jenksycat Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 1 minute ago, Jack Parkman said: I will say this, if Machado and Harper both end up signing for less than $300M, if i'm the players I go on strike on August 1st, 2019. No waiting. Too many players are getting screwed. They can't afford to wait this out. There is nothing that prevents them from going on strike and negotiating a better deal. The only players getting screwed are the young guys, not the dudes making hundreds of millions. The MLBPA has been selling out young talent for decades so 30 year old guys could sign massive deals. Teams finally smartened up and stopped handing those deals out so now those deals are gone. Their next deal needs to have massive pay increases for young guys 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 OTOH if we DO sign Machado for 200 mill that would be pretty incredible unless its like 1 year 200 million then I would say that was probably unwise. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 3 minutes ago, Jack Parkman said: I will say this, if Machado and Harper both end up signing for less than $300M, if i'm the players I go on strike on August 1st, 2019. No waiting. Too many players are getting screwed. They can't afford to wait this out. There is nothing that prevents them from going on strike and negotiating a better deal. I'm sure you already know this, but most union contracts include a "no strike" clause whereby a person can be terminated from their contract if they go on strike while the contract is in operation. Cub fans right now are encouraging Jason Heyward to go on strike, for example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soxfan49 Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 19 minutes ago, Y2Jimmy0 said: This isn't true though. They've offered more $$ than Abreu's contract to other players. Alex Gordon and Tanaka included. Are you chicagoooooo92 on twitter? That guy just tweeted him the same thing ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
almagest Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 Just now, bmags said: OTOH if we DO sign Machado for 200 mill that would be pretty incredible unless its like 1 year 200 million then I would say that was probably unwise. If we do sign Machado for much less than expected I wonder if they still push for Harper? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roughneck Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 1 minute ago, Jack Parkman said: I will say this, if Machado and Harper both end up signing for less than $300M, if i'm the players I go on strike on August 1st, 2019. No waiting. Too many players are getting screwed. They can't afford to wait this out. There is nothing that prevents them from going on strike and negotiating a better deal. That's nuts. They don't have a salary cap set by revenue sharing. Unless there is collusion which can be proved, nothing you can do. Harper and Machado are superstar players. If no team wants them for more than $300m, then oh well. And why would the majority of the players want to go on strike because the two top players get astronomical deals which weren't astronomical enough? They are both such outliers that their contracts aren't going to really set the market and give more money to the other players. So middle relievers making $1 mil a year would just be tossing away a third of their year's paycheck to help get the super rich super-richer. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Parkman Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 Just now, iWiN4PreP said: Big changes are absolutely needed. I haven't spent too much time looking into it -- but it feels like Executives in the front office are pocketing more of the money and are using the young players who make next to nothing to field their team. MLB Players need to get paid significantly more for the years that they are valuable (younger years). The system is broken. They have to do something to compensate players properly. If every FO is not going to sign a top FA to a huge contract because they're unlikely to live up to it, then the system is busted. The players give 6 years of control in return for big retirement contracts. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Parkman Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 (edited) 3 minutes ago, Roughneck said: That's nuts. They don't have a salary cap set by revenue sharing. Unless there is collusion which can be proved, nothing you can do. Harper and Machado are superstar players. If no team wants them for more than $300m, then oh well. And why would the majority of the players want to go on strike because the two top players get astronomical deals which weren't astronomical enough? They are both such outliers that their contracts aren't going to really set the market and give more money to the other players. So middle relievers making $1 mil a year would just be tossing away a third of their year's paycheck to help get the super rich super-richer. It affects everyone's earnings the MR could end up getting squeezed out of the league before he even gets his payday. Players like Dozier used to get 4/60 contracts. The fact he's settling for 1/9 goes to show how fucked up this is. Edited January 10, 2019 by Jack Parkman 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoshPR Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 If 200 million is the offer he will be Phil tonight when Philly surpasses that. You know that's not true. We would be out already Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 31 minutes ago, Sockin said: Bruce also hinting that offer is around $200 mil. If we are to believe the reports from the time, they offered $100 million to Tanaka. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whisox05 Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roughneck Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 4 minutes ago, Jack Parkman said: It affects everyone's earnings the MR could end up getting squeezed out of the league before he even gets his payday. Players like Dozier used to get 4/60 contracts. The fact he's settling for 1/9 goes to show how fucked up this is. But how does a strike solve that? Teams want to win, and unless there is collusion, they will offer players what they think are reasonable contracts to get them. I guess nobody wanted to go longterm on Dozier. If the Yankees, for instance, wanted him, they could easily offer him way more than the measly $9 mil he got. Are they striking to demand longterm deals? Because that won't work. The only thing that would change this is going to a cap system that has payroll based on revenue, and the PA doesn't want that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sockin Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 (edited) Edited January 10, 2019 by Sockin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheTruth05 Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 Just now, Sockin said: https://twitter.com/CST_soxvan/status/1083395323102445569 Thome sounds pretty damn confident there, almost like it's damn near done. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoshPR Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 Only way 200 mil works is if its a 5/6 year deal. A 6yr deal puts him at 33.33 million per season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iWiN4PreP Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 8 minutes ago, Jack Parkman said: It affects everyone's earnings the MR could end up getting squeezed out of the league before he even gets his payday. Players like Dozier used to get 4/60 contracts. The fact he's settling for 1/9 goes to show how fucked up this is. Absolutely Parkman. Dozier's deal is un-fucking-believable. 9 Million for a guy that's had the years he's had? Ridiculous. There's got to be some sort of balancing going on in the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 3 minutes ago, TheTruth05 said: Thome sounds pretty damn confident there, almost like it's damn near done. pretty much how thome always talks sorry to say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saufley Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 3 minutes ago, TheTruth05 said: Thome sounds pretty damn confident there, almost like it's damn near done. I wish I were as confident as you. Let's hope. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 3 minutes ago, Roughneck said: But how does a strike solve that? Teams want to win, and unless there is collusion, they will offer players what they think are reasonable contracts to get them. I guess nobody wanted to go longterm on Dozier. If the Yankees, for instance, wanted him, they could easily offer him way more than the measly $9 mil he got. Are they striking to demand longterm deals? Because that won't work. The only thing that would change this is going to a cap system that has payroll based on revenue, and the PA doesn't want that. There's got to be a fundamental rethink of the economics. Right now, the economics of baseball have pushed too many teams to the point where your statement "Teams want to win" is no longer true. As a consequence, there is no longer enough demand for guys who can win 1-2 extra games for teams to satisfy the number of players available. One other way you could change that is to make it less viable to build with young players - by making them more expensive or by doing something else that similarly shifts teams' motivation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buehrle>Wood Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 10 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said: If we are to believe the reports from the time, they offered $100 million to Tanaka. And 175 million to arod 18 years ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iWiN4PreP Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 2 minutes ago, Tony said: To be fair, he was really bad last season. Absolutely. I had him on like 45 of my fantasy teams so I felt the pain. Yet, he still had 1.0 WAR, 21 Homers, a .305 OBP (shit, but that's typical Tim Anderson OBP), all while playing 2b. Perhaps his thinking is that he can recover and get his big contract next year, but this is just absurd. I would have loved Dozier to the Sox for 1 year 12 million even. Hell, I would have given him a 2 year contract, or even 3. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Parkman Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 (edited) 7 minutes ago, Balta1701 said: There's got to be a fundamental rethink of the economics. Right now, the economics of baseball have pushed too many teams to the point where your statement "Teams want to win" is no longer true. As a consequence, there is no longer enough demand for guys who can win 1-2 extra games for teams to satisfy the number of players available. One other way you could change that is to make it less viable to build with young players - by making them more expensive or by doing something else that similarly shifts teams' motivation. Agreed. At this point the MLBPA could go to court and claim the owners aren't acting in good faith on the current CBA, and they wouldn't If the players aren't getting their retirement contracts, then the negotiated 6 years of control is just being exploitative and nothing more. There are two options currently: 1. Cap and Floor 2. Arbitration kicks in after 1st full season in the Majors. I don't think the owners would go for 2. so they have to seriously consider the cap and floor model. Edited January 10, 2019 by Jack Parkman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steveno89 Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 7 minutes ago, Balta1701 said: There's got to be a fundamental rethink of the economics. Right now, the economics of baseball have pushed too many teams to the point where your statement "Teams want to win" is no longer true. As a consequence, there is no longer enough demand for guys who can win 1-2 extra games for teams to satisfy the number of players available. One other way you could change that is to make it less viable to build with young players - by making them more expensive or by doing something else that similarly shifts teams' motivation. What about a reduction in team control over a new player? Instead of say 6-7 years of control that currently exists, what about going to 5 years of control? Players could hit arbitration and free agency sooner, theoretically allowing them to earn more money? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roughneck Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 1 minute ago, Balta1701 said: There's got to be a fundamental rethink of the economics. Right now, the economics of baseball have pushed too many teams to the point where your statement "Teams want to win" is no longer true. As a consequence, there is no longer enough demand for guys who can win 1-2 extra games for teams to satisfy the number of players available. One other way you could change that is to make it less viable to build with young players - by making them more expensive or by doing something else that similarly shifts teams' motivation. Clearly not all teams want to win. The problem is that the teams which do want to win seem set at a lot of these positions. Players are in a rough spot because so many teams are rebuilding, and the teams trying to win seem set either set at a lot of these positions or at payroll limits. If the Cubs/Yankees/Boston/Dodgers had legitimate needs at 3B or OF, Harper and Machado would be looking at much bigger contracts and the Sox might not be in on this. Maybe the problem was the players agreeing to the current penalty system, because those teams clearly are profiting like crazy, but no longer willing to spend the taxed money because it also comes with other penalties. A guy like Dozier could moderately improve a lot of teams, but that's the exact move the Sox would have made in years past which would drive fans insane - a pretty good veteran who is too old to be on your next good team, who will help a contender but do just well enough for you to worsen your draft position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eminor3rd Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 Dozier is coming off a 0.8 fWAR season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts