Jump to content

The MLB lockout is lifted!


southsider2k5

Recommended Posts

This is one issue im on the side of the owners.  There is a desperate need for a draft.  The current proposal projects to spend $20m+ more then before.  If there is not a deal the players are the sole cause and should be exposed for it.   Tatis' statements are not true and just grand standing imo.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

This was one driving me nuts last night. A number of these things would ideally require weeks to get the exact details down and several back-and-forth passes. It’s generally acceptable to both but you don’t want to accidentally sign off on something whose implications you don’t understand. Manfred wants them doing these talks under a deadline so that maybe that exact scenario happens. No wonder no one trusts him.z

Usually you don’t have weeks to assess these things when working on major deals and have to evaluate in real-time.  That being said, I you’re right that Manfred is purposely introducing certain things late in the game to make it harder for the union to reject.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Polar Bear said:

This is one issue im on the side of the owners.  There is a desperate need for a draft.  The current proposal projects to spend $20m+ more then before.  If there is not a deal the players are the sole cause and should be exposed for it.   Tatis' statements are not true and just grand standing imo.  

I think the issue with drafts is that it caps earnings for players who may be worth quite a bit more and then ties up their rights for years without them actually being able to earn what they are truly work. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Chicago White Sox said:

Usually you don’t have weeks to assess these things when working on major deals and have to evaluate in real-time.  That being said, I you’re right that Manfred is purposely introducing certain things late in the game to make it harder for the union to reject.

Union can use intl draft to force one final increase in prearb pool. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

I think the issue with drafts is that it caps earnings for players who may be worth quite a bit more and then ties up their rights for years without them actually being able to earn what they are truly work. 

Yes, but with the pools already in place, it's really not that much of a difference, if any, and it gets most of the money in the players hands not the grime around them.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

I think the issue with drafts is that it caps earnings for players who may be worth quite a bit more and then ties up their rights for years without them actually being able to earn what they are truly work. 

Thats a non argument imo bc its no different then it is now.  The players near the top would actually be getting more than the current system as would the players at the bottom.  

Christian Vaquero would have actually gotten more money this past January but would still be locked up for the same amount of time. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

I think the issue with drafts is that it caps earnings for players who may be worth quite a bit more and then ties up their rights for years without them actually being able to earn what they are truly work. 

The issue that I have with drafts is that players do not have the choice on where to sign. 

I'm fine with limiting spending on amateur players, as a competitive balance tool, but the draft pool has to be bigger dollar wise than what it is. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

I think the issue with drafts is that it caps earnings for players who may be worth quite a bit more and then ties up their rights for years without them actually being able to earn what they are truly work. 

That has already been doing with spending caps.  All this system does is screw over late arrivals and older kids with breakout season by leaving no money for them by the time they are noticed.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

Usually you don’t have weeks to assess these things when working on major deals and have to evaluate in real-time.  That being said, I you’re right that Manfred is purposely introducing certain things late in the game to make it harder for the union to reject.

At the very least, for something like “an international draft”, this is novel enough that the union should have had text weeks ago. That’s the kind of thing that is likely to need refinement for both sides to agree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, flavum said:

I’m definitely for ties after 12, but if the man on 2nd rule continues, play the 10th and 11th regular, and then start it in the 12th.

This.  Give teams a chance to win in extras w/o the gimmick first.  After 12 or so saving the pen becomes important so I'm fine with it then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, HOFHurt35 said:

Although I believe it hurt us more than help us, I'm fine with the man on 2nd rule.    LONG xtra inning games are not good for anyone. 

 

Start runner on 2nd in the 12th inning.  Give it 2 innings to finish organically.  

7 inning double headers are complete trash tho. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Dick Allen said:

Yes, but with the pools already in place, it's really not that much of a difference, if any, and it gets most of the money in the players hands not the grime around them.

The grime around them can still be paid off to get them to sign with a team on the open market currently. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Texsox said:

It only helps the owners. When players can only negotiate with one team it lowers salaries. 

No. The salaries in the minor leagues are all the same for a team. It's the bonus that the international players negotiate.

It does benefit the owners because it would probably a controlled bonus amount like the US draft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is an idea I talked to my dad about that I really like.  Set the pre-arb pool at $40M.   But 50% of all CBT taxes from teams that exceed go into the pool.  I'd say 100%, but not exactly sure where those dolalrs go currently, so I am sure someone isn't likely to want to give it all up.  Seems like a great compromise for both sides. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...