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.
Baseball salary economics
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Dec 23, 2014 7:51:09 GMT -5
Yeah, Scott Boras has represented some players who then got hurt or didn't play well at the end of their contracts. Other agents have represented players who did that, and players who Boras represented have been worth their contracts. The Boras hate is such "Yankees Suck"-bumper sticker, fanboy BS. Sorry. I get where it comes from because everyone thinks that professional athletes should be members of the only profession where people perform their jobs for free even though they have about a 10-15-year window of earning potential and line the pockets of the billionaires who own the teams. But really, it's such crap. Boras is the best in the world at what he does. If I played baseball, I'd want him working for me too. And yes, that's what the relationship is - the agent works for the player. Players who let him dictate what they do would let any other agent do the same, and they pay Boras to be the bad guy so that they don't have to get that label. Good for Boras if he gets Scherzer way more money than he's worth - that's what he's supposed to do. There is a little room in between free and $200 million. It's not the Yankees Suck mantra. It's the Money is Ruining Sports mantra. Boras is the poster child for that and that's where the hate comes from (for me anyway). I wish the owners didn't get as much money either. But people are dumb enough to pay it I guess. The way players are paid sucks. It puts so many of them in positions where they have an embarrassingly overpaid contract that cripples the team and annoys the fans. I mean Josh Hamilton made $3 million when he won the MVP and will be making $90 million over the next three years. |
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871 
|
Post by danr on Dec 23, 2014 11:35:01 GMT -5
Re: those pitchers coming on the market next year...
Sometime back I read that the players are going to try to increase their share of revenues in the next negotiation. With baseball's revenues continuing to rise, if they succeed, there will be more large contracts. However, they also are going to have to get the salary cap raised, maybe considerably.
The average player salary now is above $3 million and rising.
Much of the rise in revenues is due to TV contracts. I wonder how much of the growth in viewers is due to three things:
First, the development - and subsequent steep drop in prices - of large flat screen TVs;
Second, that cable and satellite channels carry all the games of the major league sports teams and;
Third, more people watching sports events at low cost, as a substitute for more expensive entertainment.
MLB has been very smart to exploit the technologies.
And yes, those pitchers who continue to pitch like they have will get large contracts next year
|
|
|
|
Post by suttree on Dec 23, 2014 11:40:23 GMT -5
Even with some highly overpaid veterans the economics of the game still overwhelmingly favors ownership. A guy like Nava will probably accumulate less than $1MM per WAR for his whole career. Peanuts in a $9 Billion a year industry.
|
|
|
|
Post by brianthetaoist on Dec 23, 2014 12:04:41 GMT -5
Yeah, Scott Boras has represented some players who then got hurt or didn't play well at the end of their contracts. Other agents have represented players who did that, and players who Boras represented have been worth their contracts. The Boras hate is such "Yankees Suck"-bumper sticker, fanboy BS. Sorry. I get where it comes from because everyone thinks that professional athletes should be members of the only profession where people perform their jobs for free even though they have about a 10-15-year window of earning potential and line the pockets of the billionaires who own the teams. But really, it's such crap. Boras is the best in the world at what he does. If I played baseball, I'd want him working for me too. And yes, that's what the relationship is - the agent works for the player. Players who let him dictate what they do would let any other agent do the same, and they pay Boras to be the bad guy so that they don't have to get that label. Good for Boras if he gets Scherzer way more money than he's worth - that's what he's supposed to do. There is a little room in between free and $200 million. It's not the Yankees Suck mantra. It's the Money is Ruining Sports mantra. Boras is the poster child for that and that's where the hate comes from (for me anyway). I wish the owners didn't get as much money either. But people are dumb enough to pay it I guess. The way players are paid sucks. It puts so many of them in positions where they have an embarrassingly overpaid contract that cripples the team and annoys the fans. I mean Josh Hamilton made $3 million when he won the MVP and will be making $90 million over the next three years. The players are the absolute last people to blame for this ... the money is the money. We're to blame for that; if we didn't watch/read/buy so much baseball-related product, there wouldn't be all the money flowing into the owners' pockets. But, since we do and since there is, I'm all for the players getting as much of that money as possible. The real equity issue is not that free agent players are overpaid but that younger players are grossly underpaid. If the money was spread out a little more fairly, you wouldn't have so much money sloshing around for the free agents and younger guys would get compensated more in line with their contributions. |
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Dec 23, 2014 14:18:47 GMT -5
It's not the Yankees Suck mantra. It's the Money is Ruining Sports mantra. Boras is the poster child for that and that's where the hate comes from (for me anyway). I wish the owners didn't get as much money either. But people are dumb enough to pay it I guess. The way players are paid sucks. It puts so many of them in positions where they have an embarrassingly overpaid contract that cripples the team and annoys the fans. I mean Josh Hamilton made $3 million when he won the MVP and will be making $90 million over the next three years. Same difference, imo. I get that baseball's money structure doesn't make sense. But money isn't ruining sports. Owner/front office stupidity isn't "money ruining sports." |
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Dec 23, 2014 14:24:16 GMT -5
It's not the Yankees Suck mantra. It's the Money is Ruining Sports mantra. Boras is the poster child for that and that's where the hate comes from (for me anyway). I wish the owners didn't get as much money either. But people are dumb enough to pay it I guess. The way players are paid sucks. It puts so many of them in positions where they have an embarrassingly overpaid contract that cripples the team and annoys the fans. I mean Josh Hamilton made $3 million when he won the MVP and will be making $90 million over the next three years. Same difference, imo. I get that baseball's money structure doesn't make sense. But money isn't ruining sports. Owner/front office stupidity isn't "money ruining sports." That is easier to say as a Red Sox fan who doesn't have to worry about sticking to an $80 million payroll. |
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Dec 23, 2014 14:27:20 GMT -5
Re: those pitchers coming on the market next year... Sometime back I read that the players are going to try to increase their share of revenues in the next negotiation. With baseball's revenues continuing to rise, if they succeed, there will be more large contracts. However, they also are going to have to get the salary cap raised, maybe considerably. The average player salary now is above $3 million and rising. There is no salary cap in baseball. The percentage of revenues that goes to players is not collectively bargained for. Unlikely the other three majors sports leagues, owners can pay however much they want to whomever they want. The luxury tax does somewhat constrain the ability of teams/owners to spend, but it is not a hard cap and plenty of teams have been content to spend above it for multiple years at a time. |
|
|
|
Post by elguapo on Dec 23, 2014 14:56:59 GMT -5
But, the MLBPA deems it more important that there be no cap on the high end of the salary scale. It is a very unfortunate and unfair situation. Guys like Nava are one sustained slump away from not only being out of baseball but working at a used car lot or worse - living in a van down by the river. And, while you're living there, you may as well get comfortable, since your pension won't kick in until you're 62. In the meantime, those poor scrubs are making a half million a year to play a game. Let's not kid around. Regarding the relatively low starting MLB salaries, I always think of the years of development that go into preparing young players to play in the majors. There is currently a huge financial incentive for teams to invest in these kids, which is a great thing for the players and for the game.... how would that be impacted if team contractual control or the benefit of modest salaries was dramatically reduced? The #1 thing I would like to see is a bump in minor league salaries. Minor league baseball is such a wonderful and, it seems to me, underutilized part of the game in terms of marketing the sport. |
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Dec 23, 2014 15:13:07 GMT -5
But, the MLBPA deems it more important that there be no cap on the high end of the salary scale. It is a very unfortunate and unfair situation. Guys like Nava are one sustained slump away from not only being out of baseball but working at a used car lot or worse - living in a van down by the river. And, while you're living there, you may as well get comfortable, since your pension won't kick in until you're 62. In the meantime, those poor scrubs are making a half million a year to play a game. Let's not kid around. Regarding the relatively low starting MLB salaries, I always think of the years of development that go into preparing young players to play in the majors. There is currently a huge financial incentive for teams to invest in these kids, which is a great thing for the players and for the game.... how would that be impacted if team contractual control or the benefit of modest salaries was dramatically reduced? The #1 thing I would like to see is a bump in minor league salaries. Minor league baseball is such a wonderful and, it seems to me, underutilized part of the game in terms of marketing the sport. Sounds like something a kid in China would say to an American making $8 an hour. It's all relative. I wish there were a lot of standard incentives for every player. |
|
|
|
Post by johnsilver52 on Dec 23, 2014 15:23:59 GMT -5
If there was a need to raise the salaries in the minor leagues, especially those at the AAA level as long as some attempt to play that level? Gys would continue playing for sometimes 10 or more years with little to no hope of ever reaching the big leagues. It's become a regular job to them, only they have to work less than 12 months per year with more than just 2-3 weeks of vacation.
|
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Dec 23, 2014 15:32:10 GMT -5
Just because minor league baseball players only get paid six months a year doesn't mean they only work six months a year. If you really think that players who hang on at Triple-A are slackers who are only doing it because they don't want to start their real life, wow.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Dec 23, 2014 15:49:42 GMT -5
Same difference, imo. I get that baseball's money structure doesn't make sense. But money isn't ruining sports. Owner/front office stupidity isn't "money ruining sports." That is easier to say as a Red Sox fan who doesn't have to worry about sticking to an $80 million payroll. What does that have to do with it? Again, that's the sport's salary structure. If a bad player gets himself in a bad count and can't hit the ensuing curveball, we don't say it's unfair that he was in a bad count. Either learn to hit the curve and/or stay out of bad counts. If an owner limits payroll and the team signs a guy to an awful contract, then they either should have been smarter or should expand payroll. It's not "unfair" that said owner won't sell to another owner who would spend more. It's a competitive issue to take up with that owner or front office. |
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Dec 23, 2014 15:51:01 GMT -5
If there was a need to raise the salaries in the minor leagues, especially those at the AAA level as long as some attempt to play that level? Gys would continue playing for sometimes 10 or more years with little to no hope of ever reaching the big leagues. It's become a regular job to them, only they have to work less than 12 months per year with more than just 2-3 weeks of vacation. With all due respect, this is one of the more insane things I've ever read here. |
|
|
|
Post by johnsilver52 on Dec 23, 2014 18:37:54 GMT -5
If there was a need to raise the salaries in the minor leagues, especially those at the AAA level as long as some attempt to play that level? Gys would continue playing for sometimes 10 or more years with little to no hope of ever reaching the big leagues. It's become a regular job to them, only they have to work less than 12 months per year with more than just 2-3 weeks of vacation. With all due respect, this is one of the more insane things I've ever read here. Just how is it insane? 6 months, even at AAA min 2100 per month spread over 6 months, meal money included is a LOT more than many of the players who choose to make a career out of MiLB than they would make in their home Caribbean isles. Don't think owners know that Chris? You are fooling yourself if not. Many who play the game for a handful of years, realize they have no chance, just hang 'em up and move onto other things, then there are the guys who NEED that money with nothing better to do, or there are no hope back home. Not trying to say anything that everyone doesn't realize, but people have to think sometimes about the obvious if they have ever been to a Caribbean isle and past the locales where the cruise ship told you to stop at. It's dirt poor, it's bad and very sad. |
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Dec 24, 2014 1:41:39 GMT -5
I guess this is the "baseball players as welfare queens" gambit? The only question I have is are they paid an amount that reflects the value they bring to a team? What do you think would happen if MLB instituted a free market in MiLB talent tomorrow, with no restraint on movement or salaries? Willing to hazard a guess?
|
|
|
|
Post by johnsilver52 on Dec 24, 2014 10:21:18 GMT -5
I guess this is the "baseball players as welfare queens" gambit? The only question I have is are they paid an amount that reflects the value they bring to a team? What do you think would happen if MLB instituted a free market in MiLB talent tomorrow, with no restraint on movement or salaries? Willing to hazard a guess? Think they do Norm. MiLB players are free to walk anywhere they wish after 5-6 seasons, depending and can sign for as much as they are able to get, problem is that I just don't see the real value in giving away "the farm" so to speak for a late 20's to 30's career MiLB player, who at most a MLB *MIGHT* in dire emergency, call up for a couple of games if someone gets hurt. Most teams have someone that they developed, or can sign for the AAA minimum. As for the Free market? MLB itself doesn't even have it, but has the reserve clause still intact after all these years. |
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Dec 24, 2014 11:19:49 GMT -5
I guess this is the "baseball players as welfare queens" gambit? The only question I have is are they paid an amount that reflects the value they bring to a team? What do you think would happen if MLB instituted a free market in MiLB talent tomorrow, with no restraint on movement or salaries? Willing to hazard a guess? Think they do Norm. MiLB players are free to walk anywhere they wish after 5-6 seasons, depending and can sign for as much as they are able to get, problem is that I just don't see the real value in giving away "the farm" so to speak for a late 20's to 30's career MiLB player, who at most a MLB *MIGHT* in dire emergency, call up for a couple of games if someone gets hurt. Most teams have someone that they developed, or can sign for the AAA minimum. As for the Free market? MLB itself doesn't even have it, but has the reserve clause still intact after all these years. So you're saying that minor league baseball players are worth below minimum wage? And by the way, they don't get paid at all during spring training and Fall Instructs and the like. The fact is that most minor leaguers work for between $3,000 and $7,500 for the year. Nobody is saying to pay them the major league minimum, but it's insane that for a year of baseball some of these guys are paid what I'm guessing a good number people who post on this forum make in a month is appalling. If your son took a job that paid him $5,000 total plus a shitty per diem for the time period between mid-February and mid-October, during which he'd be working 50-70 hours per week, you'd be ok with that? |
|
|
|
Post by johnsilver52 on Dec 24, 2014 12:08:02 GMT -5
Think they do Norm. MiLB players are free to walk anywhere they wish after 5-6 seasons, depending and can sign for as much as they are able to get, problem is that I just don't see the real value in giving away "the farm" so to speak for a late 20's to 30's career MiLB player, who at most a MLB *MIGHT* in dire emergency, call up for a couple of games if someone gets hurt. Most teams have someone that they developed, or can sign for the AAA minimum. As for the Free market? MLB itself doesn't even have it, but has the reserve clause still intact after all these years. So you're saying that minor league baseball players are worth below minimum wage? And by the way, they don't get paid at all during spring training and Fall Instructs and the like. The fact is that most minor leaguers work for between $3,000 and $7,500 for the year. Nobody is saying to pay them the major league minimum, but it's insane that for a year of baseball some of these guys are paid what I'm guessing a good number people who post on this forum make in a month is appalling. If your son took a job that paid him $5,000 total plus a shitty per diem for the time period between mid-February and mid-October, during which he'd be working 50-70 hours per week, you'd be ok with that? No I'm not Chris and I googled it yesterday to see what it was.. 1100. per month for rookie ball and 2150 for AAA. Am not saying it's a princley sum by any means, even it's much above min wage for the Rookie ball. You can add probably 20-25. per day for the lowest levels per day for food when on the road and some kind of spreads every day also at games. Lowest levels **might** have some kind of housing options for younger players for say the DSL and GCL Sox? I haven't seen anything like that posted here, but has crossed my mind before. Players will "bunk up", meaning 3.. Even 4 to a dbl room apt, condo, have seen that before back in the HaSox days to save money. Think my point was kind of misconstrued though. I have no issues with ball players (MilB) getting more, though as long as there is a glut of career MiLB players who refuse to go away? My question is, why should they? The MLBPA has shown that they really don't care about UD players and not much more about MLB quality layers either, they are not members of the MLBPA union (yet) for the much part and thus, not dues paying members. They will happily bargain away anything having to do with that area. See? They have both sides against them as it is. I remember Pete Ladd showing me his check once back in like.. 77..78.. Forget and it was .like 400. You account for inflation and how much is 1150 now for an A ball player? It's gone down counting for inflation hasn't it. |
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Dec 24, 2014 12:50:29 GMT -5
OK, so that's $5500-$10,750 per year. Point stands.
As for your point about a "glut of players", teams need to want to keep the players around for them to stay around. The ones than want to but aren't signed basically make up the Indy Leagues. At least I think that's what you're saying - I'm not entirely sure what your point is right now.
|
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Dec 24, 2014 12:58:37 GMT -5
There is an insane amount of money in baseball today. I don't know where people think it should be spent, but is it the first $40 million/year player? His salary alone would probably be able to double to triple the salaries of all minor league players. I'm not sure how many minor league players there are, so that's just a guess.
|
|
|
|
Post by johnsilver52 on Dec 24, 2014 13:12:38 GMT -5
OK, so that's $5500-$10,750 per year. Point stands. As for your point about a "glut of players", teams need to want to keep the players around for them to stay around. The ones than want to but aren't signed basically make up the Indy Leagues. At least I think that's what you're saying - I'm not entirely sure what your point is right now. Then you can add in whatever bonus many of those players received upon signing. Think many teams count upon players hanging around, only because they dream of one day making it big. Look at it this way Chris.. Why do so many kids play College B/Ball and F/ball when their chances are remote of making 1 dime? Those leagues don't even have a minor league to hope for. They play for the love of the sport. Same with theses career minor leaguers and Indy leaguers. Same with the guys going to college on sports scholarships with no business being anywhere near one.. They just want to play that sport professionally. |
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Dec 24, 2014 13:22:10 GMT -5
There is no such thing as a player who refuses to go away. That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard. They are either signed or not. They can't hang on if they aren't wanted.
|
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Dec 24, 2014 14:44:47 GMT -5
OK, so that's $5500-$10,750 per year. Point stands. As for your point about a "glut of players", teams need to want to keep the players around for them to stay around. The ones than want to but aren't signed basically make up the Indy Leagues. At least I think that's what you're saying - I'm not entirely sure what your point is right now. His point is that there are enough people willing to do it for the salary they get now, therefore the system is fair. It's the same argument that one would make about any attempt to raise a minimum wage. |
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Dec 24, 2014 14:56:29 GMT -5
OK, so that's $5500-$10,750 per year. Point stands. As for your point about a "glut of players", teams need to want to keep the players around for them to stay around. The ones than want to but aren't signed basically make up the Indy Leagues. At least I think that's what you're saying - I'm not entirely sure what your point is right now. His point is that there are enough people willing to do it for the salary they get now, therefore the system is fair. It's the same argument that one would make about any attempt to raise a minimum wage. This goes back to complaining about athletes getting paid insane amounts of money to play a game. Minor league baseball does pretty much everything to prepare most players that end up in the majors. There is no need to make them live like slaves just because a lot have the hopes of making it to the big leagues. There is nothing free market about baseball. This isn't anything at all like minimum wage for US citizens. It's more similar to the minimum wage in the majors. |
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Dec 24, 2014 15:02:54 GMT -5
Just to be clear: I absolutely think the minor league minimum should be increased. I think it's good for the game (better living standards = better nutrition, etc.) and a more equitable distribution of baseball's considerable income. I just wanted to clarify the point he was trying to make, which is that in a free market system, wages should be set by the market.
Of course, the real solution is to eliminate the dumb antitrust exemption and then sue MLB for collusion/price-fixing.
|
|
|
