Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'The Mainboard' started by teel, Mar 29, 2018.
Well you're wrong so...
YUP, fuck billionaires and their hoarding. MLB owners are sitting on a free cash cow, that's entirely driven by the players on the field. They should be getting a lot more, because they are creating that value with their labor.
Always on the side of labor. Union, union, union
you’re the only person arguing for the owners here, and we’re all wrong.
you made the claim, so would you mind backing it up? because "you're wrong" isnt really an argument or proof of anything
Is it possible for me to disagree with that tweet while not being on the side of You and You? Because that's where I would like to be.
You still think I'm arguing for the owners...
no. only binary answers for you, robot
Can't the same be said for the owners making even more?
Do you run in circles where the majority of your acquaintances hold these views or anything similar?
I know no one outside this thread who argues athletes aren't fairly compensated.
i personally think it’s great for baseball that the owners are colluding and not paying two of the best players in baseball what they should be as a sign of solidarity. the inevitable strike is going to be awesome.
Says a lot about those that you hang out with.
so baseball should just make less money?
But you're not complaining about them making enough. Why is that?
CHEAPER TICKETS AND FREE MLB.TV!!!
I'll just suggest you all take your outrage about athlete's wages, and you go funnel all that energy into fighting for people who are actually underpaid.
Yeah this is colluding...
The MLB has seen colluding, and this isn't it.
We're in the MLB thread, not the teacher's thread.
yes most of my friends arent billionaire bootlickers like you and generally support labor. sorry you and your friends are shitty.
again, that's not evidence for your argument whatsoever
I'm glad you're so anti little guy.
Lol. Me and my friends support people who work for a living. The little guys.
I'm all for everyone making as much as they can. MLB isn't a non-profit. Everyone involved is trying to make as much as they can.
do you have any non-anecdotal evidence backing up your claim that myself and wtx and others are in the minority? because your anecdotal argument doesnt really make much sense
So really this boils down to you thinking MLB should charge less and everyone involved should make less so it's more affordable for the little guys.
I believe there's such thing as enough. I'm not greedy like most humans, and I could give a shit how much my boss makes as long as I'm healthy and happy and my bills are paid.
I guess that's part of it.
You're a fan of a team with a payroll in excess of $200M who happens to have a racist owner.
I didn't realize you're a socialist.
You can go to any number of polls of the American citizen in just about any era, and they'll show the majority feel athletes are overpaid. You'll never get me to buy into the "fair market" argument either.
I'm sure as shit not a capitalist.
Part of the problem is that, because there's no cap, floor, or anything else related to it in the CBA, there isn't a set "fair share" for players to demand. NBA, NFL and NHL salaries are shaped by an agreed upon percentage of league revenue. The MLBPA hasn't done that. My guess is that is the case at least in some part because, during the PA's peak, MLB players were getting significantly more than the 50-55% other leagues were getting.
Yes, and I'd be more than happy if a change was made at the top. I've never liked the Ricketts family, and as someone who lived most of his life in Nebraska, I never voted for Pete Ricketts. I don't like anything about them.
Also, I'm pissed we didn't go after Harper.
Also, if that scenario you laid out isn't something that you would in some way support, you're a shitty person.
I know several girls from my hometown who were underage and would drink and have sex with Pirates minor leaguers.
I really liked these two things from Joel Sherman this morning on tanking. I hate the premise of giving low revenue teams more draft picks for being good (or taking a 1st entirely from a team shitty for more than 3 years), but I'm okay with the rest.
The four free agents in that picture are going to be fine. It's the middle class free agents that are getting screwed the last few years. Second tier veterans can't get even modest multi year deals and are forced to forego security to get what was market value.
And minor leaguers, pay the damn minor leaguers.
The middle class is why the system needs to change in a major way, because it's only going to become more pronounced in both FA and arbitration the longer this system is in place. Most players unions aren't really of that mindset, though, and tend to look for the shiny, massive contracts at the top instead.
I think if that's battle the MLBPA picks it's will make things harder for them. Most of the top free agents last year did end up getting paid with many already disasters beyond repair (Darvish, Hosmer, Santana, Cobb)
I'm a shitty person for not expecting companies and employees for trying to make as much as they can? This isn't some medical drug they are selling that people are dependent on. It's entertainment. If people are willing to pay it, they should make as much as they can.
I think one of the bigger issue is teams have learned they can get similar production from a 24 yr old making $500k as they can from a 34 yr old vet making $5m. You don't see a lot of bench vets these days. The top guys are going to get paid. It's the mid to lower level guy that's struggling to find a job now. I mean James Loney isn't great but he's better than the independent league. He's easily replaced by a farmhand making the minimum though.
Every issue with MLB compensation issue starts with the rookie scale and arbitration
Agree completely. A guy like Judge making $500k this year is insane.
And I'm not really sure what the union can do to fight that, unfortunately.
At the very least, they need to fix the arb system to reward players who actually do the things that teams value. Whit Merrifield just signed a 4/$16M extension in KC, which is absurdly cheap, in part because arbitration doesn't reward players like him. It rewards players who are good at counting stats people valued in 1970. Because of that you get a bunch of players arb overpays getting non-tendered, which leads to a glut of FAs at different positions, while the better players stay cheap.
The PA giving away the rights of American and International players with the bonus pools in the last few CBAs while getting nothing in return is a big reason I don't feel bad for players and want punch Tony Clark in the face every time he speaks.
not to mention the fact that because Merrifield started his career in the bigs so late he will never get to sign for his real market value in his prime. they bought out his arb years and he'll be 34 at the end of the deal.
Replacing arbitration with restricted free agency would be a start
yep, they gotta start paying guys for their most effective years. guys become free agents way too late in their career for free agency to be the solution.
I've been a proponent of this idea for a while. Should be at least some level of performance-based pay for 0-3 players, as well, and pay should go up from years 0-1 and years 2-3 instead of being static.
I also don't understand why people think the service time time thing is so hard. Why don't they just cut the year of service thing in half? If Toronto wants an extra half season out of Vlad Jr., they have to sit him in AAA for 3 months while it hurts them on the field and with attendance. How is that so hard to fix? I see the players' proposal in the stuff from earlier this week and it makes no sense to me.