but you have rough "salary bands" that you're eligible for if you achieve a certain WAR or however they want to calculate it. And it'd be rolling, to, so if you have a player like E-Rod that gets unlucky in a season and has a down year by whatever metric they go off of (I know E-Rod had a higher fWAR this year, I'm just making a general example) they'd still be eligible for a higher salary band from their season before. And then obviously winning a Silver Slugger or Gold Glove would make you eligible for the highest salary band and longer contract length. Obviously there would be a million details that'd need to be ironed out within that, but I think that it does offer a way for compensation to be performance based and a little more structured, while also not screwing a player that had a down year or was unlucky. Congratulations Joey Gallo and Andrew Benintendi!
|
|
|
Post by baseball3 on Nov 14, 2021 13:25:57 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by julyanmorley on Nov 14, 2021 15:28:40 GMT -5
The median salary is a weird metric to look at. If Xander Bogaerts and his big guaranteed salary goes on the IL, and Jack Lopez is called up for his only cup of coffee of the season, then the median salary goes down but baseball players have made more money.
|
|
|
Post by foreverred9 on Nov 14, 2021 21:52:28 GMT -5
Your point is factually correct, but I see don't how that matters. Adding Jack Lopez might bring the median from 599,965 to 599,946 but does that matter? It's still 600K in my book. I might be missing something though.
My takeaway is that the MLBPA does a horrible job representing their broad constituents. Their focus always tend to be on the big-dollar free agency when they have essentially ignored the folks at the bottom (and have ignored their future members in the MiLB).
These charts are great and show how the inefficiencies in the system, which the MLBPA had a huge part in creating and reinforcing, has been figured out by analytics. Teams have been learning to stay away from the big-dollar contracts for non-elite 30+ and now use entry-level talent to bring in value.
Like I've said further above, blame the system not the teams... but fix the system. I like the direction of the WAR-based compensation, not perfect but a step in the right direction to push dollars to those who deserve it.
|
|
|
Post by baseball3 on Nov 19, 2021 5:23:41 GMT -5
Ohh boy. Lol even he's admitting it's coming, the lockout. At least try to pretend to be positive about it and try to fool us lmao.
|
|
|
Post by baseball3 on Nov 19, 2021 5:35:53 GMT -5
Last post, but related. This is going to be negotiated in next deal, or implemented. It's coming.
|
|
|
Post by vermontsox1 on Nov 19, 2021 11:44:21 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Underwater Johnson on Nov 30, 2021 12:52:29 GMT -5
TB extends Franco (and signs Kluber), TEX and DET open up the vaults, MIA signs a top-25 FA.
Most of these moves make baseball sense (although for TEX only if they think Jack Leiter is going to cash in the first ROY/CY double in history) but is it possible that owners are anticipating the introduction of a payroll floor? All four of those teams had payrolls lower than $100m last year.
Based on 2021, 18 teams would've been above a $100m floor, with 4 more within $10m of that. Of course, other teams (e.g. OAK, CLE, CIN) are openly slashing their payrolls. Maybe they'd institute it gradually. If it adversely affects less than a third of the owners, it should have a good chance of happening.
It would be a pretty big bone to throw to the union, in exchange for keeping the gains they made in the last CBA and (obviously) asking for more (like a lower CBT). It would also be good PR for the league and bring more excitement to fans in places like PIT, KC, BAL and those already mentioned.
It could also make it harder to do a complete tear-down tank job, since a $100m payroll is bound to have some decent players on it and a top-5 draft position wouldn't be as much of a guarantee. (I suppose teams that are bent on tanking could trade for bad contracts, like Chris Davis or Miggy Cabrera, along with good prospects, to get their payrolls up to par -- wouldn't the fans love that?)
It's already been floated and there may already be rosters moving in that direction, so something to keep an eye on.
|
|
|
Post by baseball3 on Nov 30, 2021 16:10:38 GMT -5
We are about to see no moves made until CBA is ratified, which could take until February. Trades and signings need to pass physicals in order to be completed. That takes usually a day.
The MLBPA and MLB had a meeting today that lasted 30 minutes and everyone stormed off and left. So this is going to be fun hearing about this drama for the next 2 months. Can't wait.
|
|
|
Post by prospectlove on Nov 30, 2021 17:05:19 GMT -5
We are about to see no moves made until CBA is ratified, which could take until February. Trades and signings need to pass physicals in order to be completed. That takes usually a day. The MLBPA and MLB had a meeting today that lasted 30 minutes and everyone stormed off and left. So this is going to be fun hearing about this drama for the next 2 months. Can't wait. And JUST how ugly does this get?? Fans won't be to frustrated tomorrow or into December with the holidays coming up. However, if come February and March and still no baseball then I suspect fans and sponsors will start to apply pressure. It's sad because the league has momentum also.
|
|
|
Post by baseball3 on Nov 30, 2021 17:46:02 GMT -5
We are about to see no moves made until CBA is ratified, which could take until February. Trades and signings need to pass physicals in order to be completed. That takes usually a day. The MLBPA and MLB had a meeting today that lasted 30 minutes and everyone stormed off and left. So this is going to be fun hearing about this drama for the next 2 months. Can't wait. And JUST how ugly does this get?? Fans won't be to frustrated tomorrow or into December with the holidays coming up. However, if come February and March and still no baseball then I suspect fans and sponsors will start to apply pressure. It's sad because the league has momentum also. The momentum stuff even has me curious, too. Like for the past 4 years owners have done nothing but surpress payroll (which means salaries). Now all of a "sudden" they show good faith and throw money around like monopoly money? Seems like a ploy to get the players to shut up, especially after the covid season scenario disaster that the owners implemented on the players to get the (only) 60 game season in and get the free playoff revenue out of it. I'm not against capitalism or owners making as much they can. The owners have been acting out of bad faith for a while, however. Just trying to get as much as they can and giving up as little as they can. Even a team like the Yankees are operating like a payroll corporate structure business the past 10 years. The only good owner who has the chance to be good for the sport is Cohen because of the barrier he has the potential to break. He actually doesn't act in a way where the CBT is a issue at all when you're going for a world series. That is the way CBA was intended, instead the owners have used the CBT as a weapon to do the opposite and use that as a salary cap. The players need a clear win on this deal in order to get the owners back on track and care about winning and sharing revenue first. Not making the most dollars. That is what's best for the sport.
|
|
|
Post by foreverred9 on Nov 30, 2021 18:33:23 GMT -5
And JUST how ugly does this get?? Fans won't be to frustrated tomorrow or into December with the holidays coming up. However, if come February and March and still no baseball then I suspect fans and sponsors will start to apply pressure. It's sad because the league has momentum also. The momentum stuff even has me curious, too. Like for the past 4 years owners have done nothing but surpress payroll (which means salaries). Now all of a "sudden" they show good faith and throw money around like monopoly money? Seems like a ploy to get the players to shut up, especially after the covid season scenario disaster that the owners implemented on the players to get the (only) 60 game season in and get the free playoff revenue out of it. I'm not against capitalism or owners making as much they can. The owners have been acting out of bad faith for a while, however. Just trying to get as much as they can and giving up as little as they can. Even a team like the Yankees are operating like a payroll corporate structure business the past 10 years. The only good owner who has the chance to be good for the sport is Cohen because of the barrier he has the potential to break. He actually doesn't act in a way where the CBT is a issue at all when you're going for a world series. That is the way CBA was intended, instead the owners have used the CBT as a weapon to do the opposite and use that as a salary cap. The players need a clear win on this deal in order to get the owners back on track and care about winning and sharing revenue first. Not making the most dollars. That is what's best for the sport. Accusing the owners of bad faith is a serious accusation and needs to be backed up with evidence. What's the basis for your accusation?
|
|
|
Post by baseball3 on Nov 30, 2021 18:36:51 GMT -5
The momentum stuff even has me curious, too. Like for the past 4 years owners have done nothing but surpress payroll (which means salaries). Now all of a "sudden" they show good faith and throw money around like monopoly money? Seems like a ploy to get the players to shut up, especially after the covid season scenario disaster that the owners implemented on the players to get the (only) 60 game season in and get the free playoff revenue out of it. I'm not against capitalism or owners making as much they can. The owners have been acting out of bad faith for a while, however. Just trying to get as much as they can and giving up as little as they can. Even a team like the Yankees are operating like a payroll corporate structure business the past 10 years. The only good owner who has the chance to be good for the sport is Cohen because of the barrier he has the potential to break. He actually doesn't act in a way where the CBT is a issue at all when you're going for a world series. That is the way CBA was intended, instead the owners have used the CBT as a weapon to do the opposite and use that as a salary cap. The players need a clear win on this deal in order to get the owners back on track and care about winning and sharing revenue first. Not making the most dollars. That is what's best for the sport. Accusing the owners of bad faith is a serious accusation and needs to be backed up with evidence. What's the basis for your accusation? I explained why they are? Not getting where you're coming from. The evidence is how they've been acting the past 4 years, especially during 2020. Add- The players know this fact and are not going easy on the owners this time around-
|
|
|
Post by julyanmorley on Nov 30, 2021 18:49:02 GMT -5
Drellich produced a hagiography of Bruce Meyer the other day. I wouldn't count on his characterizations to be neutral.
|
|
|
Post by foreverred9 on Nov 30, 2021 18:52:18 GMT -5
I explained why they are? Not getting where you're coming from. The evidence is how they've been acting the past 4 years, especially during 2020. Add- The players know this fact and are not going easy on the owners this time around- Bad faith implies intentionally being dishonest, trying to deceive, etc. Nothing you said above implies that. Owners lost 3 billion dollars in 2020, using that as an example doesn't help. Just to be clear, I'm not pro-owners, I am 100% behind the players in this negotiation. Revenues grew 20% the past 5 years while average salaries have stayed flat. But that's not bad faith - the system is massively flawed to reward aging veterans in free agency at the expense of younger players who deliver more value. That's a system that the players have collectively bargained for and have wanted. Owners have just gotten smarter and realized they don't need to pay (and play) those aging veterans anymore. I shared some thoughts earlier in this thread that go into more detail, I do think the players need to look hard in the mirror at how they've contributed to where they are today: forum.soxprospects.com/post/508349/thread
|
|
|
Post by baseball3 on Nov 30, 2021 19:32:26 GMT -5
2020 does imply because the players lost 102 games. That's what? 60-70 percent of loss pay? Which would equal out to probably the same 3 billion dollars the owners lost. The players are in a lot worse position to sustain those losses than the owners for sure.
If the owners are skirting the veterans of paying them and they also are taking advantage of the cheap control of the young players, then there's natural dishonesty of the system and the way it was intended to be.
|
|
|
Post by wcsoxfan on Nov 30, 2021 20:30:45 GMT -5
2020 does imply because the players lost 102 games. That's what? 60-70 percent of loss pay? Which would equal out to probably the same 3 billion dollars the owners lost. The players are in a lot worse position to sustain those losses than the owners for sure. If the owners are skirting the veterans of paying them and they also are taking advantage of the cheap control of the young players, then there's natural dishonesty of the system and the way it was intended to be. You seem to have an odd view as to how these negotiations should be going. Both the players and owners SHOULD be negotiating in a manner that benefits their side the most. The owners negotiating a system that benefits them, is smart business and what I would expect from any business in any setting. Nobody goes into a protracted negotiation thinking 'let's just make sure everything is fair' because they will leave clothes-less with coin fair (if they're lucky). I've conducted many negotiations, but typically the side I'm negotiating with and my side have a long-running partnership (or I would like that to be the case), so the negotiation plan from my side is typically 'get as much as we can, but make sure it's still profitable for them'. But in the case of the players and owners, if a 300mil player says 'the owners are all crooks and liars' he's still going to get his 300mil after, and he's still going to sign with an MLB team because they're by-far the biggest game in town. So in a setting where there's no need to play nice, the claws come out and they all go for blood. Part of the issue is that the player's union was negligent in forcing increases of the luxury tax (competitive balance tax). They knew that ownership wanted to use the tax as a form of cap and they should have made sure the tax stayed in-line with revenue, but over the past 20 years the tax has only doubled while the revenue has more than tripled. If the tax was 300mil right now, and they had negotiated a 25-30% floor, then their share of the revenues wouldn't have diminished in the way they have. The other mistake by the players is that they didn't anticipate the owners figuring out that overpaying the young players was far more cost-effective than paying the veterans top-dollar. As the MLBPA gives no care to the minor leaguers and very little care to the young players, this gave them a blind-spot, allowing owners to take advantage. There's also the problem of the Orioles, which was the top-spending team in MLB during the first 3 years of the competitive balance tax (1997-1999) but have fallen to a mid-salary team. Whether this is due to the Nationals eating into their revenue, or Peter Angelos being petty because of the Nationals moving to DC, I can't say. In terms of the players losses vs the owners losses, I'm sure that the players have some costs (maybe a full-time personal trainer/dietician) which are static and apply to their craft, but I doubt there's much. The players didn't make' 70% of their pay, but any losses on their end were negligible (if you get into personal income then you can do the same for the owners). The owners didn't make 70% of their revenue as well, but that includes losses associated with static costs such as stadiums, minor leagues, etc. Check the link from foreverred though, as we've gone through this more thoroughly already.
|
|
|
Post by foreverred9 on Nov 30, 2021 20:42:33 GMT -5
2020 does imply because the players lost 102 games. That's what? 60-70 percent of loss pay? Which would equal out to probably the same 3 billion dollars the owners lost. The players are in a lot worse position to sustain those losses than the owners for sure. If the owners are skirting the veterans of paying them and they also are taking advantage of the cheap control of the young players, then there's natural dishonesty of the system and the way it was intended to be. That's not bad faith, that's not dishonesty. There's clear flaws in the system that have been identified in the past few years (again, the players collectively bargained for this system) and hopefully they work to fix them going forward in the new agreement. I'd like to hope the owners give in and bring player costs as a percent of revenue up, some of these valuations for teams are just ridiculous. I'll be frustrated if they don't, but that's a sign of greed not bad faith.
|
|
|
Post by foreverred9 on Nov 30, 2021 20:59:24 GMT -5
Part of the issue is that the player's union was negligent in forcing increases of the luxury tax (competitive balance tax). They knew that ownership wanted to use the tax as a form of cap and they should have made sure the tax stayed in-line with revenue, but over the past 20 years the tax has only doubled while the revenue has more than tripled. If the tax was 300mil right now, and they had negotiated a 25-30% floor, then their share of the revenues wouldn't have diminished in the way they have. This is a great point, I hadn't realized how dramatically different the luxury tax has grown relative to revenues. It really is negligent how the players have refused to tie anything related to labor costs to the revenue, especially when accepting a soft-cap such as the luxury tax. Replacing Donald Fehr with Tony Clark really seems to have been a huge step back. It shows in the CBT numbers, up only 18% in the 10 years since Fehr left (1.6% per year) compared to 50% in the previous 8 years (5% per year). 2003 - 117M 2007 - 148M 2011 - 178M 2016 - 189M 2021 - 210M
|
|
|
Post by Underwater Johnson on Nov 30, 2021 22:21:44 GMT -5
Your point is factually correct, but I see don't how that matters. Adding Jack Lopez might bring the median from 599,965 to 599,946 but does that matter? It's still 600K in my book. I might be missing something though. My takeaway is that the MLBPA does a horrible job representing their broad constituents. Their focus always tend to be on the big-dollar free agency when they have essentially ignored the folks at the bottom (and have ignored their future members in the MiLB). These charts are great and show how the inefficiencies in the system, which the MLBPA had a huge part in creating and reinforcing, has been figured out by analytics. Teams have been learning to stay away from the big-dollar contracts for non-elite 30+ and now use entry-level talent to bring in value. Like I've said further above, blame the system not the teams... but fix the system. I like the direction of the WAR-based compensation, not perfect but a step in the right direction to push dollars to those who deserve it. The union takes care of the interests of the senior members of the union, like unions everywhere. The senior members of the union are veteran players who have the biggest contracts and pay the largest amounts in dues. This is why the union is so pro-DH, because DHs tend to be veteran players and therefore more likely to be senior in the union. It sucks that the junior, poorer members, the ones who need the union the most, are left out but selfishness is a pretty common human trait. It's no joke that teammates throw big parties for guys who reach the amount of service time to become eligible for a pension, especially career utility guys like AC.
|
|
|
Post by grandsalami on Nov 30, 2021 23:18:00 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by julyanmorley on Nov 30, 2021 23:57:26 GMT -5
If I'm the owners I don't feel bad giving in to all of that except for keeping the 6th year.
Luxury tax limit has to go up if it hasn't even been keeping up with inflation.
Starting arbitration a year early seems pretty minor.
Granting free agency to all 29.5 year olds no matter their service time isn't going to effect very many big money players but is nice for journeyman like Ryan Brasier.
|
|
|