Offseason Targets

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

One more thing.. you know why we don't "know" their situation financially? Because they keep their books closed intentionally so they can make these laughable claims. 

Owners refuse to actually prove what they claim because they can't. The onus is on them to justify their claims, not on me.

[Flash]

16 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

One more thing.. you know why we don't "know" their situation financially? Because they keep their books closed intentionally so they can make these laughable claims. 

Owners refuse to actually prove what they claim because they can't. The onus is on them to justify their claims, not on me.

I'm following this thread but not sure I understand what should be expected of MLB owners. Should they be expected to ignore the economic impact the pandemic has had on their businesses because their businesses are professional sports teams? Should they be expected to maintain or even increase spending in the face of reduced or perhaps zero gate receipts? Some owners are fiduciaries to their minority investors. Would it be a responsible decision to ignore the financial dynamics of todays environment simply because they had the wherewithall to acquire professional teams in the first place? Do they owe fans visibility into their financial situations because we don't believe they are spending as much as they should be on payroll? Should owners of privately held pro sports franchises be held to a higher accountability standard than owners of other private businesses?   

[poppysox]

11 minutes ago, Flash said:

I'm following this thread but not sure I understand what should be expected of MLB owners. Should they be expected to ignore the economic impact the pandemic has had on their businesses because their businesses are professional sports teams? Should they be expected to maintain or even increase spending in the face of reduced or perhaps zero gate receipts? Some owners are fiduciaries to their minority investors. Would it be a responsible decision to ignore the financial dynamics of todays environment simply because they had the wherewithall to acquire professional teams in the first place? Do they owe fans visibility into their financial situations because we don't believe they are spending as much as they should be on payroll? Should owners of privately held pro sports franchises be held to a higher accountability standard than owners of other private businesses?   

You make an excellent point.

[thxfrthmmrs]

1 hour ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

Nba teams must have just picked better business men to run their teams. Weird! They seem to be dolling out money and contracts like its nothing.

Since I'm not a lawyer proving collusion in court that means it doesn't exist lol. Just like 2008... no bankers did anything wrong because none were criminally changed. Nice insight cali. Carry that absurdly wealthies water.

Not really. Owners aren’t losing more money than they have to just so they could pay players their full salary.

www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/30211678/nba-revenue-2019-20-season-dropped-10-83-billion-sources-say%3fplatform=amp

“The league and union are negotiating methods of artificially inflating the 2020-21 salary cap to keep it around $109 million, sources told ESPN. Those talks have centered on placing a larger percentage of each player's salary into an escrow fund. If at the end of the season, total player salaries exceed their mandated share of overall basketball-related income -- about 50% -- some or even all of that escrow money would go to teams.”

[Flash]

16 minutes ago, poppysox said:

You make an excellent point.

Thanks but not usually?  We should all be grateful for Steve Cohen's acquisition of the Mets for instilling hope (perhaps falsely) that teams will spend in order to keep pace with an expectation that Cohen's deep pockets will drive the talent market.  My sense is that if not for his presence, expectations of any vibrancy in the FA market would be tempered by a 'wait and see' approach from ownership.   

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

53 minutes ago, thxfrthmmrs said:

Not really. Owners aren’t losing more money than they have to just so they could pay players their full salary.

www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/30211678/nba-revenue-2019-20-season-dropped-10-83-billion-sources-say%3fplatform=amp

“The league and union are negotiating methods of artificially inflating the 2020-21 salary cap to keep it around $109 million, sources told ESPN. Those talks have centered on placing a larger percentage of each player's salary into an escrow fund. If at the end of the season, total player salaries exceed their mandated share of overall basketball-related income -- about 50% -- some or even all of that escrow money would go to teams.”

What does this prove exactly? Nba players and teams have revenue % split agreements for player salaries. The cap is based on prior years revenues and etc. They didn't use last year to set the cap because they thought it was artificial and not a good barometer but because the cap is based on a percentage of revenue, there has to be an escrow incase revenues don't bounce back. This is literally no where near the same thing. Their cba and salary cap are based on revenues. Baseball has no cap. Theres no requirement to meet a certain percentage on players salaries.

Nba teams also don't have closed books in negotiations as mlb owners do. This is actually the nba saying we'll pay you based on where we both thought revenues would be next year pre pandemic but if the revenue is greatly affected by the pandemic the cap would be lower so salaries would have to come down. Its actually the exact opposite of the mlb who already intentionally shortened last season to deprive players of salaries. Amazing this post has 2 likes as if some point was proven.

Edited November 29, 2020 by Look at Ray Ray Run

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

1 hour ago, Flash said:

I'm following this thread but not sure I understand what should be expected of MLB owners. Should they be expected to ignore the economic impact the pandemic has had on their businesses because their businesses are professional sports teams? Should they be expected to maintain or even increase spending in the face of reduced or perhaps zero gate receipts? Some owners are fiduciaries to their minority investors. Would it be a responsible decision to ignore the financial dynamics of todays environment simply because they had the wherewithall to acquire professional teams in the first place? Do they owe fans visibility into their financial situations because we don't believe they are spending as much as they should be on payroll? Should owners of privately held pro sports franchises be held to a higher accountability standard than owners of other private businesses?   

Lol

People who compare owning a professional sports franchise to things like a landscaping business are literally hopeless in these communications. Is the local landscaping business subsidized by my tax dollars? Did we all help build the landscapers headquarters? 

So let me get this straight, they aren't required to spend when revenues have soared well beyond costs for the past 40 years but when they aren't making money hand over foot they can also use that as an excuse not to spend. That sounds like a good deal for owners. Glad you all are so sympathetic to these people lol

Teams laying off workers left and right after making billions while using tax dollars to build stadiums. Amazing people support these crooks.

Edited November 29, 2020 by Look at Ray Ray Run

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

16 hours ago, South Side Hit Men said:

Not. "Beyond a shadow of a doubt" is not the threshold for proving collusion, owners have lost their case multiple times in the past, and if Tony Clark was competent he would have filed a grievance for the past few off-seasons.

Look I know in the late 80's MLB had to pay out a lot of money for losing basically 3 cases of collusion . Uberroth united the owners and Selig and Reinsdorf were at the forefront of it. That's always why I'm so anti-Reinsdorf. I also know that since then there have been more collusion grievances that arbiters never ruled in favor of the players and others that went nowhere for lack of evidence. I would never say the owners aren't a tricky bunch of bastards like the owners of so many multi billion dollar industries. Arbiters weigh the evidence and make a ruling for one side or the other so the arbiter has to be pretty convinced there's enough evidence to rule in favor of the players.

I also know that owners hated Fay Vincent because he didn't support them and saw the players side of it . Vincent just cared about the game , not one side or the other.

I know the owners also hate maverick owners like Ted Turner or Cohen but Cohen did get approved and that there is a salary cap (OK luxury tax) and caps on what you can spend in the international and the college draft. These things were done in the guise of competitive balance which is true to an extent. No matter what the owners do there will always be competitive imbalance because there are very rich teams and then all the other teams on varying degrees of operating capital.

Losing money unites the owners more than anything and that's how Uberroth convinced them to unite and collude for 3 years basically telling them they were idiots to put winning over profits. I sure wouldn't put it passed the owners to be colluding again. I am not that naive but to take a stance that collusion is 100% happening now is a lot more bold than my common sense approach that any opinion I have is based on lack of access to the knowledge needed to say I am 100% sure there is collusion now.

My stance is that everyone else here has that same lack of knowledge and 100% conviction in your opinion should be tempered by that lack of knowledge. I am not carrying water for the owners or the players. I am neutral because of ignorance regarding current events in that regard. If our opinions differ and you think you have the knowledge to help the MLBPA go right ahead. Otherwise you are just spitting into the wind.

Edited November 29, 2020 by CaliSoxFanViaSWside

[Flash]

2 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

 

So let me get this straight, they aren't required to spend when revenues have soared well beyond costs for the past 40 years but when they aren't making money hand over foot they can also use that as an excuse not to spend. That sounds like a good deal for owners. Glad you all are so sympathetic to these people lol

You are conflating current pandemic driven market-dynamics with the law of supply and demand. To the extent businesses in general and professional sports teams specifically fail to put forth an interesting product, we are not obligated to consume it, nor do we have the right to demand access to their financial records any more than you have the right to review your landscapers books.   

[Orlando]

3 hours ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

Nba teams must have just picked better business men to run their teams. Weird! They seem to be dolling out money and contracts like its nothing.

Since I'm not a lawyer proving collusion in court that means it doesn't exist lol. Just like 2008... no bankers did anything wrong because none were criminally changed. Nice insight cali. Carry that absurdly wealthies water.

NBA also had 90% of the season done by the time to pandemic hit

[thxfrthmmrs]

1 hour ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

What does this prove exactly? Nba players and teams have revenue % split agreements for player salaries. The cap is based on prior years revenues and etc. They didn't use last year to set the cap because they thought it was artificial and not a good barometer but because the cap is based on a percentage of revenue, there has to be an escrow incase revenues don't bounce back. This is literally no where near the same thing. Their cba and salary cap are based on revenues. Baseball has no cap. Theres no requirement to meet a certain percentage on players salaries.

Nba teams also don't have closed books in negotiations as mlb owners do. This is actually the nba saying we'll pay you based on where we both thought revenues would be next year pre pandemic but if the revenue is greatly affected by the pandemic the cap would be lower so salaries would have to come down. Its actually the exact opposite of the mlb who already intentionally shortened last season to deprive players of salaries. Amazing this post has 2 likes as if some point was proven.

Your original point was the Ricketts couldn’t cover they payroll and Bryant could be nontendered to be a farce. Baseball doesn’t have a salary cap and floor system, and I don’t think they will ever have one. In leagues where cap system is in place, e.g. NBA, NFL, NHL owners had pushed to significantly increase the salary to be escrowed to cover revenue loss. Baseball doesn’t have an escrow system in place, temporarily suppressing player salary is their way of guarding against revenue loss. Furthermore to address your point on NBA salary cap, they could not directly reduce the salary cap proportionate to the BRI hit because that would bring most every team over salary cap and possibly luxury tax.

The point MLB owners wanting to shorten the season to reduce player salary payout is apples and oranges compared to NBA, since most of the NBA season was already in the books.

Lastly, the irony is if the MLB owners are colluding to suppress player salaries (specifically during pandemic), the deals so far to the pitchers far exceeded what the industry expected, so they must be doing a really shitty job at collusion.

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

19 minutes ago, Orlando said:

NBA also had 90% of the season done by the time to pandemic hit

Plus it's apples and oranges. NBA teams pay 12 players and no minor league system . They don't have 100+  players that they are paying like every MLB team does. It also takes more people to keep track of all those players and all those players in other systems. Hockey is the closest sport you can compare to MLB.

[southsider2k5]

13 hours ago, Sox80 said:

 Some teams also have investors that aren't billionaires. 

Not in 2020 mlb.

[southsider2k5]

2 hours ago, Flash said:

I'm following this thread but not sure I understand what should be expected of MLB owners. Should they be expected to ignore the economic impact the pandemic has had on their businesses because their businesses are professional sports teams? Should they be expected to maintain or even increase spending in the face of reduced or perhaps zero gate receipts? Some owners are fiduciaries to their minority investors. Would it be a responsible decision to ignore the financial dynamics of todays environment simply because they had the wherewithall to acquire professional teams in the first place? Do they owe fans visibility into their financial situations because we don't believe they are spending as much as they should be on payroll? Should owners of privately held pro sports franchises be held to a higher accountability standard than owners of other private businesses?   

This.  I think people are stuck more in their feelings than reality when it comes to covid and spending on sports teams.

[Sox80]

10 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

Not in 2020 mlb.

 Sorry I meant minority owners.

[fathom]

24 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

This.  I think people are stuck more in their feelings than reality when it comes to covid and spending on sports teams.

When you see what’s happening with the Phillies, it should worry everyone.  It’s why I keep saying I will feel a lot more comfortable when I see the Sox linked to anyone that costs money.

[bmags]

 

ive kinda thought since alderson confirmed they weren’t looking for a president since he’d be more in control the search for a GM became less of a waiting game. Sounds like they are moving forward.

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

2 hours ago, thxfrthmmrs said:

Your original point was the Ricketts couldn’t cover they payroll and Bryant could be nontendered to be a farce. Baseball doesn’t have a salary cap and floor system, and I don’t think they will ever have one. In leagues where cap system is in place, e.g. NBA, NFL, NHL owners had pushed to significantly increase the salary to be escrowed to cover revenue loss. Baseball doesn’t have an escrow system in place, temporarily suppressing player salary is their way of guarding against revenue loss. Furthermore to address your point on NBA salary cap, they could not directly reduce the salary cap proportionate to the BRI hit because that would bring most every team over salary cap and possibly luxury tax.

The point MLB owners wanting to shorten the season to reduce player salary payout is apples and oranges compared to NBA, since most of the NBA season was already in the books.

Lastly, the irony is if the MLB owners are colluding to suppress player salaries (specifically during pandemic), the deals so far to the pitchers far exceeded what the industry expected, so they must be doing a really shitty job at collusion.

It has nothing to do with losses. The nba cap is tied to revenues. They are directly related. Thats how money is split based on their cba.

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

2 hours ago, Orlando said:

NBA also had 90% of the season done by the time to pandemic hit

Yeah, this is the point of the escrow. NBA saw most of its revenue but it did lose some. Those losses of revenue will not  be factored in for the projected salary cap but should covid cause a reduction of games and revenue next year players will be compensated based on that. 

Baseball already did this with prorating salaries last year. Thats not the problem now in baseball. The problem is baseball owners will claim and push for smaller salaries for this year and future years because of the pandemic losses that players already subsidized with prorated salaries last year. 

Salaries in baseball didn't go up to match the revenue growth over the last 20 years, leading to baseball players getting smaller share of the real revenues than other sports. If you're not going to escalate salaries to match growth you cant turn around and ask them to subsidize your losses by taking salary cuts. That's comical.

Baseball owners are awful 

[ChiliIrishHammock24]

On 11/27/2020 at 9:53 PM, EloyJenkins said:

Carlos Rodon's wife is what is wrong with professional sports. Who cares what some over pampered wife thinks on social media? Your husband sucks and will be lucky to get an MLB offer at this point. Please pipe down.

Absolutely one of the dumbest things I've read on this site in a while, but then again I don't see most of your posts. ?

[EloyJenkins]

10 minutes ago, ChiliIrishHammock24 said:

Absolutely one of the dumbest things I've read on this site in a while, but then again I don't see most of your posts. ?

What do you mean? You think rodon's wife's opinion matters? I'm confused why this is the worst you've read when 1/3 of the posts are believing some food  themed twitter post has any grain of truth.

Edited November 29, 2020 by EloyJenkins

[thxfrthmmrs]

48 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

It has nothing to do with losses. The nba cap is tied to revenues. They are directly related. Thats how money is split based on their cba.

Umm. I don't know why you have an expectation that player salaries and team spending doesn't get impacted during a global pandemic. That's not how it works.

Under the current CBA, NBA players are guaranteed a shared between 49-51% of the basketball related income (BRI). If at the end of the season the projected BRI ends up being less than the actual BRI, then NBA will have to send a check to the players. On the flip side if the projected BRI ends up a lot higher than the actual BRI than the players will have to repay the owners through the form of escrowed salaries to ensure their collective salary isn't over 51% of the BRI. So if 2020-2021 season is played in front of no crowd or less than full capacity, you could bet than the BRI will be a lot lower than the projected and what's escrowed will be going back to the owners. Salary escrow in a normal year is 10% of player salary, owners had pushed for a higher escrow % prior to restart, and end up agreeing to a 20% escrow for 2020-21, however the losses would be spread across multiple years I believe. NFL and NHL have a similar system in place, but I do not know the full details.

That said, you could argue that MLB owners are in the worst situation because lack of escrow and that they're on the hook for all existing contracts in full if the full season is played, even they're not generating anything at the gate. If Angels plays 162 games in front of no or reduced crowd in 2021, they would still have to pay Mike Trout's $38M salary in full, but if Lakers plays a 72 game season next year in which the actual BRI will certainly be a lot lower than projected, then 20% of Lebron's 39M salary goes back to the owners.

[thxfrthmmrs]

55 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

Yeah, this is the point of the escrow. NBA saw most of its revenue but it did lose some. Those losses of revenue will not  be factored in for the projected salary cap but should covid cause a reduction of games and revenue next year players will be compensated based on that. 

Baseball already did this with prorating salaries last year. Thats not the problem now in baseball. The problem is baseball owners will claim and push for smaller salaries for this year and future years because of the pandemic losses that players already subsidized with prorated salaries last year. 

Salaries in baseball didn't go up to match the revenue growth over the last 20 years, leading to baseball players getting smaller share of the real revenues than other sports. If you're not going to escalate salaries to match growth you cant turn around and ask them to subsidize your losses by taking salary cuts. That's comical.

Baseball owners are awful 

Again, this where the escrow comes in. NBA revenue dropped about 10% this year, I do not know how much of that is directly tied to BRI, but basically the owner's insurance is basically getting the 10% escrowed player salary back. And if the actual BRI is fell more than 10% then they could even recover the losses in future years.

[smellysox]

I hope something happens soon. A FA signing, a trade, anything. Sox posters are going after each other.  Soxtalk is getting dangerous. Lol

[southsider2k5]

On 11/27/2020 at 9:53 PM, EloyJenkins said:

Carlos Rodon's wife is what is wrong with professional sports. Who cares what some over pampered wife thinks on social media? Your husband sucks and will be lucky to get an MLB offer at this point. Please pipe down.

100% Carlos Rodon will have multiple major league offers for next year. If you think differently you vastly underestimate how hard it is to find major league pitching.  Teams will absolutely be willing to throw a couple of million to bet on a Rodon rebound. It is the kind of thing the Sox will be doing for depth in this rotation with other pitchers.