Salaries & a strike

[TIME TO MAKE $$$]

Statistically speaking, is there ANY way to support the Players' Association position against the owners? To be honest, I'm having trouble trying to STATISTICALLY prove that a .500 player is worth $2.4 million. With that said, I find it impossible that the salary explosion of the last 5-10 years can continue. Ticket prices are already high (which is why fans aren't showing up to watch bad teams, which are bad because they don't have enough revenue) and only a few teams in the league can have such a high payroll.

All this is pretty elementary, but I haven't been able to locate a statistical argument presented by the owners and the MLBPA.

If you ask me, there should be a MLB Fan's Association so that the people who REALLY pay the salaries have a say.

 

[RobertBIrish]

AMEN Bunch of greedy millionaires that could care less about the people that pay for the tickets that pay them. Barry Bonds phrased perfectly how much they care when he said that the fans will come back out of habit. Hell attendance hasn't been the same since the last strike and this one will hurt even more in my opinion. Just another example of the rich shitting on the little guy!

 

[TLove]

I say put in a Salary Cap and if the players don't like it...
FUK EM

Lock the Greedy bastards out.....

 

[TIME TO MAKE $$$]

This was a response from a friend in NEW YORK who is a die hard baseball fan:

Honestly, I don't think you have any clue what the Players Association's position is. The owners want to place artificial restraints on salaries, and the players are resisting that. If a .500 player isn't worth $2.4M, then the owners shouldn't offer those players that much money. The owners are trying to implement a system that will restrict some owners from offering contracts that they would like to offer. The players' position has nothing to do with how much money the players are actually worth; the players just want a free market.

As for a "Fans Association", you already have a say: you can choose whether or not to spend your money on Major League Baseball. I don't understand why you should have a say what happens with your money after that.

 

[TIME TO MAKE $$$]

And here is my response to him


The "artificial" restraints you speak of are a way of keeping a balanced and competitive product on the field. Without that, you'd have the same five teams spending and winning each year. Short-term, it's great for the players. Long-term, baseball contracts because Darwinism takes over.

I agree that the market has driven salaries higher, and it's obvious that the players' want that to continue. The problem is that the owners want to slow it down a bit because (1) they want to profit, (2) it drives ticket prices higher , and (3) the high spending directly affects attendance (so less profit, if any). Solution? Better management.

The biggest problem is the imbalance of money from team to team. The Yankees and Red Sox and a few others can afford to pay top-dollar. The other teams have to borrow so much money in order to contend. Once fans stop showing up, they can't pay back the lenders.

By the way, I was joking about a fans' union. Sorry it wasn't clear. It's obvious that people aren't willing to pay so much for MLB... that's why contraction is being discussed.

If it were up to me:
(1) new/better management for a number of teams (to create more fiscal responsibility)
(2) some sort of way to create more balanced competition (either through true and even revenue sharing or a salary cap, take your choice)
(3) contract at least one team for the time being (talent pool is too thin right now)
(4) none of that luxury-tax crap
(5) cap the amount payable to draftees via the "signing bonus" (talk about stupid fiscal repsonsibility)

 

[Howie]

I tend to disagree

I tend to disagree

The owners expect the world of these players...I mean, just think, as a batter they have to hit the ball at least 25% of the time...can you imagine???

And, further, baseball isn't like hockey. MLB players have to stand around in the field waiting on balls to be pitched can really take a toll on an athlete's body. I mean, it gets really hot out there. And, sometimes, it is raining too!!!

To compound the problem, again unlike hockey or basketball, these guys have to take an annual vacation of at least 4 months. Imagine the stress involved with that!!! Just thinking about it wears me out.

I have to give kudos to Patrick Ewing who said it best during the NBA strike - "We might make a lot of money, but we spend a lot of money too."

And, to compound the problem, for the good players who bat above .250 on a consistent basis, they really have to spend a lot of money. So, these guys have to go out and get advertising contracts just to make up the shortfall leftover by their paltry salaries. Not only do they have to rely on the physical abilities, they have to use their mental faculties to remember all those lines for the commercials. I can't even begin to imagine how tough that is.

As such, the MLB players deserve to strike on 9/11. The pain, suffering, and mental anguish these players have suffered through as a direct result of the owners failure to pay them what they are worth greatly overshadows anything else anyone in this country has endured. God bless Patrick Ewing, the MLB players, and the USA!!!

:thefinger,

Howie

 

[ferdville]

Howie - funny stuff! Funny thing is, players no doubt agree 100%. In all actuality, it is hard to root for either side in this one. Obviously, the majority of people will say that the players are overpaid. It seems like a sin to see marginal players or even those below the Mendoza line making hundreds of thousands a year. I am a teacher at a continuation school and make only a fraction of that and probably work harder. However, at least until now, there haven't been alot of people willing to pay good money to watch me teach. And there is the difference. As long as people will pay to watch these games, the players can and will demand compensation. The owners have to pay up accordingly. The fact that the owners have let salaries escalate to the current point is on them. The players will take what they can get - you would and so would I. Both sides should feel guilty about this mess. I do have some feeling for the small market teams that cannot compete against the NYY and other teams that can afford the best. Those teams are in a big jam.

 

[wondo]

Nice response, Howie. Well written and funny!

Joking aside, I think that the best answer is not putting caps on draftees bonuses or a salary cap. The draft needs to be abolished completely. What was supposed to lead to equity among teams doesn't do that. Instead, the draft has become who is most signable, not who is the best. If the draft is abolished, then in the short term, the big market teams will have the revenue to sign the 'big names' and in the short term will do well (by mere percentages of signing the most and perhaps the best). However, over the long term, the big market clubs will have spent so much money on 'busts' -- amateur players that don't perform up to standards, that the smaller market teams who invest in player development and scouting (hiring more and better personnel) will eventually make better judgements and better financial decisions on the players. It will take a few years (4?) but will work itself out.

Additionally, part of the problem that is shared among the owners and players is that the fans demand instant results. Just like weight loss or wealth or whatever it is in our current society, people look for instant results. They put pressure on the ownership to sign the big name player. That in itself drives everything up. So even when the market doesn't have a 'valuable' player that can contribute to the team, the fans always want the seemingly big trade that will do the team well. For instance, the Mets got a bunch of big names, but perhaps the biggest loss was that of Rusch. But what fan really cares about Glendon Rusch? But he was one of those invaluable guys to the team, but not a high profile guy that makes the fans come to the ball park.

An interesting book to read about the current labor issues within a couple contexts of years past (along with some other changes in MLB over the years) is "Dollar Sign on the Muscle." It's easy reading and entertaining, but gives a good view on why things are happening the way they are now.

 

[wondo]

No offense, Ferdville, but if you think Weaver and Mondesi are "the best" that money can buy, that goes back to some poor R&D on the Yanks part. I'm not calling you dumb, I'm questionning the moves for the yanks. Although the Mondesi trade was a joke and should have been vetoed by the commish, the Tiger trade was a godsend for the Tigers. For all the crap he gets, Dombrowski is going to build that team into a powerhouse.

 

[wondo]

Tlove-

If the salaries get capped, are you expecting ticket prices to drop? C'mon! If the money going into one pocket it will be going into the next.... and the next ain't yours!

wondo