This is the second offseason in a row where so many players are unsigned & we are less than 3 weeks from Spring Training. This includes Harper & Machado. I think this is awful for the sport. From a pure business standpoint, teams could capitalize on merchandise sales if all of this was wrapped up prior to the holiday season (which it used to be).
I’m hopeful this gets resolved by the next CBA, but it absolutely needs to be addressed. MLB should be taking advantage of media exposure with regards to where Harper/Machado sign, but there is absolutely no buzz.
On the contrary, look at the massive buzz created by AD & Porzingis in the NBA this past week. The countdown is already on for the 2019 FA class.
I guess the Padres are in on Harper now? Just a bad look for MLB.
That’s where the pressure to NOT sign comes from
It boggles my mind how MLB functions. Can you imagine the NFL functioning like this? I can't. I mean it would make more sense for NFL players to at least visit potential teams before just signing with a team but even with how crazy NFL FA is I still think that makes more sense than leaving 2 of the top players in MLB who are also young and entering their primes out there on the market.
The new CBA is probably going to go after service time games. Maybe start arbitration earlier, make it pay more to players, and maybe all players can become a UFA at 26 (or something like that) regardless of service time.
Then give up some combination of:
Guaranteed contracts
Unlimited contract size
Unlimited contract length
Unlimited payroll
Owners want to get rid of some combination of above?? Then they might have to deal with:
High payroll floor
Shorter control period for young players
Plus, since 2003, the Yankees have paid $325M in luxury tax to MLB for being over the salary cap. That's a lot of cheddar.
Plus, since 2003, the Yankees have paid $325M in luxury tax to MLB for being over the salary cap. That's a lot of cheddar.
Quote:
Look at the Yankees for example. They gave out a number of big, long term contracts, and although they receive immediate gratification during the early years they were handcuffed in the later years. They paid players like ARod, Tex, and Jacoby huge multi-year contracts and received very average performance from these players in the last few years of their contracts. The team became old and stale overnight.
Plus, since 2003, the Yankees have paid $325M in luxury tax to MLB for being over the salary cap. That's a lot of cheddar.
and that $325M only bought them one WS title
Well worth it IMO
Quote:
In comment 14284252 Beer Man said:
Quote:
Look at the Yankees for example. They gave out a number of big, long term contracts, and although they receive immediate gratification during the early years they were handcuffed in the later years. They paid players like ARod, Tex, and Jacoby huge multi-year contracts and received very average performance from these players in the last few years of their contracts. The team became old and stale overnight.
Plus, since 2003, the Yankees have paid $325M in luxury tax to MLB for being over the salary cap. That's a lot of cheddar.
and that $325M only bought them one WS title
Well worth it IMO
I don't see why. Only a few players are being negatively affected and they will still make enough to choke a horse.
I listen to ARod complain that there should be be a 50-million dollar player by now and think he's nuts. How does that help the majority of players? And BTW, how much did ARod's megadeal help Texas?
The problem with major league baseball is the many young stars who are making $500,000 a year with years to go before they can even get to arbitration. They are way under paid. That's the problem that has to be fixed and it affects a lot of players, players on every team.
Quote:
In comment 14284252 Beer Man said:
Quote:
Look at the Yankees for example. They gave out a number of big, long term contracts, and although they receive immediate gratification during the early years they were handcuffed in the later years. They paid players like ARod, Tex, and Jacoby huge multi-year contracts and received very average performance from these players in the last few years of their contracts. The team became old and stale overnight.
Plus, since 2003, the Yankees have paid $325M in luxury tax to MLB for being over the salary cap. That's a lot of cheddar.
and that $325M only bought them one WS title
Well worth it IMO
As compared to a team like the Giants that won 3 championships since 2010 without paying it?
Quote:
In comment 14284269 Beer Man said:
Quote:
In comment 14284252 Beer Man said:
Quote:
Look at the Yankees for example. They gave out a number of big, long term contracts, and although they receive immediate gratification during the early years they were handcuffed in the later years. They paid players like ARod, Tex, and Jacoby huge multi-year contracts and received very average performance from these players in the last few years of their contracts. The team became old and stale overnight.
Plus, since 2003, the Yankees have paid $325M in luxury tax to MLB for being over the salary cap. That's a lot of cheddar.
and that $325M only bought them one WS title
Well worth it IMO
As compared to a team like the Giants that won 3 championships since 2010 without paying it?
Giants have been over luxury tax threshold 3 times since last CBA..they are hardly paupers (like my Mets are)
Yankees not hurting for profits..Agree here that all the money they spent and continue to spend is worth it.
No one is striking because a Harper is not going to get 10 year 400 million contracts.
In the end a balanced league is in the interest fans. That should be the goal.
Want to socialize MLB? Give every player from day one 5/6 million dollars and at years end the top 10% triple that. I bet the majority of union players would go for that.
Also it doesn’t help that 1/3 of the clients remaining are Boras clients and Boras has recently lost his life lines in Illich and Steinbrenner. You think Harper couldn’t get 7/220 today if he wanted? He wants 300. That is not something you strike over IMO.
Lastly, there is more of a premium on relievers than ever before so they are taking away from the salary of position players.
Quote:
In comment 14284269 Beer Man said:
Quote:
In comment 14284252 Beer Man said:
Quote:
Look at the Yankees for example. They gave out a number of big, long term contracts, and although they receive immediate gratification during the early years they were handcuffed in the later years. They paid players like ARod, Tex, and Jacoby huge multi-year contracts and received very average performance from these players in the last few years of their contracts. The team became old and stale overnight.
Plus, since 2003, the Yankees have paid $325M in luxury tax to MLB for being over the salary cap. That's a lot of cheddar.
and that $325M only bought them one WS title
Well worth it IMO
Sure as fans, its always well worth it when its somebody else's money. But if your a business owner, and its your money, you might look at that differently.
It always makes me laugh when fans side w/the owners.Do a little research & see what their profit margins have been for the last 5 years.It might make you reconsider your opinion!
Exactly.
Quote:
In comment 14284272 TommyWiseau said:
Quote:
In comment 14284269 Beer Man said:
Quote:
In comment 14284252 Beer Man said:
Quote:
Look at the Yankees for example. They gave out a number of big, long term contracts, and although they receive immediate gratification during the early years they were handcuffed in the later years. They paid players like ARod, Tex, and Jacoby huge multi-year contracts and received very average performance from these players in the last few years of their contracts. The team became old and stale overnight.
Plus, since 2003, the Yankees have paid $325M in luxury tax to MLB for being over the salary cap. That's a lot of cheddar.
and that $325M only bought them one WS title
Well worth it IMO
Sure as fans, its always well worth it when its somebody else's money. But if your a business owner, and its your money, you might look at that differently.
It always makes me laugh when fans side w/the owners.Do a little research & see what their profit margins have been for the last 5 years.It might make you reconsider your opinion!
True. However, as owners aren’t they allowed to make money. Why must the owners put abill of their profits back to the players. They are all making crazy money. 500 thousand minumto play baseball. Where do I sign up.
Quote:
The fact that players are being greedy or teams are being smart?
I’ll never understand sports fans that support fat cat owners who have fortunes that are unimaginable to most, over athletes, most of whom have grown up modestly, in these types of debates.
Exactly.
As someone suggested, if Harper and Machado took 5, 6, or 7 year deals, they would be signed already. Offer a higher AAV for shorter years. Or sign a shorter deal 3, 4, or 5 years that gets them a second bite at the apple.
I doubt the entire league strikes because superstars don't get mega deals, it's the masses they usually care about and if league min increases and league average increases why would you strike?
they might strike for other reasons, the way they treat rookies/younger players until they reach free agency seems in need of overhaul, the way they treat the international pool vs draft still needs tweaking IMO, but not the fact Machado and Harper haven't signed 10 year 350M contracts.
Your already starting to see it and will continue to with players like Albert Pujols and Miguel Cabrera. Cabrera is with Detroit until 2023 and he is 35 now lol.
If these super long deals are done, they are probably going to have to be constructed different, like front loading money or giving team more options at end of contract.
Closer to the Yankees, Dodgers, or Red Sox than the Mets...$8M more than they have paid in luxury tax..
Quote:
In comment 14284272 TommyWiseau said:
Quote:
In comment 14284269 Beer Man said:
Quote:
In comment 14284252 Beer Man said:
Quote:
Look at the Yankees for example. They gave out a number of big, long term contracts, and although they receive immediate gratification during the early years they were handcuffed in the later years. They paid players like ARod, Tex, and Jacoby huge multi-year contracts and received very average performance from these players in the last few years of their contracts. The team became old and stale overnight.
Plus, since 2003, the Yankees have paid $325M in luxury tax to MLB for being over the salary cap. That's a lot of cheddar.
and that $325M only bought them one WS title
Well worth it IMO
Sure as fans, its always well worth it when its somebody else's money. But if your a business owner, and its your money, you might look at that differently.
It always makes me laugh when fans side w/the owners.Do a little research & see what their profit margins have been for the last 5 years.It might make you reconsider your opinion!
Quote:
In comment 14284277 Beer Man said:
Quote:
In comment 14284272 TommyWiseau said:
Quote:
In comment 14284269 Beer Man said:
Quote:
In comment 14284252 Beer Man said:
Quote:
Look at the Yankees for example. They gave out a number of big, long term contracts, and although they receive immediate gratification during the early years they were handcuffed in the later years. They paid players like ARod, Tex, and Jacoby huge multi-year contracts and received very average performance from these players in the last few years of their contracts. The team became old and stale overnight.
Plus, since 2003, the Yankees have paid $325M in luxury tax to MLB for being over the salary cap. That's a lot of cheddar.
and that $325M only bought them one WS title
Well worth it IMO
Sure as fans, its always well worth it when its somebody else's money. But if your a business owner, and its your money, you might look at that differently.
It always makes me laugh when fans side w/the owners.Do a little research & see what their profit margins have been for the last 5 years.It might make you reconsider your opinion!
There is nothing to research, they are rich and we all know that. But please feel free to share with all of us your hard hitting research that says owners should have to spend excessively to buy a championship because (in your words) they make too much money.
Well..if the owners don't want to spend then it's certainly their right...
But then don't act like you are actually doing everything in your power to win.
The Mets, for example, have been pushing this narrative that they have been trying to win and put the best product on the field possible. That hasn't been true since 2008... and still isn't this year.
It's the disingenuous messaging that really sucks, not the act itself.