Mets Refugees  

Go Back   Mets Refugees > Mets Baseball > New York Mets

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-15-2019, 03:44 PM   #41
LivebytheFunkDieBytheFuck
Banned
 
LivebytheFunkDieBytheFuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 575
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MAJERATI View Post
What do you do for a living bro
None of your business
LivebytheFunkDieBytheFuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2019, 03:52 PM   #42
YaGottaBelieve
Refugee
 
YaGottaBelieve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 909
Default

Didn't the guy who caused the NHL lockout start working with the MLB a few years ago? Makes sense IIRC
YaGottaBelieve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2019, 03:55 PM   #43
JPSchmack
Stonecutters Member
 
JPSchmack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 1996
Location: Gilbert, AZ
Posts: 98,660
Default

I agree with Ford and while we all know owners are greedy scum, the fact that GMs are getting smarter and avoiding risk and stupid contracts doesn’t mean the system is “broken.”


Of the 40 free agents that signed contracts for $60 million or more in the last 5 off-seasons:

11 have been traded as part of salary dumps, 3 have been DFA’d or released, 1 retired.

Dexter Fowler, Jason Heyward and Chris Davis (and more I assume) were total disasters. Eric Hosmer isn’t looking very good either.

You’ve got guys like Pujols, Wainwright, Melancon, Felix and Choo who haven’t been bad, but certainly haven’t been difference makers and the team would probably be better off with different, lesser players on shorter, cheaper contracts.


So that’s AT LEAST 26 of the last 41 big contracts (63 PERCENT) that are “mistakes” or teams regret.


And that’s not even counting guys $30 million guys like Martin Prado (who’s making $22 million for a Marlins team that could finish last without him), or Jay Bruce who we’ve traded twice to clear his salary. Or Matt Kemp and Adrian Gonzalez, who’ve been salary dumped a combined SIX TIMES times in the last three years.

The owners aren’t doing anything shady to drive down salaries and deprive players of what they are worth. They are simply altering how they define worth to include the risk and depreciation.


The MONEY is still there: Jay Bruce can get $13 million a season. He’s just getting 3/39 instead of 5/65. That reduces RISK. But that $13 million comes off the books after three years.

Fewer bad contracts still on the books is what’s driving salaries DOWN. Not that owners aren’t willing to pay players a high salary.
__________________
proud runner up in the frequent use of the word "cunt" competition.
JPSchmack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2019, 03:56 PM   #44
JPSchmack
Stonecutters Member
 
JPSchmack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 1996
Location: Gilbert, AZ
Posts: 98,660
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by YaGottaBelieve View Post
Didn't the guy who caused the NHL lockout start working with the MLB a few years ago? Makes sense IIRC
Other way around, Fehr is working for the NHLPA now.
__________________
proud runner up in the frequent use of the word "cunt" competition.
JPSchmack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2019, 04:43 PM   #45
DrKingman
Refugee
 
DrKingman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 329
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JPSchmack View Post
I agree with Ford and while we all know owners are greedy scum, the fact that GMs are getting smarter and avoiding risk and stupid contracts doesn’t mean the system is “broken.”


Of the 40 free agents that signed contracts for $60 million or more in the last 5 off-seasons:

11 have been traded as part of salary dumps, 3 have been DFA’d or released, 1 retired.

Dexter Fowler, Jason Heyward and Chris Davis (and more I assume) were total disasters. Eric Hosmer isn’t looking very good either.

You’ve got guys like Pujols, Wainwright, Melancon, Felix and Choo who haven’t been bad, but certainly haven’t been difference makers and the team would probably be better off with different, lesser players on shorter, cheaper contracts.


So that’s AT LEAST 26 of the last 41 big contracts (63 PERCENT) that are “mistakes” or teams regret.


And that’s not even counting guys $30 million guys like Martin Prado (who’s making $22 million for a Marlins team that could finish last without him), or Jay Bruce who we’ve traded twice to clear his salary. Or Matt Kemp and Adrian Gonzalez, who’ve been salary dumped a combined SIX TIMES times in the last three years.

The owners aren’t doing anything shady to drive down salaries and deprive players of what they are worth. They are simply altering how they define worth to include the risk and depreciation.


The MONEY is still there: Jay Bruce can get $13 million a season. He’s just getting 3/39 instead of 5/65. That reduces RISK. But that $13 million comes off the books after three years.

Fewer bad contracts still on the books is what’s driving salaries DOWN. Not that owners aren’t willing to pay players a high salary.
1000% this. Well written.
__________________
"You hang out with nice people, you get nice friends. You hang out with smart people, you get smart friends. You hang out with yo-yo people, you get yo-yo friends. You see, it's simple mathematics."
DrKingman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2019, 04:47 PM   #46
CharMart
Refugee
 
CharMart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 1,063
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BennySammy View Post
it's because after 6 years, they'll be 32 still getting paid the same money they were getting paid at 26-28...I guess the solution would be to front-load the longer contracts, but that goes against the economics of baseball...i think the only real solution for the players would be to request less controllable years...Harper and Machado came in to the league when they were 19 and had to wait until they were 26 before they could finally get that big contract...now that they're 26, teams only want to pay them for the 26-30 years...at age 26, the desire to sign these guys long term has already passed, and they never got the opportunity to even try and get a bigger contract because of the team control
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.
__________________
Quote:
"I knew there was a bird on the field and I wanted to look like the bird."
CharMart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2019, 04:58 PM   #47
ChocolateZorro
Spoon Beast's lover
 
ChocolateZorro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Dallas
Posts: 20,947
Default

fuck long contracts. every player has arbitration every year based on the previous years performance. the team they are on has that players rights. if their team decides they dont want to pay what a player is deemed to be worth, that players rights are released and they can be paid that amount by another team if theres mutual interest.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by notoriousjim7 View Post
You got big balls huh gimme ur email and we can share our private info together and we will see who got big balls when we see each other.
ChocolateZorro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2019, 04:59 PM   #48
BennySammy
Writes like a 16 yr. old girl in her diary
 
BennySammy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Sunnyside, Queens
Posts: 40,434
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.
still, in 6 years, paying one player $35-$40 mil a year would probably be just as impactful to a team as it would be today...like, Arod's contract back in 2004 would still be a huge contract by today's standards...how many people have gotten a $250+ mil contract?
BennySammy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2019, 05:05 PM   #49
sross07
Refugee
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 4,794
Default

I think a work stopage would be the kiss of death for mlb.
sross07 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2019, 06:49 PM   #50
DeeKay7685
Donut Licker
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Queens, NY
Posts: 29,718
Default

If I were a team owner I would demand that contracts are not guaranteed beyond 3 years but the cap hit remains foraminimum of 5 years. I have great ideas. I am rhe light bulb man.
DeeKay7685 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2019, 06:52 PM   #51
Ballpark_Frankx
Refugee
 
Ballpark_Frankx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 12,549
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sross07 View Post
I think a work stopage would be the kiss of death for mlb.
And they won't have steroids to bail them out this time either.
Ballpark_Frankx is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2019, 07:01 PM   #52
Likwit
Look At Mah Tittehs!
 
Likwit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 35,045
Default

I hope the work stoppage lasts a good long time....like 2 full seasons. It will never happen, but I think it would be great. Being a Met fan ensures I won't miss anything while it's gone.
Likwit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2019, 08:10 PM   #53
CharMart
Refugee
 
CharMart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 1,063
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BennySammy View Post
still, in 6 years, paying one player $35-$40 mil a year would probably be just as impactful to a team as it would be today...like, Arod's contract back in 2004 would still be a huge contract by today's standards...how many people have gotten a $250+ mil contract?
I mean you wouldn't though if you slightly front loaded it with a declining yearly rate and an opt out or two. 25-27 million for a 32-35 year old harper in year 2025-2028 not bad right. Remember you are paying 32-35 year old cespedes 30 million in 2019, and were only paying wright 20 million.
__________________
Quote:
"I knew there was a bird on the field and I wanted to look like the bird."
CharMart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2019, 08:34 PM   #54
ugottaBelieve
Get off my Lawn!
 
ugottaBelieve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Mojave Desert
Posts: 57,664
Default

After 1994-5, it took the Mets getting Mike Piazza to get me to care beyond checking the standings once a week.

If there is another extended baseball stoppage I may just tell 'em all to fuck off.
ugottaBelieve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2019, 08:50 PM   #55
Hire
Administrator
 
Hire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 56,163
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JPSchmack View Post
I agree with Ford and while we all know owners are greedy scum, the fact that GMs are getting smarter and avoiding risk and stupid contracts doesn’t mean the system is “broken.”


Of the 40 free agents that signed contracts for $60 million or more in the last 5 off-seasons:

11 have been traded as part of salary dumps, 3 have been DFA’d or released, 1 retired.

Dexter Fowler, Jason Heyward and Chris Davis (and more I assume) were total disasters. Eric Hosmer isn’t looking very good either.

You’ve got guys like Pujols, Wainwright, Melancon, Felix and Choo who haven’t been bad, but certainly haven’t been difference makers and the team would probably be better off with different, lesser players on shorter, cheaper contracts.


So that’s AT LEAST 26 of the last 41 big contracts (63 PERCENT) that are “mistakes” or teams regret.


And that’s not even counting guys $30 million guys like Martin Prado (who’s making $22 million for a Marlins team that could finish last without him), or Jay Bruce who we’ve traded twice to clear his salary. Or Matt Kemp and Adrian Gonzalez, who’ve been salary dumped a combined SIX TIMES times in the last three years.

The owners aren’t doing anything shady to drive down salaries and deprive players of what they are worth. They are simply altering how they define worth to include the risk and depreciation.


The MONEY is still there: Jay Bruce can get $13 million a season. He’s just getting 3/39 instead of 5/65. That reduces RISK. But that $13 million comes off the books after three years.

Fewer bad contracts still on the books is what’s driving salaries DOWN. Not that owners aren’t willing to pay players a high salary.
This is also the point I was making and the reason I proposed the things I did. The owners will still pay players, but they don't want to pay you for your late 30 seasons.

Which is why almost everything I proposed would allow players to get paid MORE and EARLIER.

The players deserve a certain % of revenue that the owners make.

The players in MLB have also relied on other guys setting the bar higher and higher, to allow everyone else to make more money. Which is also why I don't think your proposal to split the excess payroll/revenue across the 1200 players on the 40-man rosters would really fly with the MLBPA. They want the guys at the top to make more and more, so that everyone else below them makes more and more. As a Union, they're supposed to care about everyone, but that's not the reality of how it works.
Hire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2019, 09:24 PM   #56
robardin
Refugee
 
robardin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Citi Field
Posts: 12,790
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hire View Post
This is also the point I was making and the reason I proposed the things I did. The owners will still pay players, but they don't want to pay you for your late 30 seasons.

Which is why almost everything I proposed would allow players to get paid MORE and EARLIER.

The players deserve a certain % of revenue that the owners make.
This is the crux of the matter; if revenues are going up, but average FA contract total values are going down for all but a handful of well-under-30, multiple-time-All-Star MVP caliber players, AND younger players are routinely getting "gamed" with their service time to maximize "years under team control",

...then the Player's Union, if they are really a union for all players, should be taking a stand to force more of that revenue into not just the players' side of the ledger, but the median and/or average career total income of a current MLB player.

Now add in the fact that even guys like Harper and Machado, who are 26 year old multiple time All-Stars, are not getting signed "the way they used to be" (Alex Rodriguez, Albert Pujols, or even that 8 year deal for Eric Hosmer last off-season), then "something is wrong".

Especially when revenue sharing means that even teams that literally spend as close to zero as possible on player salaries still get to play 162 games a season, and get an equal share in the general revenue sharing pie.

That "something is wrong" doesn't have to equate to "hey, who turned off the spigot on the 10-year, 300M+ deals all of a sudden? How dare they get smarter about spending!" It can also mean "OK if Grandal can't get more than a 4-year, 60M deal and even Bryce Harper is getting offered no more than an 8 year contract as a 25 year old free agent, ... maybe free agency or something approximating it, like salary minimum arbitration, has to come into play much earlier in a player's career."

The funny thing is, when revenue sharing and luxury taxes were implemented under Selig, it was done as a way to increase the competitiveness of smaller market teams, to achieve greater "parity" in the teams that make the playoffs. And it HAS done that; every single one of 30 MLB teams have made the playoffs at least once in the past 20 years, the longest drought being the Seattle Mariners (not since 2001), who still have more wins over the last 5 seasons (2014-2018) than the Mets, even as the Mets went to the 2015 WS and the 2016 NLWC. (Mariners: 89+78+86+76+87 = 416 wins; Mets: 77+70+87+90+79 = 403 wins).
__________________
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, 01:14 AM   #57
JPSchmack
Stonecutters Member
 
JPSchmack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 1996
Location: Gilbert, AZ
Posts: 98,660
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hire View Post
This is also the point I was making and the reason I proposed the things I did. The owners will still pay players, but they don't want to pay you for your late 30 seasons.

Which is why almost everything I proposed would allow players to get paid MORE and EARLIER.

The players deserve a certain % of revenue that the owners make.

The players in MLB have also relied on other guys setting the bar higher and higher, to allow everyone else to make more money. Which is also why I don't think your proposal to split the excess payroll/revenue across the 1200 players on the 40-man rosters would really fly with the MLBPA. They want the guys at the top to make more and more, so that everyone else below them makes more and more. As a Union, they're supposed to care about everyone, but that's not the reality of how it works.
I get you, I just don't think that earlier FA "increases" the amount of dollars though. The analytics of risk aversion aren't going to change (unless we have more PED guys hitting bombs at age 37 again), it's just the same thing a year earlier.

The reason the "total dollars" are declining isn't because the owners are OFFERING less money. They're offering LESS YEARS.

Seven years ago, Josh Hamilton was offered a FIVE-YEAR, $125 million contract. Not SEVEN. So instead of paying $33 million for Hamilton and the $8 million guy who takes his roster spot when he's on the DL/released, teams are only spending $8 million because Hamilton's contract already expired.

It's the "dead weight" contracts that are MISSING from the totals that used to be there.

Can all the increases in salaries the 5th and 6th year service time players would be earning offset all that former dead money given out that isn't going to be given out again?
__________________
proud runner up in the frequent use of the word "cunt" competition.
JPSchmack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2019, 01:20 AM   #58
Hire
Administrator
 
Hire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 56,163
Default

The combination of the 3 things I proposed would certainly go a long way (earlier arb, earlier FA, more money in arb)

Everyone is making a big deal about the offers to Machado and Harper, but both are going to make way more than they ever made in arbitration.

Overall, the earlier and younger you can reach free agency, the more likely you are to get the huge long-term deal. Owners will still overpay for the prime years even if they need to tack on a couple years of post-prime money
Hire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2019, 02:51 AM   #59
JPSchmack
Stonecutters Member
 
JPSchmack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 1996
Location: Gilbert, AZ
Posts: 98,660
Default

I understand that. I'm just thinking like... fuck articulating this is hard. Ok, try this for the easiest explanation.

Felix Hernandez. Take his career earnings table, and just slide his salaries up a year starting in year 3.

So instead of being a slave Year 3 and cashing in Year 7, he goes to 3.8 mil in Year 3 and cashes in with the same mega contract for Year 6.

Now it's 2019.

REAL LIFE: $27,858,000 on final year of his mega deal.
EARLIER FA: Now a free agent and was 0-8 with a 6.34 ERA the last three months of the season.

All things being equal -- which, obviously, not everything is going to be equal -- his career earnings would be $540,000 less (his Year 3 salary) if no one wants to sign a SP who sucked last year. The Mariners wouldn't even be allowed to sign him, because they're not giving him $21 mil minimum.

It's going to be different for every player, but I'm just saying we're not ALWAYS replacing a $540,000 year three with a $27.8 million year 14. Lots of guys are worth nothing at year 14.

Does that make sense?
__________________
proud runner up in the frequent use of the word "cunt" competition.
JPSchmack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2019, 03:04 AM   #60
JPSchmack
Stonecutters Member
 
JPSchmack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 1996
Location: Gilbert, AZ
Posts: 98,660
Default

Or like, Daniel Murphy.

Murphy had a great walk year and got paid. How much of his Nationals contract was because of his post-season (which he might not be in if he walked a year earlier?).


If he’s a FA a year earlier, he hits the market as a career 109 OPS+ guy with bad defense.

IRL, he made $8 mil Year 6 with us, then $37.5 million over 3 years from Washington.

It would be great if we resigned him to a 4-year, $32 million contract after year 5, but Murph is out $13.5 million.
__________________
proud runner up in the frequent use of the word "cunt" competition.
JPSchmack 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 09:05 AM.


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