The Dolphins Make Me Cry.com - Forums

December 2nd is when there will be a work stoppage and screw up free agency. Lots of issues to work out so this may delay the season or worse.

I am almost entirely on the players side of this as I am in all sports, but there is an easy compromise to be made in terms of free agency. Almost all of these massive free agent deals that go over 7 years end in disaster for various reasons. They should adopt the NBA model and have max contracts for shorter terms. That way, the player still gets paid but the team doesn't have to worry about a 38 year old making $35 Million and hitting .219 a year. This will also even the playing field somewhat between the Dodgers and Marlins. If all a team can do is offer say 4 years/$140 Million then other teams can't be outbid.

This also incentives the player to try hard all 4 years rather than phone it in 3 years into a 10 year deal.

That's another form of salary cap, and the players are likely to want a salary floor in exchange.  As I understand it, players who are called up from the minors make (https://www.sportingnews.com/us/mlb/news/even-after-overdue-salary-bump-baseballs-minor-leaguers-still-paid-far-below-nba-nhl-counterparts/1gpql94asy7a10uo5nvc3yp4k) under $50k for their first year in the majors and under $100k for their second year; players still in AAA and below make what can only be described as poverty wages.

It wouldn't necessarily be a cap because a team can have as many max players as they want. There should absolutely be a salary floor and something needs to be done about Minor League wages. They really are poverty wages and it's disgusting for the Yankees to not support their minor league affiliates.

The minimum MLB salary is half a million, so they can certainly live off of that. There is still negotiation though with free agency and arbitration. Too much ground to cover and they haven't budged much on it. If the players accept that 13 year contracts are nuts, they can get much larger wages in the short term. I think that's a win for everyone but common sense doesn't always apply when money is on the line.

The problem is that (as I understand it) if you're called up from the minors, you don't qualify for that ~500k "minimum salary" until your third year in the majors.

There is a whole convoluted system about being called up from the Minors and being sent back a certain number of times, not to mention service time manipulation which will definitely be addressed this offseason. Lots of stuff the players can fight for and fix but they are going to have to give back and I think limiting the years on contracts is the way to go.

Short answer - I'm with the players, without them there isn't baseball
Other short answer - I don't care, if this kills baseball as a sport entirely, I'm ok with it, it's a pretty boring sport

I've absolutely grown out of the sports the past 2 years so I can't even disagree. I still want to see the Dolphins or Knicks win a title before I die but my days are no longer ruined if my teams lose games.

I saw that MLB was going to either start subsidizing or providing player housing for minor leaguers. This is major since that is the largest bill for most people.

That would be a huge help.  Granted, my reference is from a long time ago.  But, I played two years of Single A ball in the early 80's.  During the season, there were 5 of us living in a 2 bedroom apartment.  Also, my first year I made $10K and my second year I had a huge $500 pay increase.  I wasn't highly scouted or anything and if you weren't highly scouted and sought after coming out of high school or college, you pretty much signed for whatever they offered you back then.  There was no negotiation at least not on your first contract. 

It shocks me that they don't already. Wouldn't you want your players all living next to the stadium in a bunch of dorms? Easy to keep an eye on them and make sure they are eating healthy? These guys are investments, they should be treated as such.

Extremely valid points and especially Dolphster's point is right on the money. 

I am friends with two guys that bounced around in the minors but they both spent time with the Marlins big league club (one more than the other).  And their way of life was very similar to Dolphster's.   When they got called up, it was like a luxury to them. 

Wednesday is the day for the work stoppage if nothing changes tonight or tomorrow.

As a Yankees fan, I welcome it and the end of all baseball so those greedy fucks stop pocketing profits while raising ticket prices. Burn in hell, Hal Steinbrenner.

I also welcome an MLB work stoppage .. and the domino effect of the Sinclair RSN bankruptcy ! .. down with them all

The Owners and the Players had a meeting today to try to see if they could avoid a lockout. It lasted 30 minutes.

So, that's pretty much that. I would be fine with no baseball this year. Both sides are dumb but mainly the owners, not to mention their greed. The Yankees are the worst case scenario, literally raking in above $600 Million a year in revenue and they won't sign top players except once every 5 years or so due to costs. This is not supposed to be a business first, it's about winning. Don't finish in 3rd place and then show me your Balance Sheet while claiming it was a successful year.

yay for a work stoppage !! .. is this a strike or a lockout ? .. cause I'd like to see some pickets.

i'm hoping that they cancel the entire season .. and the next one too. but unfortunately all congress has to do is say that they'll look at MLB's anti-trust exemption if they don't work out a deal to make them all cave

Huh???  For decades everyone has complained about the Yankees high payroll, accusing them of buying Championships.  They've probably paid the most money of any team in the Luxury Tax for excessive payroll.  I realize Hal is a cheapskate and doesn't want to pay the luxury tax, but I believe they are still in the top 5 for payroll.  I'm a Yankees fan and I'd rather see them field a team at the max payroll without getting into the Luxury Tax.  The problem I see with MLB is that there are too many owners with way too low of a payroll; they make money when top teams come to their cities and fill the stands (Yankees, Boston, Dodgers) and they get a cut of the Luxury Tax paid by the Yankees, Mets, Boston, etc. - and they just pocket this money instead of its intended purpose of increasing the payroll of their own teams.

You have to compare what they bring in to what their payroll is. Right now, they are a Wild Card team, not really a contender. However, that changes if you sign a Max Scherzer or Carlos Carrea. That would add between $30-40 Million in payroll. The team brought in $683 Million in revenue during their last full season in 2019. 2020 was crap of course but 2021, even with restrictions they brought in $526 Million. This is far and away greater than every other team and as a fan who would have to pay hundreds for one ticket on top of my $40 parking, $14 beer and $9 pretzel, I expect them to invest the money back into the product.

They aren't Verizon, I don't care about their profits. They are making hundreds of millions a year and the team's value grows 5% almost every year. I'm fine with not having a $400 Million payroll but when a guy like Max Scherzer becomes available and would help them win the World Series, I expect them to be the highest bidder.

Unlike an evil corporation like Verizon, they really don't provide a service at all. The players do everything and I'm fine with them getting a larger piece of the pie.

But Max Scherzer didn't help the Dodgers win the World Series.
He didn't even help them win their division.

He did his part, they just ran into the World Series champs. Any team that adds Max is better for it. Whether or not that is enough is up to the rest of the team.

If I were the Yankees, I wouldn't sign him, or any other star pitcher in the NL.   NL pitchers face only eight hitters per game.   AL pitchers face nine.  He comes to the AL East, he's going to get his bell rung.

And that's coming from a fan of the Yankees personal farm club (the Marlins)

MLBPA rejected the owner's proposal unanimously and the Owners are expected to announce the season will be delayed and games will be canceled. Players say the rumors of the two sides being close were never true and created by the owners.

They appear to be very far apart on all economic matters, especially the Luxury Tax which is being used by owners as a salary cap that is not going up higher to match the new revenues.

I'm almost 100% on the players side for this but I said before that they need to cap the years on these contracts as they are way out of line with all other professional sports. 13 year deals? Absolute madness and that creates a lot of hesitancy on a team's side about whether to commit so much money and flexibility into one player. Almost eveyr mega contract has been bad for the team, so just cap it at 7 years and the salaries will probably go up to match it.

However, that's just one of many issues and one I don't think they are even discussing. This is primarily about the Luxury Tax, Arbitration and Free Agency.

The problem with baseball is that contracts are 100% guaranteed.   No contract in any sport should ever be guaranteed.

First off, the contracts of every manager/head coach and GM are guaranteed, even in a sport like the NFL where player contracts aren't.

But hey, if you're in favor of no guaranteed contracts, I'm also fine with that... as long as it works BOTH ways.  So for example, after Corbin Burnes wins the NL Cy Young award, he tears up his contract with the Brewers and immediately goes to play for whomever will pay him the most.

You agree with that scenario, right?  Or does "you signed the contract, live with it" only apply to players?

If that's the way it works in the NFL, that's the way it should work in all other sports.   This is a job and these are the terms of said job.   Because if you don't like it, there's thousands of other guys who are willing and able to take your spot.  

And before you start whining about that not being fair to the players, remember what I said in the other thread about life not being fair.

I think all contracts should be guaranteed, but they should have a cap on the years so that the players can get paid more over time. If there was a 6 year limit on contracts, Manny Machado would probably have gotten more combined than the one mega contract he signed. NBA does it and they make a ton. NHL rarely goes past 7 years and that's for mega stars.

Just seems better for all parties but it will never be agreed to by the MLBPA, especially if the owners aren't even budging on the luxury tax and arbitration.

One of the issues they are making traction on is  14 team playoff system. That is a horrible idea that would ruin baseball. What is the point of 162 games if nearly half the league gets in the playoffs? This is being driven purely by greed from both parties who want playoff revenue.

Knowing Rob Manfred, he'll have 14 teams make the playoffs, but half of them will be eliminated after one game.
Worst of both worlds.

The players are dumb for this as it lets owners actually spend less. Fans get angry with low payrolls when you are losing, but if you are a "perennial playoff team" then you don't need to spend an extra $8 Million at the trade deadline. Keep staying in the 86 win range and pocket that TV money.

MLBPA is usually the best sports union but they aren't playing anything right this time around.

It appears that there is a deal and baseball will start April 7th. Lots of double headers to make it a full 162 game season.

No details yet on the final numbers but I don't think the Players got what they needed. The Luxury Tax is still being used as a hard salary cap and the threshhold was not raised high enough.

The owners will vote to ratify the deal at 6 PM ET.   If they do, then free agency will begin immediately.   One big change is the that DH will be put in both leagues.  This should've been done in 1973 when the AL did it.  Better late than never.

Kind of takes the manager's job down to being almost as useless as a first base coach. I get why fans would like it but I don't like it at all. I absolutely love a great chess match on the diamond.

Because it makes no sense to have a pitcher in the batter's box swinging at pitches and looking silly while doing it.   Pitching and hitting are skills that take years to develop and there isn't enough hours in a day to hone both.  It's either one or the other.

In the past I could agree, but we are long past the point of the pitcher knowing how to hit. They are automatic outs and it's embarassing to watch at this point. The DH isn't as "pure" as I like, but neither are automatic outs.

So we are allowing guys who can't catch a ball to still play. The problem is teams not emphasiszing the pitchers hitting and not that pitchers can't hit. There is no reason they can't give up 4 or 5 days of golf to take batting practice. 

Pitchers make more money than anyone else on the team.   You aren't going to put your $30 million per year investment at risk that he may hurt himself swinging a bat (which he doesn't do on a regular basis) on a chance that he may get a hit occasionally.   Pitching is a specialty that is different from any other position on the diamond and top pitching prospects have millions invested into them even before they make it to the majors.  Owners will protect that investment every way possible.   

And don't say that DH's can't catch balls.   I've seen the DH rotate on some American League teams where they play the field.

The money aspect is dead on. I remember around 2009 the Ynakees had Chien Meng Wang and he hurt himself running the bases and was never the same. Pitchers are too valuable to hit. Not just that, but the DH opens up another big money spot so the players want that. It's just better all around.

You're absolutely right.  It is better baseball.  And it may take a couple years for the National League to adjust but eventually their pitchers will be on equal footing just like the American League.  They will now face nine hitters every game.

This eliminates the amazing chess matches known as "Do not swing at any pitch" and "Under no circumstances are you to attempt to run to first base" that National League managers currently employ when their pitchers come up to bat.

Call me crazy, but a world in which every batter actually tries to hit the ball seems like it might help baseball's waning popularity.

If we are going to have one DH....why not have nine?  Baseball isn't like hockey or basketball where you seamlessly transition from offense to defense, it is like football where offense and defense is separate and distinct phases.  So have your nine best hitters - hit; and your nine best defensive players - play defense.  No doubt there are great hitters that can't field and great fielders that can't hit. 

 

Only if you're willing to allow a roster of 40 players with an expansion to 55 in late Aug/early Sep (current setup is 25/40).  Teams will need more hitting/fielding specialists and a few more pitchers as well.  

The same reason we don't say, "If you're going to allow one pinch runner... why not allow infinite pinch runners?": roster sizes.

A position player plays the vast majority of his team's games; a pitcher does not.  And due to the way DH rules work, allowing a pitcher to bat in games they do and do not pitch in hurts the team (without these particular rules, there is significant potential for gamesmanship shenanigans).  It's ultimately easier to allow a team to substitute a DH for a player that won't even play back-to-back games.