Financial state of baseball: New Quotes from Brewerfan Agent39

[PDXBrewCrew]

You gotta figure the players will want to cut back on the controllable years in the next CBA. It seems the elimination of arbitration and free agency after four years is a good compromise. Players get free agency two years earlier. Teams get another year (or two in the case of Super Two players) at league minimum.

[brooks_quichenick]

the billionaire owners who do nothing for the sport itself.

 

Really? The owners do nothing?

 

What do they truly, actually do besides make money? That is what they own teams for. What do baseball owners contribute to make the sport better in any way?

[PDXBrewCrew]

the billionaire owners who do nothing for the sport itself.

 

Really? The owners do nothing?

 

What do they truly, actually do besides make money? That is what they own teams for. What do baseball owners contribute to make the sport better in any way?

 

What does the owner of any business contribute to make the world better in any way? One day the workers will rise in revolt! VIVA LA REVOLUCION!!!

[brooks_quichenick]

What does the owner of any business contribute to make the world better in any way? One day the workers will rise in revolt! VIVA LA REVOLUCION!!!

 

 

I know you’re being sarcastic, and this is a topic for another thread, but yes - labor is the source of all wealth, and in baseball that means the players. Owners aren’t turning double plays, hitting game winning home runs, inspiring kids around the world, etc. They are merely leeches who siphon the surplus value of players’ labor and place it directly into their pockets.

 

Half the league isn’t even making an ounce of effort to win games right now, yet those teams will still reap massive profits. What about that is good for baseball?

[tmwiese55]

Any chance it's possible that it's not out of greediness by owners just take make the extra money but that they generally know their operating expenses and what the player salary target should be for their team to profit/even and therefore have figured the best way to win is to maximize that budget. And having 30 mil dead contracts for two years is not the best way to win. Sure,you can just say spend more and lose money or make less. But many times there is groups of owners, not one guy, and many times the team can't just operate substantially in the red as a lot of the owners net worth is tied up in the equity of the team (which he's not selling anytime soon) so he's not exactly liquid with that and much of his private wealth might not be liquid either.

 

I guess that was just a long way to say, that maybe they've just realized a better way to get more bang for their buck even though they're going to basically be spending the same buck they have been previously. As in maybe some really do want to win and think this is the best way. And for the mega market teams, this one year dip to get below tax allows them to get back into spending big in coming years again (and to pay more of that $$ to the players rather than the other owners via the tax).

[jerichoholicninja]

Teams are smarter.

Long term, 9 figure deals for 32+ year olds are a bad investment.

End of story.

 

Crying about it and threatening to strike is only going to backfire.

[SeaBass]

Teams are smarter.

Long term, 9 figure deals for 32+ year olds are a bad investment.

End of story.

 

Crying about it and threatening to strike is only going to backfire.

 

I don't think it's suddenly news that those big deals of the past are sometimes really bad. It hasn't stopped the big spenders from spending before.

 

I think it's more that the players/agents didn't forsee, or didn't believe, that the luxury tax penalty increases would actually work to curb spending for the usual big spending clubs, and for so many of them to self-administer fiscal restraint in the same off-season. It's really been a perfect storm of those clubs having their "come to Jesus" moment and it coinciding with teams trying to reset their tax position heading into next off-season's projected free agent bonanza.

 

I'm not sure it's strike worthy after just one instance, but the players are on alert and if there's another off-season similar to this in two to three years they aren't going to sit back and tolerate it.

 

Which is why I think the talk right now from agents isn't pointing at an actual strike per se, but that the talk of boycotting spring training is their warning shot that a strike is possible down the line if they don't see signs of a more normal signing period in the near future.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

Seeing huge market teams like the Yankees squirm trying to dump idiotic contracts like Ellsbury's is actually fun to watch. And the luxury tax system is creating a more even playing field that is giving teams like the Brewers the opportunity to be players for guys like Cain and Darvish.

 

That said, teams just didn't suddenly decide to get smart. Of course there is some level of collusion going on. The Cubs hoping they can get Darvish at a discount because they think its an honor to play for them is proof positive. The Dodgers and Yankees are worth billions. They have more than enough money to sign him to a deal if they want. I'm just happy that the Brewers seemed to miss the collusion memo.

[TheEndless7]

Teams are smarter.

Long term, 9 figure deals for 32+ year olds are a bad investment.

End of story.

 

Crying about it and threatening to strike is only going to backfire.

 

 

And it's an era where young GMs are taking over that are looking more at the stat lines as well. I don't think you can reasonably claim collusion when, after being burned by so many bad contracts, teams are still (suppsoedly at least) offering things like 5/125 to JD Martinez who is 29 years old and has only paid more than 125 games once in his career. Even in Braun's 'injury riddled' years he played 135! Except for last year.

 

I think it's just the era of the 8-10 year deal is gone.

[stoutdude04]

the billionaire owners who do nothing for the sport itself.

 

Really? The owners do nothing?

 

What do they truly, actually do besides make money? That is what they own teams for. What do baseball owners contribute to make the sport better in any way?

 

Clearly you know this, but without them the money doesn't flow. Without money, there is no league. At least not like we are used to. Maybe Im wrong, but the players need the owners and the owners need the players.

[KeithStone53151]

These players are delusional. Are they really so stupid as to be unable to connect the dots? I could explain this to a 10 year old and they'd get it...

[SeaBass]

I don't think they're stupid at all. It's just the politics of baseball being played out in the media.

[PDXBrewCrew]

Collusion is a lot more than the teams figuring out that long-term deals usually don't work out. Collusion would be the teams getting together and deciding not to hand out long-term deals.

[Patrick425]

What does the owner of any business contribute to make the world better in any way? One day the workers will rise in revolt! VIVA LA REVOLUCION!!!

 

 

I know you’re being sarcastic, and this is a topic for another thread, but yes - labor is the source of all wealth, and in baseball that means the players. Owners aren’t turning double plays, hitting game winning home runs, inspiring kids around the world, etc. They are merely leeches who siphon the surplus value of players’ labor and place it directly into their pockets.

 

Half the league isn’t even making an ounce of effort to win games right now, yet those teams will still reap massive profits. What about that is good for baseball?

 

 

http://images.memes.com/meme/233643

[PDXBrewCrew]

Our enemies are all those in league with imperialism: the bureaucrats, the big landlord class and the reactionary section of the intelligencia attached to them. The leading force behind our revolution is the industrial proletariat. Our closest friends are the entire semi proletariat and the petty bourgeoisie.

[Noche]

Our enemies are all those in league with imperialism: the bureaucrats, the big landlord class and the reactionary section of the intelligencia attached to them. The leading force behind our revolution is the industrial proletariat. Our closest friends are the entire semi proletariat and the petty bourgeoisie.

 

Best post I have seen on these pages

[PDXBrewCrew]

The Chairman does have a way with a phrase.

[patrickgpe]

it seems like there are a bunch of free agents that are not getting paid as they would like and are waiting it out, that is hardly collusion. Davish has received a few offers, but owners are not going nuts for a 31 year old starter, who didn't exactly light the world on fire.

 

I recently had to find a new job and it became pretty clear how much i was worth. Yes I could have waiting it out for a dream offer, or as an adult with a family to support would do, took the best offer and hoped for the best.

[McRibMcLove]

labor is the source of all wealth, and in baseball that means the players.

 

Absolutely wrong. The source of all wealth is the consumer. Without the consumer there is no professional baseball. Do you think owners would ever give players a single dime without the knowledge they have consumers to buy the product? Try starting a business without any idea if anyone will buy your product.

 

And as a consumer I am getting tired of getting the shaft from both the millionaires and the billionaires... I’m insulted every time an agent complains about their pampered clients... who agreed to the current CBA? And I don’t want the owners to share more of the wealth with the players, I want them to give me, the consumer, a discount because my financial state takes a hit every time I buy tickets to a game.

[jerichoholicninja]

it seems like there are a bunch of free agents that are not getting paid as they would like and are waiting it out, that is hardly collusion. Davish has received a few offers, but owners are not going nuts for a 31 year old starter, who didn't exactly light the world on fire.

 

That's exactly why these players have no leg to stand on. There have been plenty of reports of the top free agents getting offers that are more than fair and the players are rejecting them or holding out for more money. These aren't low ball offers that are well below market value. Please ask the 10 or so RP's that signed already how free agency went for them.

[Fear The Chorizo]

This yrs fa class is bitter that they aren't getting more than what prior contract precedents were for marquee free agents at their positions...problem is all of this year's crop are either older or not as good as the precedents they are seeking to eclipse. The agents are miffed that they can't get teams to pony up regardless.

 

When the best FA's don't sign it makes little sense for the mid and lower tier FA's to get contract offers because there are better available options. In sbort, blame agents like boras for trying to pass off good players as great players

[danzig6767]

it seems like there are a bunch of free agents that are not getting paid as they would like and are waiting it out, that is hardly collusion. Davish has received a few offers, but owners are not going nuts for a 31 year old starter, who didn't exactly light the world on fire.

That's exactly why these players have no leg to stand on. There have been plenty of reports of the top free agents getting offers that are more than fair and the players are rejecting them or holding out for more money. These aren't low ball offers that are well below market value. Please ask the 10 or so RP's that signed already how free agency went for them.

I suspect that most of these free agents are being offered fair per year dollar amounts, but what teams are mainly balking at is the number of years which the agents and players want.

 

Boston likely offered JD Martinez big money per year, but only 4-5 years when he wants 6-7 years. Arrieta and Boras are likely asking for 5-6 years and teams aren't willing to offer more than four. Same for Lynn and Cobb, teams likely aren't willing to offer more than 3 or 4 years at most. Reports are it's the number of years as to why Hosmer isn't signed.

 

Teams and GM's seem to have finally learned lessons from the past when it comes to free agency. More often than not, it isn't the yearly salaries paid to prominent free agents which causes teams problems so much as the 5th/6th/7th/8th or more years on long term mega contracts, leading to excessive dead money, especially for free agents over 30 years old.

 

This is a trend i see continuing going forward for vets over 30.

[PDXBrewCrew]

it seems like there are a bunch of free agents that are not getting paid as they would like and are waiting it out, that is hardly collusion. Davish has received a few offers, but owners are not going nuts for a 31 year old starter, who didn't exactly light the world on fire.

That's exactly why these players have no leg to stand on. There have been plenty of reports of the top free agents getting offers that are more than fair and the players are rejecting them or holding out for more money. These aren't low ball offers that are well below market value. Please ask the 10 or so RP's that signed already how free agency went for them.

I suspect that most of these free agents are being offered fair per year dollar amounts, but what teams are mainly balking at is the number of years which the agents and players want.

 

Boston likely offered JD Martinez big money per year, but only 4-5 years when he wants 6-7 years. Arrieta and Boras are likely asking for 5-6 years and teams aren't willing to offer more than four. Same for Lynn and Cobb, teams likely aren't willing to offer more than 3 or 4 years at most. Reports are it's the number of years as to why Hosmer isn't signed.

 

Teams and GM's seem to have finally learned lessons from the past when it comes to free agency. More often than not, it isn't the yearly salaries paid to prominent free agents which causes teams problems so much as the 5th/6th/7th/8th or more years on long term mega contracts, leading to excessive dead money, especially for free agents over 30 years old.

 

This is a trend i see continuing going forward for vets over 30.

 

This is how I'm seeing it. We've basically reached a point where every team has had a number of "too long" contracts a number of times and just aren't going to offer those to older players any longer. Is it collusion if at some point there was a straw that broke the camels back for every team?

 

Darvish or Arrieta could probably have their pick of teams to sign with at $25M a year if they took a three-year deal. But asking for around that for five or seven years? If Darvish is still throwing Cy Young caliber after the end of that, there will still likely be quite a number of teams willing to offer another two- or three-year deal for the same money.

 

I do think it will cause big changes to the next CBA. I can see the players going hard for free agency after four years instead of the current six because of this.

[reillymcshane]

I'm skeptical that there is collusion going on. I think it's just a combination of many thing.

 

1. Players are getting offers - just not outrageous ones. I mean, JD Martinez getting $25-30M/year for five years sounds pretty reasonable. And the relievers seem to have done pretty well for themselves.

 

If Hosmer is setting on a 7-year/$140M offer - and waiting for an eighth year - that's too bad. It's still an awesome offer. To say he's not getting a fair offer is not right.

 

2. Players just aren't that good. Let's be honest - there is not superstar on the market. There's some very good players - but no ace starters. No

 

3. Teams are just smarter. They realize how badly some of the big contracts have hamstrung teams and holding back. It's just good business.

 

4. There is a de facto cap with the luxury tax. Teams are reluctant to pass it for a variety of reasons. This has put a lot of teams that normally spend money in a bit of a holding pattern. They just don't have the cash to spend as in the past.

 

5. Next year's class is big - and teams want to save for that (which relates to the luxury tax).

 

6. The reluctance of the top free agents to accept a deal (Darvish, Arrieta, Martinez, Hosmer, etc.) is holding up a lot of things for others. It's just the way things work.

 

7. You get more and more teams willing to go into 'rebuild' mode (Tigers, White Sox, Marlins, etc.) - and are looking to shed long term obligations (which often means salary) and aren't willing to add salary.

 

I mean, does it really help Detroit to spend $25M/year to add Jake Arietta for the next five or six years? That's moronic. The team is rebuilding, and it simply doesn't help a team to spend that kind of money to help them win 73 games instead of 70 games.

 

I think this is huge. It takes teams out of the free agent market to a large degree. And then it puts more players on the trade market. Miami traded Stanton, Yelich and Ozuna - all very good players. And all the teams that got those players now don't need an outfielder - meaning the free agents have fewer option available.

 

In the end, it's a lot of reasons that probably lead to the current marketplace. I think it's foolish to thinks it's one thing.

 

The players and the owners have set up a system, and the system has gone in this specific direction. The owners are probably the ones who have benefited the most from the current CBA. It's worked well for them - but I'm skeptical of collusion.

 

But hey, you never know.

[PDXBrewCrew]

Collusion is the owners getting together and deciding as a whole to not offer certain free agents certain contracts. A market shift is when the individual owners decide for themselves not to offer certain free agents certain contracts.