Is a strike looming, or is this fake news?

[tmwiese55]

With this creating such a rift this far ahead of the next deal I'm still confident they'll find a way to get the next deal done in time to avoid a strike. Both sides know they can't have 1994 happen again and they have plenty of time to start hammering through the issues we all see here. Thus far it seems the players have the more unreasonable viewpoints, mostly because those contracts got so out of hand that they started to take them for granted.

[DougJonesChangeUp]

If there's a salary cap limit for players, maybe there should be a cap on the percentage of profits an owner can pocket without re-investment.

 

Money definitely needs to be spread out better and if anything all prospects in the minors should band together for a raise.

[DHonks]

If there's a salary cap limit for players, maybe there should be a cap on the percentage of profits an owner can pocket without re-investment.

 

Money definitely needs to be spread out better and if anything all prospects in the minors should band together for a raise.

 

Don't forget the costs of ownership is not simply player salaries. The front office, analytics departments, Murphy Money, first class tickets for players, team charters, top hotel rooms, locker room attendants, in-game entertainment, etc.

 

People on here are acting like: (Brewers Revenues) - (Players salaries) = profit

 

This is simply not true.

[MrTPlush]

MLB need to lobby for minor league players. That is the only way anyone will ever get something to change with MiLB salaries. The probably is most players don’t care after they make it and weren’t MiLB players long before making it. Not to mention a good chunk had $1mil+ signing bonuses.

 

It’s too bad they just don’t care to help what they once were.

[DHonks]

 

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.

 

Pretty simple. Team rosters are full. There are plenty of veterans available. If teams pay for a full-time DH, they'll make more than the last bench player or last pitcher, although realistically I don't think the DH takes a pitcher's job. If should lead to less double switches and take away the token .220 hitting backup infielder.

 

I still advocate for several simple things:

-expand to 32 teams

-previous point will also increase the number of minor league teams by 2 per level

-add an extra MLBPA run AAA team that is comprised only of MLB veterans...giving them jobs and allowing their contracts to be purchased at any time, rather than sitting on their couch or playing independent ball

-increase minor league wages

-eliminate the pitcher batting by either adding the DH or batting only 8 players as Doug Melvin has recommended

-expand rosters by 1-2 players

-return the luxury tax to its previous less penal policies, including eliminating draft pick threats. If the Dodgers or Cubs want to spend $500 million and have terrible years at times, I'll laugh at them like I have in the past.

-fight tanking. It's worthless in baseball.

[TURBO]

If there's a salary cap limit for players, maybe there should be a cap on the percentage of profits an owner can pocket without re-investment.

 

 

Seriously, limit the profits an owner can make?

 

Isn't that a bit socialistic?

 

Imagine being a business owner, and someone says that you can only make so much in profit, if you hit that magic number, then you have to give it to someone else?

 

Oh my, that is a slippery slope.

[TURBO]

If there's a salary cap limit for players, maybe there should be a cap on the percentage of profits an owner can pocket without re-investment.

 

Money definitely needs to be spread out better and if anything all prospects in the minors should band together for a raise.

 

Don't forget the costs of ownership is not simply player salaries. The front office, analytics departments, Murphy Money, first class tickets for players, team charters, top hotel rooms, locker room attendants, in-game entertainment, etc.

 

People on here are acting like: (Brewers Revenues) - (Players salaries) = profit

 

This is simply not true.

 

THIS.

[owbc]

If there's a salary cap limit for players, maybe there should be a cap on the percentage of profits an owner can pocket without re-investment.

 

 

Seriously, limit the profits an owner can make?

 

Isn't that a bit socialistic?

 

Imagine being a business owner, and someone says that you can only make so much in profit, if you hit that magic number, then you have to give it to someone else?

 

Oh my, that is a slippery slope.

 

Sounds like you are opposed to salary caps and the luxury tax?

[owbc]

If there's a salary cap limit for players, maybe there should be a cap on the percentage of profits an owner can pocket without re-investment.

 

 

Seriously, limit the profits an owner can make?

 

Isn't that a bit socialistic?

 

Imagine being a business owner, and someone says that you can only make so much in profit, if you hit that magic number, then you have to give it to someone else?

 

Oh my, that is a slippery slope.

 

Sounds like you are opposed to salary caps and the luxury tax?

[homer]

If there's a salary cap limit for players, maybe there should be a cap on the percentage of profits an owner can pocket without re-investment.

 

Money definitely needs to be spread out better and if anything all prospects in the minors should band together for a raise.

 

Don't forget the costs of ownership is not simply player salaries. The front office, analytics departments, Murphy Money, first class tickets for players, team charters, top hotel rooms, locker room attendants, in-game entertainment, etc.

 

People on here are acting like: (Brewers Revenues) - (Players salaries) = profit

 

This is simply not true.

 

I think most people realize there are other costs both fixed and variable that determine the amount of profit. Again, we have no idea what those numbers are but people have surmised that even the worst franchises in the league are making money.

[paul253]

Sounds like you are opposed to salary caps and the luxury tax?

 

 

Luxury tax does not limit how much any individual player can earn. Same with salary cap, depending on how it’s set up.

[Ennder]

A salary cap will not work in baseball unless you completely revamp the minor league system from top to bottom. It just isn't realistic.

[jerichoholicninja]

If there's a salary cap limit for players, maybe there should be a cap on the percentage of profits an owner can pocket without re-investment.

 

Money definitely needs to be spread out better and if anything all prospects in the minors should band together for a raise.

 

Don't forget the costs of ownership is not simply player salaries. The front office, analytics departments, Murphy Money, first class tickets for players, team charters, top hotel rooms, locker room attendants, in-game entertainment, etc.

 

People on here are acting like: (Brewers Revenues) - (Players salaries) = profit

 

This is simply not true.

 

I'd like to think most people understand that.

 

The other thing is that Mark is not the only owner of the Brewers. I'm sure just about every other team is owned the same way. Mark might be happy spending more on players and making a few million less but the other owners have a say in that too and they might not be as happy with it. Especially since they're already making less since they own a smaller percentage of the team. I think we would really be surprised at how much Mark, or any other principle owner of any team, actually personally makes by owning a franchise. I'm sure it's a number most of us can only dream of but I have a feeling it is nowhere near as much as we all want to believe these guys are taking home.

[AdvantageSchneider]

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?

 

I guess I don't see the point in bringing up the price of parking and hot dogs if they aren't related to players' salaries. Are the players not overpaid if parking is $5 and hot dogs are $1?

 

Demand for older free agents is down and that is driving the free agent's salaries down. By contrast demand for younger players is up, yet the CBA prohibits or constrains the salaries of young players from increasing. That is why there is going to be a strike.

[mtrebs]

I don’t think I could take it if the Brewers were finally a strong World Series contender and then a strike killed that chance (a la the 1994 Expos). There’s a good chance I’d have to give up baseball forever (unless the Brewers already happened to win it all prior to then.)

[owbc]

Sounds like you are opposed to salary caps and the luxury tax?

 

 

Luxury tax does not limit how much any individual player can earn. Same with salary cap, depending on how it’s set up.

 

Huh? The whole point of these systems is to restrict salaries. Several teams avoided Harper/Machado bidding due to their desire to stay under the luxury tax threshold.

[owbc]

Demand for older free agents is down and that is driving the free agent's salaries down. By contrast demand for younger players is up, yet the CBA prohibits or constrains the salaries of young players from increasing. That is why there is going to be a strike.

 

Exactly. That's all there is to it.

[JimH5]

I guess I don't see the point in bringing up the price of parking and hot dogs if they aren't related to players' salaries. Are the players not overpaid if parking is $5 and hot dogs are $1?

 

It's not about players' salaries. It's about teams being able to charge those prices because crowds are drawn to watch the best players in the world, and we are willing to pay those prices while watching those players. Absent the players and they can't charge those prices.

[paul253]

Huh? The whole point of these systems is to restrict salaries. Several teams avoided Harper/Machado bidding due to their desire to stay under the luxury tax threshold

 

Ok. But it still doesn’t restrict any one player’s salary. If anything it restricts what other players the team is willing to sign. Just because, say, the Yankees didn’t get involved for Machado or Harper that doesn’t mean Harper and Machado had their salary restricted. Machado still received the largest contract in the history of baseball. Maybe now the Padres aren’t able to go out and get anothe expensive free agent but again, that doesn’t mean any individual player has his salary restricted.

 

I guess I don't see the point in bringing up the price of parking and hot dogs if they aren't related to players' salaries. Are the players not overpaid if parking is $5 and hot dogs are $1?

 

The point was to point out how out of touch the players are when they claim they are being treated unfairly. Kind of like “you think you’re being treated unfairly? I’m paying $15 to park a car a quarter mile from the stadium. And unlike you I’m not making $550,000 minimum each year I work so I apologize for not having any sympathy”.

 

I’d love to be treated as unfairly as Major League Baseball players are.

[paul253]

Absent the players and they can't charge those prices

 

But absent the owners there are no players.

[DougJonesChangeUp]

When the income gap in this country has been getting larger for at least a decade, I say screw the owners, throw that money around more evenly through the minors in my ideal world. Don't know if it's possible but that's what I'd like to see.

[JimH5]

Absent the players and they can't charge those prices

 

But absent the owners there are no players.

 

It's not binary. They have to work symbiotically. But the players are the product, and they are irreplaceable. And whether they have fan sympathy or not doesn't really matter. Both sides have to be content with the labor deal.

 

And the new trend of younger & cheaper rosters has cost older players a lot of money. Suppressed wages--even high ones--lead to unrest.

[TURBO]

But the players are the product, and they are irreplaceable.

 

I disagree.

 

Players are 100% replaceable, but how many people can afford to own a team?

 

If a player opts to not play baseball because their salaries are not what they think they are worth, there will be 1000 guys willing to play for that embarrassing salary.

[JimH5]

But the players are the product, and they are irreplaceable.

 

I disagree.

 

Players are 100% replaceable, but how many people can afford to own a team?

 

If a player opts to not play baseball because their salaries are not what they think they are worth, there will be 1000 guys willing to play for that embarrassing salary.

 

And fans rejected replacement players when the owners brought them in in 1995. As a group, they're not as good. Players in Independent leagues, the minor leagues, college, etc...nobody's paying $50 a seat to watch them.

[sveumrules]

But the players are the product, and they are irreplaceable.

 

I disagree.

 

Players are 100% replaceable, but how many people can afford to own a team?

 

If a player opts to not play baseball because their salaries are not what they think they are worth, there will be 1000 guys willing to play for that embarrassing salary.

 

If you replaced the current players, the quality of the product would fall off exponentially.

 

A drastically worsened product would draw significantly less interest & generate far less revenue.

 

Team values would plummet accordingly.