Is a strike looming, or is this fake news?

[logan82]

If this article is a truthful account of how the players are really feeling then why aren’t players pushing for incentive based contracts. I have to imagine that teams would heavily favor incentive based contracts.

 

Doubtful. It would be a terrible ides since they could be put on the bench so they don't reach their incentives. Any time a player didn't reach their incentive there would be tons of speculation. Too much opportunity for manipulation.

[Ennder]

The issue is really how soon players hit free agency and how much they get paid before they reach it. The top end players don't really have much to complain about even though they are the most vocal. The owners are 100% correct that they should not be handing out these terrible long term contracts to guys age 30+ anymore. That doesn't mean everything is just fine though.

[Tbadder]

I do believe that no one comes to see the owners play. I also don’t believe that major sports franchises are susceptible to the same risk factors as ordinary businesses. Therefore I think we need to be more wary of ownership than players. I’m sure I’m wrong but I can’t remember an owner in any of the big sports selling the team for less than he bought it for or a franchise that went straight up bankrupt (again I’m probably wrong and would love my memory to be refreshed). Given the travesty of the plight of minor leaguers something needs to happen for them no matter what. I personally love strikes. They take real guts. You have to stand up for something you believe in and in the end strikers usually lose (of course there are some exceptions). If a strike does happen I hope it’s a long one and that both sides can agree that it’s silly to play a partial season. Given that I’m primary on the players side the one thing that concerns me is that a work stoppage will probably hurt small market team disproportionately. I’m not much into winning and losing doesn’t bother me either, but what I really like is a great story, and a season long strike would make for an epic story. In the end baseball will survive, the players will survive, the teams will survive; rich people always survive.

[Brew crew 92]

I do believe that no one comes to see the owners play. I also don’t believe that major sports franchises are susceptible to the same risk factors as ordinary businesses. Therefore I think we need to be more wary of ownership than players. I’m sure I’m wrong but I can’t remember an owner in any of the big sports selling the team for less than he bought it for or a franchise that went straight up bankrupt (again I’m probably wrong and would love my memory to be refreshed). Given the travesty of the plight of minor leaguers something needs to happen for them no matter what. I personally love strikes. They take real guts. You have to stand up for something you believe in and in the end strikers usually lose (of course there are some exceptions). If a strike does happen I hope it’s a long one and that both sides can agree that it’s silly to play a partial season. Given that I’m primary on the players side the one thing that concerns me is that a work stoppage will probably hurt small market team disproportionately. I’m not much into winning and losing doesn’t both me either, but what I really like is a great story, and a season long strike would make for an epic story. In the end baseball will survive, the players will survive, the teams will survive; rich people always survive.

 

Huh?

[TURBO]

I’m not much into winning and losing doesn’t bother me either, but what I really like is a great story, and a season long strike would make for an epic story.

 

What the?

[Tbadder]

Yeah, I really dont care if my team wins or loses as long as the story is interesting. I thought the story of last season was fabulous. Yelich, Hader, Stearns, etc. If the Cubs had pulled it out at the end I wouldnt have found the season any less enjoyable. If the Crew would have made the series I wouldn’t have found it anymore enjoyable. What it was, was fascinating front to back. I also loved the season a few years back when we went into the tank the second half and fired Roenicke. That was really interesting. Why would I put any emotional investment into winning it all. It’s kind of a fools game considering at best any team has only a one in thirty chance to win the championship, and given our historical record it’s seems much less likely than a one in thirty chance.

 

A one year strike would be really interesting. I’ve never encountered one. I’d like to see how it would play out. I wonder what might be learned, what future generation sight have to say about it. I’ve seen partial strikes, threats of strikes/lock outs. I wouldn’t mind a real donnybrook.

[TURBO]

wow.

 

ok then.

 

I have nothing more to say.

[homer]

1994 sucked. You don't want a full year strike.

[cesser000]

A one year strike would be really interesting.

So you'd welcome a one-year strike, but god forbid they bring the DH to the NL?

[Tbadder]

A one year strike would be really interesting.

So you'd welcome a one-year strike, but god forbid they bring the DH to the NL?

 

Yeah, given the choice between something that happens continuously and something nearly unique I’d always take the later. I also won’t mind the strike because baseball is everywhere. Minors, NWL, little league, college. I like them all. I’ve been a Chinooks season ticket holder for several years now and I wouldn’t feel that deprived. I’d also like to hear what others say about a strike—Effectively Wild, Infinite Inning, bloggers, journalists, historians. It would be a summer to remember.

[NievesNoNO]

Revenues are going up, so players salaries should also go up. Pretty simple.

 

Why? In what other area of life other than sports do we expect the employees pay to go up every time revenue goes up? And I’m sure these players who demand more pay if profit goes up will gladly take lower salaries if the owner loses money right?

 

Players need to understand one thing. They are worth what the owners decide to pay them. For years and years and years players were getting absolutely absurd amounts of money in contracts that were terrible for the teams. Owners finally wised up and said “screw that” and stopped paying huge amounts for average to below average output. But let’s face it, they are still getting huge amounts of money (on top of all the other perks pro athletes get). The minimum salary.....the absolute lowest amount of money you can be paid, is over $550k. It takes me 6-7 years to make that. And that’s just for the bad players. If you are even halfways decent you’re a millionaire. And if you’re smart with your money you can retire in your mid thirties.

 

I’m sorry but I will NEVER side with players on money issues. Safety issues? Sure. Money? Never. Owners are businessmen whose goal is to make money. Are they greedy? Sure. But what business owner isn’t? I’m sitting here paying $15 to park a car within walking distance of Miller Park and $4.50 or whatever it is for a friggen hot dog and I’m supposed to feel sorry for pro athletes who want more money to play baseball for a living? Sorry.

 

I wish we had a like, no, LOVE button on this site!

 

Great post Paul!

 

I'm with you all on this. I will never side with the players.... well at least not if the current scenario is considered bad or getting cheated. Being a pro baseball player is one of the best gigs on earth. These guys travel in luxury at no cost to them, they stay at the best accommodations and paid stipends for top shelf food, again at no cost to them and then are paid to play a child's game. Yes, they are entertainers and only a super select portion of the population can do what they do, so obviously they should be compensated appropriately. In comparison to other pro sports the player pool is larger, the career expectancy is longer, the tole on your body in comparison is minimal, and they're getting guaranteed contracts. Are Dexter Fowler and Tulo giving back any of their contracts from last season? Yes, I'm cherry picking but you get the point.

 

When I see guys spouting their mouths off who are making about 30 million a year, saying how broken and unfair things are I really am left with a sour taste in my mouth. I honestly, could care less what the owners are making. They are making the business decisions and overseeing (or at least hiring somebody to do so) operations. They player's only responsibility is to play; and probably show up at a few community functions. Yes, I do think there could be some tweaking of the system; I think a salary floor is a good start, especially with revenue sharing. I'm for making what you can, however the players need to be careful, imo. Look, most of these owners don't need their baseball franchises to be wealthy. When push comes to shove, the general public could care less if MLB continues. Give it some time and people will find other stuff to do. People like me and I'm sure many on this forum would be disappointed for a bit longer but in the end it's just entertainment and a game. The sport is already losing a battle to interest the younger generations. Take a way a year or so, or get the public viewing you as a bunch of overpaid whiners and see where things go. I love the Brewers and baseball and I don't see that changing, but I also used to love NFL football and quite frankly I'm mostly done with it. There's plenty of stuff I should/could be doing other than following pro baseball.

[AdvantageSchneider]

Revenues are going up, so players salaries should also go up. Pretty simple.

 

Why? In what other area of life other than sports do we expect the employees pay to go up every time revenue goes up? And I’m sure these players who demand more pay if profit goes up will gladly take lower salaries if the owner loses money right?

 

Players need to understand one thing. They are worth what the owners decide to pay them. For years and years and years players were getting absolutely absurd amounts of money in contracts that were terrible for the teams. Owners finally wised up and said “screw that” and stopped paying huge amounts for average to below average output. But let’s face it, they are still getting huge amounts of money (on top of all the other perks pro athletes get). The minimum salary.....the absolute lowest amount of money you can be paid, is over $550k. It takes me 6-7 years to make that. And that’s just for the bad players. If you are even halfways decent you’re a millionaire. And if you’re smart with your money you can retire in your mid thirties.

 

I’m sorry but I will NEVER side with players on money issues. Safety issues? Sure. Money? Never. Owners are businessmen whose goal is to make money. Are they greedy? Sure. But what business owner isn’t? I’m sitting here paying $15 to park a car within walking distance of Miller Park and $4.50 or whatever it is for a friggen hot dog and I’m supposed to feel sorry for pro athletes who want more money to play baseball for a living? Sorry.

 

I wish we had a like, no, LOVE button on this site!

 

Great post Paul!

 

 

 

 

I don't understand why it's ok for the owners to be greedy but not the players. I also find it extremely cute that you think player's salary is in some way tied to the price you pay for parking or a hot dog. Those prices are set by supply and demand. Every player could take a 20% paycut tomorrow and those prices wouldn't change one penny.

[BrewersSuperCollector]

How come many people believe if the average Joe doesn’t like their pay or benefits they’re told to find a different job, but in pro sports the owners are at fault for being greedy?

[adambr2]

I personally don't really have any empathy for either the MLBPA or MLB. I have empathy for the guys toiling in the minors for less than minimum wage, but not for the guys like JD Martinez upset about the current situation.

 

It's hard for me to really care who is right or wrong because of the different plateau that every one of them is on in their life. A comparitive perspective for us common folk would be a worker making $100,000 in the US complaining about not getting a promised annual raise from their company to another guy living in poverty in a 3rd world country. Does the worker have a legitimate beef? Sure, but the guy in the 3rd world country could probably care less.

 

At the end of the day to me it's millionaires and billionaires fighting over the pieces of a 10 billion dollar pie. If they can't figure out how to divide that pie up amongst themselves, it's really not my problem. And if they make it my problem or try to garner sympathy from the public, they'll probably see the public turn their backs on Major League Baseball for years like they did back in '94 and really undo the progress they've made since then.

[502 to Right]

I think a strike will happen.

 

Players think they are getting screwed by the new labor market, and a strike is the only way they'll get back what they have lost.

 

What have they lost? They haven't had anything taken away.

 

Many have lost the guaranteed high dollar contracts in their 30s that players of the Suppan/Garza/Lohse era enjoyed.

 

 

So they've lost the stupid contracts? Which nearly everyone here at the time knew was stupid?

 

We need to require teams to sign more stupid contracts!

[wntrtxn21]

Revenues are going up, so players salaries should also go up. Pretty simple.

 

Why? In what other area of life other than sports do we expect the employees pay to go up every time revenue goes up? And I’m sure these players who demand more pay if profit goes up will gladly take lower salaries if the owner loses money right?

 

There are far more professional baseball players deemed MLB talent than there are MLB jobs. When you have a surplus of talent, wages shouldn’t go up. Adding two more teams, expanding rosters, creating an MLB-owned extra AAA team of MLB free agents, and adding the DH to the NL would provide jobs for over 100 MLB/AAAA players. A full time DH (although not used very often, as most teams rotate DH duties) is paid more than a LOOGY or bench bat.

 

For every job added by the DH it takes away a job of a pitcher. Where do you get far more MLB talent than MLB jobs? That is so subjective depending on who you listen to. Is a .220/.297 hitter really an MLB talent? There are so many bad teams already, adding two more wouldn't be good for the game.

[paul253]

The reason we pay $15 to self park in an open lot and $15 for $2 worth of beer is because the best players in the world are playing in front of us. We don't do that because Mark A is a nice guy

 

I think you’re hurting your own argument here. Yes we pay that amount because we are willing to. But what happens when we aren’t willing to pay that anymore? The price would have to go down for the same product. That’s exactly what’s happening here. Owners are no longer willing to pay what they were willing to pay before. So basically the system in baseball is mirroring the system everywhere else and yet somehow that’s bad?

 

I don't understand why it's ok for the owners to be greedy but not the players

 

Who said it’s not ok for them to be greedy? I said the complete opposite in fact. Absolutely they should be trying to get every dollar they can. But when people are no longer willing to throw stupid contracts your way that doesn’t mean you are being unfairly or the system is broke somehow.

 

I also find it extremely cute that you think player's salary is in some way tied to the price you pay for parking or a hot dog. Those prices are set by supply and demand. Every player could take a 20% paycut tomorrow and those prices wouldn't change one penny

 

Couple of things. One, I never said that they were tied together. I was simply trying to point out how much the average person has to pay for basic things like parking a car while millionaire players are complaining they are being treated unfairly because they aren’t being overpaid as much now as they used to be.

 

Second, what I think is cute is that you bring up supply and demand while apparently not seeing that it is supply and demand that is exactly what is driving the plasters salaries down. The demand for the players’ services, or at least the demand for their services at the price the player expects, is going down. So therefore supply and demand would dictate their salaries would go down too. If that’s the case then what is the problem?

[trwi7]

I think you’re hurting your own argument here. Yes we pay that amount because we are willing to. But what happens when we aren’t willing to pay that anymore? The price would have to go down for the same product. That’s exactly what’s happening here. Owners are no longer willing to pay what they were willing to pay before. So basically the system in baseball is mirroring the system everywhere else and yet somehow that’s bad?

 

The problem is fans are still paying $15 for parking, $10 for cheap swill, $25 for a ticket and $8 for a barely warmed hot dog. So owners are basically just lining their own pockets with money from the fans and not giving it to the people that fans are paying these prices to see, the players.

 

I don't think anybody would be on the player's side if owners reduced parking, ticket and concession prices and in turn player salaries went down. But owners are making record profits and players are signing for less. I would actually be totally okay with MLB players making less in exchange for giving minor league players an actual livable salary but that's not happening either.

[paul253]

The problem is fans are still paying $15 for parking, $10 for cheap swill, $25 for a ticket and $8 for a barely warmed hot dog. So owners are basically just lining their own pockets with money from the fans and not giving it to the people that fans are paying these prices to see, the players

 

The players will have to decide if they are still willing to play for what is being offered. Obviously it’s their choice but I just don’t have any sympathy for them given their circumstances. I’d be ok with a change with younger players getting more of the pot but as another poster said all that this will result in is older players asking for even more.

[igor67]

Actually raising the minimum MLB salary and then advocating for a raise for minor leaguers would give the union an incredibly strong case for negotiating by giving all those minor leaguers an actual stake in the outcome (and reduce the replacement player aspect). Raising the minimum does benefit the vets because it reduces the pay gap for vet vs. rookies. They could maybe try to add a few other things in, but that would be the best way to build unity among members.

[Baldkin]

How come many people believe if the average Joe doesn’t like their pay or benefits they’re told to find a different job, but in pro sports the owners are at fault for being greedy?

 

You do realize people say that because these days it's actually one of the only ways you can get paid your worth as a worker?

 

Changing jobs is quite often the only way to get a significant increase in salary when you learn new skills.

 

With big business killing unions over the past 40 years and with salaries becoming more and more stagnant it has become more and more difficult for the worker to have any impact in what they make.

 

So when we're looking at dysfunction in the difference in salaries between owners and players - yes, the greedy owners should be called out.

 

Heck, even here, with the Brewers, people were acting as though spending as much as they did 8 years ago is "capping them out" despite a new national TV deal, better revenue sharing and higher ticket prices.

[MillerParkSouth]

It never ceases to amaze me how many people are pro ownership. I don’t give a damn about the owners making more money, I want them to spend to put a better product on the field. I’m paying to see the players, not the owners and it’s not like ticket prices will get cheaper if the players make less.

[homer]

I really wish the teams had to open their books up to the public.

[MillerParkSouth]

There's a very good reason that they will never consent to that - most team's fanbases would be absolutely furious i'm sure because it would show that just about the entirety of the league could support materially higher payrolls than they do. I think there are teams that basically have their entire payroll subsidized by revenue sharing.

[JosephC]

I'm sure if an "open books" threat came along, the last thing the owners would worry about is paying players more money. They would be far more concerned about (1) having to pay for their own stadiums (2) having to pay a fair property tax rate on those stadiums.

 

Anybody catch the news last week that the stadium district has already collected 569 million from the public? The funny thing is that Miller Park was only supposed to cost 400 million to build. Interest and upkeep sure is a killer.

 

I hope that the 1/2 of the ill-will directed towards owners and the other 1/2 of ill-will directed towards the players will be remembered 10 years down the road when the Brewers declare that American Family Park is a pile of junk and they need a mere 1.5 billion (which actually means 2.5-3 billion after interest and upkeep) to build a new park that everyone can be proud of (even the 80% of the state residents who could care less about MLB) to remain competitive.