okay, what am I missing?

[Rick2583]

I couldn't help but notice some of the more recent arbitration decisions that had me asking, "What the hell are these owners looking at?" Here's two that come to mind.......

Pittsburgh Pirates Pedro Alvarez

2013 = $700,000 Numbers = 36/100/233 League leading 186Ks and an OBP of .296
2014 = $4.2M Numbers = 18/56/231 .312 OBP missed 40 games
2015 = Wins arbitration for $5.7M

Atlanta Braves Mike Minor

Through 2012 (3 seasons) = 19-15 with a 4.73 ERA
2013 = 13-9 3.21 ERA earned $505,000
2014 = Salary increased to $3.8M
2014 = 6-12 with a 4.77 ERA and a 1.438 WHIP
2015 = Wins arbitration for $5.6M

How these two players were worthy of such large increases baffles the mind.

 

[totus44]

Unions and agents baby!

 

[Rick2583]

Unions and agents baby!

I get all that Tom but seriously if you were say a vacuum cleaner salesman & one year you sold 200 vacuum's & the following year you only sold 75 do you think you'd get a raise?

 

[totus44]

I get all that Tom but seriously if you were say a vacuum cleaner salesman & one year you sold 200 vacuum's & the following year you only sold 75 do you think you'd get a raise?

Of course not. But that is representative of performance based compensation, a hallmark of capitalism.

Now baseball, the all-american sport, has adopted a collective/redistributive economic model that is more socialist in nature.

 

[Rick2583]

Of course not. But that is representative of performance based compensation, a hallmark of capitalism.

Now baseball, the all-american sport, has adopted a collective/redistributive economic model that is more socialist in nature.

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA......Okay.

 

[totus44]

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA......Okay.

You have noted often that compensation in MLB is disconnected from reality (performance, comps, etc), correct? Its a well accepted fact that the normalization of wages, redistribution (from owners to players), and guaranteed wages are things that unions share with Marxist socialism. Just like progressivism is rooted in Hagel, but I digress.

Now its not pure socialism because there is some reward and acknowledgment of the individual in the collective....bonuses and tiers for stars, etc. My point is that baseball is an odd hybrid of two opposing economic philosophies. This is why it doesnt make much sense.

 

[yankeesince59]

You have noted often that compensation in MLB is disconnected from reality (performance, comps, etc), correct? Its a well accepted fact that the normalization of wages, redistribution (from owners to players), and guaranteed wages are things that unions share with Marxist socialism. Just like progressivism is rooted in Hagel, but I digress.

Now its not pure socialism because there is some reward and acknowledgment of the individual in the collective....bonuses and tiers for stars, etc. My point is that baseball is an odd hybrid of two opposing economic philosophies. This is why it doesnt make much sense.

...you know, I'm really surprise that MLB has gotten away with the old anti-trust ruling for so long...almost 100 years.

 

[totus44]

...you know, I'm really surprise that MLB has gotten away with the old anti-trust ruling for so long...almost 100 years.

Same here. Senate Bill 2269 introduced by Rand Paul back in 2012 tried to repeal antitrust laws.

 

[Rick2583]

You have noted often that compensation in MLB is disconnected from reality (performance, comps, etc), correct? Its a well accepted fact that the normalization of wages, redistribution (from owners to players), and guaranteed wages are things that unions share with Marxist socialism. Just like progressivism is rooted in Hagel, but I digress.

Now its not pure socialism because there is some reward and acknowledgment of the individual in the collective....bonuses and tiers for stars, etc. My point is that baseball is an odd hybrid of two opposing economic philosophies. This is why it doesnt make much sense.

For the most part professor I follow your logic but, going forward do me a favor, less of trying to make the deans list and more pretending like some of us are from Missouri.

 

[Mattingly23NY]

I couldn't help but notice some of the more recent arbitration decisions that had me asking, "What the hell are these owners looking at?" Here's two that come to mind.......

Pittsburgh Pirates Pedro Alvarez

2013 = $700,000 Numbers = 36/100/233 League leading 186Ks and an OBP of .296
2014 = $4.2M Numbers = 18/56/231 .312 OBP missed 40 games
2015 = Wins arbitration for $5.7M

Atlanta Braves Mike Minor

Through 2012 (3 seasons) = 19-15 with a 4.73 ERA
2013 = 13-9 3.21 ERA earned $505,000
2014 = Salary increased to $3.8M
2014 = 6-12 with a 4.77 ERA and a 1.438 WHIP
2015 = Wins arbitration for $5.6M

How these two players were worthy of such large increases baffles the mind.

I guess less is truly more after all, at least in these two strewed instances.....

 

[Rick2583]

I guess less is truly more after all, at least in these two strewed instances.....

I'd have loved to have been a fly on the wall during those negotiations.

 

[Hammerojustice]

Union..... Players union....

 

[totus44]

For the most part professor I follow your logic but, going forward do me a favor, less of trying to make the deans list and more pretending like some of us are from Missouri.

Sorry Rick....cliff notes, got it. Lol!

Interesting thought experiment: if baseball eliminated guaranteed contracts, and installed a contract min of $1M/yr ($25M/yr min salary cap)....would the MLBPA go for it? This is a divide an conquer strategy, pitting journeymen players against the stars.

I think long term this would be a better deal for the players, but not in the short term.

 

[yankeesince59]

I think long term this would be a better deal for the players, but not in the short term.

...why are you dragging up Kevin Long again?

 

[Rick2583]

Sorry Rick....cliff notes, got it. Lol!

Interesting thought experiment: if baseball eliminated guaranteed contracts, and installed a contract min of $1M/yr ($25M/yr min salary cap)....would the MLBPA go for it? This is a divide an conquer strategy, pitting journeymen players against the stars.

I think long term this would be a better deal for the players, but not in the short term.

I know with these large contracts today this idea comes a little late but, I've always felt that if a player is demanding $20M a year & his best offer is say $12M a year & ALL the interested teams hold there ground than said player would have to except the $12M I mean whats the guy gonna do quit & become a shoe salesman? He'd have to except the $12M from the team of his choice.

Now I know the only thing wrong with this is that it would fall under the heading of Collusion. But if something like this were done under the table years ago the salaries wouldn't be what they are today. Unfortunately even if this were possible the'll always be that one owner that says "Sure we'll give you the $20M". And then we'd be right back to square one. Never mind.

 

[totus44]

You see, if a team wasn't committed to that contract, then someone might be willing to pay $25M, and cut him if he fails to perform.

I'm thinking NFL w/o the cap.

 

[Mattingly23NY]

I'd have loved to have been a fly on the wall during those negotiations.

"A fly on the wall?" seriously, LOL....

Be careful, they either have a no-pest supposed harmless, fly auto spray system, hidden from view.

Or-worse yet, they just may of had a fly swatter in one hand......

 

[Rick2583]

"A fly on the wall?" seriously, LOL....

Be careful, they either have a no-pest supposed harmless, fly auto spray system, hidden from view.

Or-worse yet, they just may of had a fly swatter in one hand......

Its okay I got clearance from Vincent Price.