Mets Refugees  

Go Back   Mets Refugees > Mets Baseball > New York Mets

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-16-2019, 03:07 AM   #61
JPSchmack
Stonecutters Member
 
JPSchmack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 1996
Location: Gilbert, AZ
Posts: 99,745
Default

Obviously, we can cherry pick players and argue scenarios for days. I'm just saying it's not clear-cut. They picked after Year 6 for a reason.

There's billions of variables. Really fucking smart people would have to run numbers and scenarios and look at charts of career paths and earnings tables and shit before I just ran with "That'll be a huge win for the MLBPA or Owners."

Because of that, I don't think "FA after year 5" is the hill the MLBPA should be willing to die on.

But I do think that "Somehow, 50% of revenues is guaranteed to the MLPBA" IS a hill worth dying on.

Because that cannot blow up in your face. You can work it out the HOW later. Fighting to change a system "hoping the outcome leads to" isn't as smart as fighting for the guarantee.
__________________
proud runner up in the frequent use of the word "cunt" competition.
JPSchmack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2019, 09:48 AM   #62
Joey Dirt
Hopes Community College Can Compare
 
Joey Dirt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: West Side
Posts: 24,373
Default

Free agency after year 4

First year MLB minimum, and then they get paid based on their production . Service time doesnít matter. But if they have a huge rookie year, get 10-12mil year 2 and then suck, their salary can go down based on their year 2 production.

I just donít know how you stop owners from holding down players in the minor leagues
__________________
Originally Posted by hammerhead View Post
-Cano is a way better player than Bruce, $112 million better?
-Probably
-Diaz is possibly best reliever in baseball, 4 years of control, -24 years old
-Cano and Diaz together are worth more than $112 million
-Iím skeptical mariners would do it, but if itís there to be done, Iím in
Joey Dirt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2019, 10:08 AM   #63
Madoff's Mets
Refugee
 
Madoff's Mets's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Baton Rouge, LA
Posts: 10,813
Default

A strike will solve nothing and damage baseball.
__________________
Sauerkraut on all levels!!!
Madoff's Mets is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2019, 10:13 AM   #64
Hire
Administrator
 
Hire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 57,221
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JPSchmack View Post
Obviously, we can cherry pick players and argue scenarios for days. I'm just saying it's not clear-cut. They picked after Year 6 for a reason.

There's billions of variables. Really fucking smart people would have to run numbers and scenarios and look at charts of career paths and earnings tables and shit before I just ran with "That'll be a huge win for the MLBPA or Owners."

Because of that, I don't think "FA after year 5" is the hill the MLBPA should be willing to die on.

But I do think that "Somehow, 50% of revenues is guaranteed to the MLPBA" IS a hill worth dying on.

Because that cannot blow up in your face. You can work it out the HOW later. Fighting to change a system "hoping the outcome leads to" isn't as smart as fighting for the guarantee.
Under the current system, the team could just non-tender the guy coming off the bad season. How is that any better?

It’s all about the upside for earning potential. The younger you reach free agency, the more you’ll get
Hire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2019, 10:57 AM   #65
gallstone
Dr. Monkeyballs
 
gallstone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 6,640
Default

Lower that luxury tax threshold and put a real bite into the amount of tax you have to pay when going over it. This will correct the salary inflation.

It will also get more teams competing for the Harpers and Mannys. Just having two or three teams with a realistic shot is not enough.
gallstone is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2019, 12:21 PM   #66
jmac17
Refugee
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 11,383
Default

Remove Mlb service time and make players a free agent from set date after being drafted or signed. So if you choose to keep vlad jr in minors that’s on you.
jmac17 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2019, 12:35 PM   #67
BennySammy
Writes like a 16 yr. old girl in her diary
 
BennySammy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Sunnyside, Queens
Posts: 42,850
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jmac17 View Post
Remove Mlb service time and make players a free agent from set date after being drafted or signed. So if you choose to keep vlad jr in minors thatís on you.
I don't know if that'd work...like, we signed Ronny Mauricio when he was 16, so for him to have the same counter as some other kid drafted out of college doesn't seem right...I think the counter should still start after they're called up, but they need to start the arbitration years earlier...maybe only 2 years before they need to be offered arbitration...Machado and Harper not hitting free agency until they're 26 when they were called up at age 19 seems like a glaring flaw with the current system
BennySammy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2019, 01:15 PM   #68
Joey Dirt
Hopes Community College Can Compare
 
Joey Dirt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: West Side
Posts: 24,373
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jmac17 View Post
Remove Mlb service time and make players a free agent from set date after being drafted or signed. So if you choose to keep vlad jr in minors thatís on you.
Thatís a good idea.

And Benny is an idiot like usual.

Obviously you would have a longer set time with a player depending on the age they sign.

Free agency would be so exciting every year.

Eventually theyíll need to hit teams with a salary floor. Thereís no way with all these funds getting dispersed across the league to small market teams that they should be able to continue to have 40 million dollar payrolls
__________________
Originally Posted by hammerhead View Post
-Cano is a way better player than Bruce, $112 million better?
-Probably
-Diaz is possibly best reliever in baseball, 4 years of control, -24 years old
-Cano and Diaz together are worth more than $112 million
-Iím skeptical mariners would do it, but if itís there to be done, Iím in
Joey Dirt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2019, 01:32 PM   #69
BennySammy
Writes like a 16 yr. old girl in her diary
 
BennySammy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Sunnyside, Queens
Posts: 42,850
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joey Dirt View Post
Thatís a good idea.

And Benny is an idiot like usual.

Obviously you would have a longer set time with a player depending on the age they sign.

Free agency would be so exciting every year.

Eventually theyíll need to hit teams with a salary floor. Thereís no way with all these funds getting dispersed across the league to small market teams that they should be able to continue to have 40 million dollar payrolls
dude, what the fuck is your deal? did he mention time set on age they signed? I referenced exactly what he proposed...not sure why you're such a faggot at all times
BennySammy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2019, 01:45 PM   #70
Hire
Administrator
 
Hire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 57,221
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BennySammy View Post
I don't know if that'd work...like, we signed Ronny Mauricio when he was 16, so for him to have the same counter as some other kid drafted out of college doesn't seem right...I think the counter should still start after they're called up, but they need to start the arbitration years earlier...maybe only 2 years before they need to be offered arbitration...Machado and Harper not hitting free agency until they're 26 when they were called up at age 19 seems like a glaring flaw with the current system
MLB already solves for this with the Rule 5 rules. Guys signed out of Latin America and high school have more time before they need to be on the 40-man.
Hire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2019, 02:35 PM   #71
Ford Prefect
Refugee
 
Ford Prefect's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 33,759
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CharMart View Post
Yes but it wont be the same... Wrights 20 million in year 7 didnt have the same financial impact as it did in the first few years... If he wasnt dead it would have been a great contract because $1 today is worth more than it will be 10 years from now.
Forgive me if I'm only confusing myself and I'm interpreting what you said incorrectly in my own brain.

Why is $1 today worth more than it will be in 10 years? Especially in baseball where for the most part salaries have just gone up and up and up. It seems to me that the smart thing for teams to do is to front load contracts so you're paying a talented player the big $ when his production justifies it. it also makes a contract potentially more movable in the later years.

As for Wright, had he stayed healthy it probably would have been a fair contract. however, it's also reasonable to expect that he wouldn't be producing as well at age 35 as he did at age 29. If a team can convince a player to do a front loaded contract, I think it helps the team out in the long run.
Ford Prefect is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2019, 02:50 PM   #72
JPSchmack
Stonecutters Member
 
JPSchmack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 1996
Location: Gilbert, AZ
Posts: 99,745
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hire View Post
Under the current system, the team could just non-tender the guy coming off the bad season. How is that any better?
I don't know what this in reference to.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hire View Post
Itís all about the upside for earning potential. The younger you reach free agency, the more youíll get
There's way too many variables for that to be 100% automatically true.

Owners/GMs are going to be willing to pay more for more prime years and less decline years if all the big free agents are a year young. But the incentive to buy out more "Decline Years" is not increased.

It's actually easier for GMs to match a player's contract to his prime years. Which COULD get the players more money in their prime, but it also means teams are paying for less decline years, and the effects on the Second Free Agent Contract guys COULD be catastrophic as well.


Did you consider that the Service Time Free Agent line is set where it is so that it DOESN'T coincide with player primes on purpose. So that owners HAVE to buy some decline years in order to sign a player in his first FA contract?
__________________
proud runner up in the frequent use of the word "cunt" competition.
JPSchmack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2019, 04:11 PM   #73
robardin
Refugee
 
robardin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Citi Field
Posts: 13,570
Default

How about this: if there is a "revenue sharing" structure to boost small market team revenues, and a "competitive luxury tax" in place to keep high revenue teams from running away with all the top FAs, there is the third component of a minimum payroll?

If you're a team like the Marlins doing a full teardown and are basically planning to sit back and wait for your minor league talent to mature to compete in 2021 or 2022, the way the Astros did back in 2015... Fine. But you can't just run out 25 league minimum salary guys while pocketing the MLB shared revenue, the 10-year TV deal you signed when the team was more respectable, and while playing in a taxpayer funded ballpark.
__________________
Motto of a Mets fan: Expect the worst, hope for the best, and BELIEVE that anything is possible on the baseball field!
"The more you suffer, the more it shows you really care"
robardin is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2019, 04:20 PM   #74
tloka
Refugee
 
tloka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 12,558
Default

I would use aspects of the NBA system that might work in the MLB

salary cap (and floor) based on % of revenue with a luxury tax similar to NBA

no more arbitration. Rookie contract, then RFA, then FA with maximum contract length at each interval.
tloka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2019, 04:50 PM   #75
TDM
Refugee
 
TDM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Long Island
Posts: 11,579
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tloka View Post
I would use aspects of the NBA system that might work in the MLB

salary cap (and floor) based on % of revenue with a luxury tax similar to NBA

no more arbitration. Rookie contract, then RFA, then FA with maximum contract length at each interval.
Isn't the NBA system designed to favor the owners? Why would the MLBPA agree to salary caps and max contracts? Despite all of this, MLB still probably has the strongest union in sports.
TDM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2019, 05:24 PM   #76
tloka
Refugee
 
tloka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 12,558
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TDM View Post
Isn't the NBA system designed to favor the owners? Why would the MLBPA agree to salary caps and max contracts? Despite all of this, MLB still probably has the strongest union in sports.
cap will be based around % of revenue with floor and ceiling. forces owners to spend.
tloka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2019, 05:53 PM   #77
MG5
Refugee
 
MG5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 26,674
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ford Prefect View Post
Forgive me if I'm only confusing myself and I'm interpreting what you said incorrectly in my own brain.

Why is $1 today worth more than it will be in 10 years? Especially in baseball where for the most part salaries have just gone up and up and up. It seems to me that the smart thing for teams to do is to front load contracts so you're paying a talented player the big $ when his production justifies it. it also makes a contract potentially more movable in the later years.

As for Wright, had he stayed healthy it probably would have been a fair contract. however, it's also reasonable to expect that he wouldn't be producing as well at age 35 as he did at age 29. If a team can convince a player to do a front loaded contract, I think it helps the team out in the long run.
Inflation and other fancy economics make $1 worth more today than in the future. As you said salaries go up over time so you’d likely would’ve got a better player for $10 mil 10 years ago than you would now. And from the team perspective it’s also easier to fit the bigger salary in a future year given overall payroll and luxury tax lines are likely to be higher and the team likely has less commitments years from now.

And for the most part - other than aesthetics - if you are talking about a long term deal at a set amount of money it doesn’t really matter that you paid a guy less during his more productive years of the deal and more during his “bad” years.

Wright’s deal was actually one the ones that wasn’t backloaded. He took less the first year of the deal bc the Mets we’re trying to lower payroll but the last 2 years of his deal tapered off and had a lower AAV than the middle of the deal
__________________
David Wright died for our sins
MG5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2019, 06:26 PM   #78
Hire
Administrator
 
Hire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 57,221
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JPSchmack View Post
I don't know what this in reference to.



There's way too many variables for that to be 100% automatically true.

Owners/GMs are going to be willing to pay more for more prime years and less decline years if all the big free agents are a year young. But the incentive to buy out more "Decline Years" is not increased.

It's actually easier for GMs to match a player's contract to his prime years. Which COULD get the players more money in their prime, but it also means teams are paying for less decline years, and the effects on the Second Free Agent Contract guys COULD be catastrophic as well.


Did you consider that the Service Time Free Agent line is set where it is so that it DOESN'T coincide with player primes on purpose. So that owners HAVE to buy some decline years in order to sign a player in his first FA contract?
I have absolutely no clue what your last point means. Obviously, the owners donít want anyone reaching free agency when theyíre entering their prime. Isnít that the entire fucking point of this discussion and the issue?

Itís like youíre just ignoring every single point Iíve made
Hire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2019, 06:37 PM   #79
Joey Dirt
Hopes Community College Can Compare
 
Joey Dirt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: West Side
Posts: 24,373
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BennySammy View Post
dude, what the fuck is your deal? did he mention time set on age they signed? I referenced exactly what he proposed...not sure why you're such a faggot at all times
Itís pretty much common sense .. why would you get the same control of a 16 year old vs a 23 year old from college
__________________
Originally Posted by hammerhead View Post
-Cano is a way better player than Bruce, $112 million better?
-Probably
-Diaz is possibly best reliever in baseball, 4 years of control, -24 years old
-Cano and Diaz together are worth more than $112 million
-Iím skeptical mariners would do it, but if itís there to be done, Iím in
Joey Dirt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2019, 06:41 PM   #80
BennySammy
Writes like a 16 yr. old girl in her diary
 
BennySammy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Sunnyside, Queens
Posts: 42,850
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joey Dirt View Post
Itís pretty much common sense .. why would you get the same control of a 16 year old vs a 23 year old from college
because that's what he said...this is just a proposal that he made up on his own and is not an actual policy...you're connecting dots for him that he never brought up and then talk shit to me for saying why his proposal had holes...it's not like someone's service time changes based on their age


and you know, if I did the reverse and said what he said, you or someone else here would be like, "What about when a player that's 4 years younger is drafted?! Guys, can you believe this guy??!"
BennySammy is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Go Back   Mets Refugees > Mets Baseball > New York Mets
 
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:09 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.