|
Post by prospectlove on Mar 10, 2022 16:21:33 GMT -5
The Rule 5 draft is canceled, which I'm kind of glad about. Great news! I felt for sure Feltman, German, and Santos would be gone with a good possibility for Gimenez, although not sure he could stick the whole year. This is an added bonus for “depth based” teams. I predict almost 80% likely that this time next year we are happy we didn’t lose atleast one of those players. ( good luck measuring that prediction. I don’t even know how to quantify it) Simply saying I think atleast one of those players will be a definite keeper on the 40 man roster next year and be seen as a contributor to the 2023 team in a meaningful manner
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Mar 10, 2022 16:23:19 GMT -5
As much as I would like to hear that baseball is about to start, I think it's important that the players push back one more time. The reason is that the end-values on CBT and minimum salary will put them into a similar dilemma that they're in now, the next time the CBA expires. Over the life of this CBA the CBT is currently set to increase at ~1.5% annually while the minimum salary increases at ~2.7%. If we assume that inflation remains over 3% during the life of this deal then the players' buying power will diminish and if we assume that baseball revenue continues to grow at a much higher rate (safe to assume right now) then the players may find that their share of revenue is even lower 5 years from now than it is today. If the players sign today, then I expect another lockout in 5 years with the owners once again attempting to retain the status quo. Edit: Well, I guess they said yes. See you guys on this thread again in 5 years. Minimum went from $570,500 to $700,000 to start with, an 22.7% increase over the last CBA. I think they did darn well there, from start to finish 36.7% higher than last CBA. I just don’t see the issue going from $570,500 to $780,00 in five years. Let's wait on the those CBT rules, that is likely a problem.
|
|
|
Post by chr31ter on Mar 10, 2022 16:36:13 GMT -5
This is potentially significant...
|
|
|
Post by Gwell55 on Mar 10, 2022 16:38:30 GMT -5
Curious why New York teams would vote no. Well with Scherzer and Cole voting no I wouldn't need to think long on anyone their would go against them.
|
|
|
Post by grandsalami on Mar 10, 2022 16:44:14 GMT -5
I think it’s the kris Bryant rule.
Ie a player who is clearly ready being held down in the minors for service time reasons.
|
|
|
Post by julyanmorley on Mar 10, 2022 16:45:04 GMT -5
This is potentially significant... Wait, did they just kill underslot deals?
|
|
|
Post by ematz1423 on Mar 10, 2022 16:51:04 GMT -5
This is potentially significant... Wait, did they just kill underslot deals? Not necessarily, looking at this year in particular if my math is correct. The pirates slotted bonus at 1st was 8,415,300. 75 percent of that is 6,311,475 and Davis signed for 6,500,000.00. I'm not going to go through the whole draft to check but I'm sure at least a few signings would have come in under than 75 percent though. Edit: I was curious and once again if my math was right frank mozzicato to KC at number 7 signed for less than 75 percent of the slotted bonus for that pick.
|
|
|
Post by jerrygarciaparra on Mar 10, 2022 16:53:25 GMT -5
There will enough time to diagnose the CBA. For now, I am ecstatic for the return on my beloved.
BOSTON RED SOX !!
|
|
|
Post by greatscottcooper on Mar 10, 2022 16:54:32 GMT -5
Wait, did they just kill underslot deals? Not necessarily, looking at this year in particular if my math is correct. The pirates slotted bonus at 1st was 8,415,300. 75 percent of that is 6,311,475 and Davis signed for 6,500,000.00. I'm not going to go through the whole draft to check but I'm sure at least a few signings would have come in under than 75 percent though. 25% savings starts getting drastically smaller after the first dozen picks or so. Maybe we see more under slot deals at the top but no more senior signs and saving hundreds of thousands on picks in rounds 3-10
|
|
|
Post by bluechip on Mar 10, 2022 17:02:57 GMT -5
Not necessarily, looking at this year in particular if my math is correct. The pirates slotted bonus at 1st was 8,415,300. 75 percent of that is 6,311,475 and Davis signed for 6,500,000.00. I'm not going to go through the whole draft to check but I'm sure at least a few signings would have come in under than 75 percent though. 25% savings starts getting drastically smaller after the first dozen picks or so. Maybe we see more under slot deals at the top but no more senior signs and saving hundreds of thousands on picks in rounds 3-10 Nah. Teams will just draft players who did not submit to physicals. Edit: you just let a hand full of players know you might draft them in the top ten rounds if they don’t submit to a physical.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Mar 10, 2022 17:03:38 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by bluechip on Mar 10, 2022 17:09:04 GMT -5
Curious why New York teams would vote no. I’m more interested in the fact that the MLBPA executive subcommittee was universally against it, but that must team reps were in favor.
|
|
|
Post by julyanmorley on Mar 10, 2022 17:24:18 GMT -5
"Teams that promote top prospects to the Opening Day roster will also be eligible to receive draft picks with Top 3 ROY or Top 5 MVP/CY finish."
Having your prospect make it and then rooting for them to do good in the voting so you can get draft picks sounds like a lot of fun.
|
|
|
Post by Canseco on Mar 10, 2022 17:26:52 GMT -5
There will enough time to diagnose the CBA. For now, I am ecstatic for the return on my beloved. BOSTON RED SOX !!
… brought to you by Lockheed Skunkworks! According to MLB Trade rumors: “ The league also succeeded in its desire to add advertising patches to player uniforms, which will generate tens of millions in revenue itself.” This might be it for me. I can’t have corporate America elbowing in on every possible aspect of the things I love.
|
|
|
Post by foreverred9 on Mar 10, 2022 17:36:17 GMT -5
Curious why New York teams would vote no. I’m more interested in the fact that the MLBPA executive subcommittee was universally against it, but that must team reps were in favor. Interesting indeed. Humans almost always overvalue near term gain (i.e. CBT to 230M) over long term loss (i.e. only growing 14M in 5 years) so my pure speculation is that while the executive committee who has been knee deep in this might not like the long term of the deal the team reps didn’t seem to be aligned. They might just want to play and are happy with the 230M. My opinion is that the owners still are winning against the union. Maybe the players won this but they are still behind where I think they should have been. I’m just glad the owners budged before June, I wasn’t expecting that.
|
|
|
Post by grandsalami on Mar 10, 2022 17:55:15 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by jerrygarciaparra on Mar 10, 2022 17:55:40 GMT -5
LMAO. The Mods took down my rejoice thread. I guess threads that don't have to dissect every nerdy component of baseball aren't welcome.
Some of us just like to watch the game Mods !! Positive, silly emotions, you should try it.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Mar 10, 2022 18:02:11 GMT -5
Alright its 6pm. The freeze is over. You're on the clock Chaim. It's been a minute and there's no new transactions to report
|
|
|
Post by soxinsf on Mar 10, 2022 18:06:56 GMT -5
I’m more interested in the fact that the MLBPA executive subcommittee was universally against it, but that must team reps were in favor. Interesting indeed. Humans almost always overvalue near term gain (i.e. CBT to 230M) over long term loss (i.e. only growing 14M in 5 years) so my pure speculation is that while the executive committee who has been knee deep in this might not like the long term of the deal the team reps didn’t seem to be aligned. They might just want to play and are happy with the 230M. My opinion is that the owners still are winning against the union. Maybe the players won this but they are still behind where I think they should have been. I’m just glad the owners budged before June, I wasn’t expecting that. The reason why the players split from their executive committee is pretty simple. Most of them make a million dollars or more and they are ready to play. They are rich and they are ball players. Yes, maybe they gave up some long range potential, but unlike school teachers, they are neither led by peer activists nor are they underpaid. As for us, we have baseball.
|
|
|
Post by bluechip on Mar 10, 2022 18:08:10 GMT -5
I’m more interested in the fact that the MLBPA executive subcommittee was universally against it, but that must team reps were in favor. Interesting indeed. Humans almost always overvalue near term gain (i.e. CBT to 230M) over long term loss (i.e. only growing 14M in 5 years) so my pure speculation is that while the executive committee who has been knee deep in this might not like the long term of the deal the team reps didn’t seem to be aligned. They might just want to play and are happy with the 230M. My opinion is that the owners still are winning against the union. Maybe the players won this but they are still behind where I think they should have been. I’m just glad the owners budged before June, I wasn’t expecting that. The players, individually do likely wish to play. They have already lost most of one season to COVID, they don’t want lose another to a work stoppage.
|
|
mobaz
Veteran
Posts: 2,797
|
Post by mobaz on Mar 10, 2022 18:15:44 GMT -5
There will enough time to diagnose the CBA. For now, I am ecstatic for the return on my beloved. BOSTON RED SOX !!
… brought to you by Lockheed Skunkworks! According to MLB Trade rumors: “ The league also succeeded in its desire to add advertising patches to player uniforms, which will generate tens of millions in revenue itself.” This might be it for me. I can’t have corporate America elbowing in on every possible aspect of the things I love. ...have you watched a game? Every situation, pitching change, strike zone box, mound visit, inch of all in the park are all covered in ads. Frankly a uni patch might just be lost in the noise. I hope that they do the patches like the NBA which fit pretty seamlessly.
|
|
|
Post by vermontsox1 on Mar 10, 2022 18:26:56 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by grandsalami on Mar 10, 2022 18:27:10 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by natesp4 on Mar 10, 2022 19:02:07 GMT -5
Little concerned about the toxic relationship I'm in with baseball given the massive avalanche of serotonin I got from knowing the emotional manipulation I've endured for 4 months is over.
Now I get to live the rest of my life chasing the high of reading a Jeff Passan "baseball is back" tweet again.
|
|
|
Post by Canseco on Mar 10, 2022 19:03:01 GMT -5
… brought to you by Lockheed Skunkworks! According to MLB Trade rumors: “ The league also succeeded in its desire to add advertising patches to player uniforms, which will generate tens of millions in revenue itself.” This might be it for me. I can’t have corporate America elbowing in on every possible aspect of the things I love. ...have you watched a game? Every situation, pitching change, strike zone box, mound visit, inch of all in the park are all covered in ads. Frankly a uni patch might just be lost in the noise. I hope that they do the patches like the NBA which fit pretty seamlessly. I am very aware. My point is that the uniform was the last bastion of tradition. It’s the uniform Ted Williams wore… now brought to you by Exxon.
|
|