Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
weams

Boemmel: Pandemic and MiLB

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Can_of_corn said:

Except a lot of them probably are for a good hunk of the season. 

If you are a year two guy, like say Zoellner, and you can't get out of the GCL you don't deserve to make 30K.

 

30k isn’t much money.  If the team doesn’t think he is worth 30k they can cut him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

I'd still go full season/short season as a cutoff.  I think a reward should exist for making a full season team.  Not more travel and games for the same money.

My understanding is that a distinction between short season pay and low A pay was already in the works for 2021.    Weekly pay:

Short season $290 —> $400

A/A+ $290 —> $500

AA $350 —> $600

AAA $502 —> $700

These are all minimum figures; higher amounts apply to players on the 40-man roster and players who have major league service time.

While one can argue that the revised weekly figures are still stingy, my bigger issue is that they don’t kick in until the regular season starts.     So, you have a bunch of guys showing up for camp in February/early March who get nothing but meal money until early June when short season ball begins.    That just strikes me as very wrong.     

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Frobby said:

My understanding is that a distinction between short season pay and low A pay was already in the works for 2021.    Weekly pay:

Short season $290 —> $400

A/A+ $290 —> $500

AA $350 —> $600

AAA $502 —> $700

These are all minimum figures; higher amounts apply to players on the 40-man roster and players who have major league service time.

While one can argue that the revised weekly figures are still stingy, my bigger issue is that they don’t kick in until the regular season starts.     So, you have a bunch of guys showing up for camp in February/early March who get nothing but meal money until early June when short season ball begins.    That just strikes me as very wrong.     

 

I agree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Frobby said:

My understanding is that a distinction between short season pay and low A pay was already in the works for 2021.    Weekly pay:

Short season $290 —> $400

A/A+ $290 —> $500

AA $350 —> $600

AAA $502 —> $700

These are all minimum figures; higher amounts apply to players on the 40-man roster and players who have major league service time.

While one can argue that the revised weekly figures are still stingy, my bigger issue is that they don’t kick in until the regular season starts.     So, you have a bunch of guys showing up for camp in February/early March who get nothing but meal money until early June when short season ball begins.    That just strikes me as very wrong.     

 

On a moral level I completely agree.  If you have a $10B organization that uses loopholes and arguments like MLB does to avoid paying players even minimum wage while expecting them to pay a significant part of their meager salary for clubhouse dues for the peanut butter-and-ham-sandwich spread they should be ashamed.  If they don't cough up a significant amount to help out these players during this pandemic they should be ashamed.

But on the other hand, there is essentially an endless supply of young men who willingly spend their late teens and early 20s making $8000 a year because they absolutely know that they're going to be one of less than a 1000 players in the Show (some of whom are) making $millions any minute now.  From an owner's perspective it's hard to logically justify paying $30k a head for a job that you have thousands upon thousands of people eagerly willing to do for (essentially) free. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, DrungoHazewood said:

On a moral level I completely agree.  If you have a $10B organization that uses loopholes and arguments like MLB does to avoid paying players even minimum wage while expecting them to pay a significant part of their meager salary for clubhouse dues for the peanut butter-and-ham-sandwich spread they should be ashamed.  If they don't cough up a significant amount to help out these players during this pandemic they should be ashamed.

But on the other hand, there is essentially an endless supply of young men who willingly spend their late teens and early 20s making $8000 a year because they absolutely know that they're going to be one of less than a 1000 players in the Show (some of whom are) making $millions any minute now.  From an owner's perspective it's hard to logically justify paying $30k a head for a job that you have thousands upon thousands of people eagerly willing to do for (essentially) free. 

Ewww.... peanut butter and ham?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

On a moral level I completely agree.  If you have a $10B organization that uses loopholes and arguments like MLB does to avoid paying players even minimum wage while expecting them to pay a significant part of their meager salary for clubhouse dues for the peanut butter-and-ham-sandwich spread they should be ashamed.  If they don't cough up a significant amount to help out these players during this pandemic they should be ashamed.

But on the other hand, there is essentially an endless supply of young men who willingly spend their late teens and early 20s making $8000 a year because they absolutely know that they're going to be one of less than a 1000 players in the Show (some of whom are) making $millions any minute now.  From an owner's perspective it's hard to logically justify paying $30k a head for a job that you have thousands upon thousands of people eagerly willing to do for (essentially) free. 

The MLBPA needs to be a union for all baseball players. Not just for an elite club of superior athletes. Their mega contracts were built on the backs of career minor leaguers who earned very little.

Owners are always going to be owners. The MLBPA needs to step up on behalf of all workers within their industry. And all of us, collectively as common-folk workers, need to make our voices heard and demand this change as well, through the power that our collective wallets have over the owners.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Mr. Chewbacca Jr. said:

The MLBPA needs to be a union for all baseball players. Not just for an elite club of superior athletes. Their mega contracts were built on the backs of career minor leaguers who earned very little.

Owners are always going to be owners. The MLBPA needs to step up on behalf of all workers within their industry. And all of us, collectively as common-folk workers, need to make our voices heard and demand this change as well, through the power that our collective wallets have over the owners.

 

Why should they?  What's in it for current players to vote to include minor league players into their union? 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Can_of_corn said:

Why should they?  What's in it for current players to vote to include minor league players into their union? 

 

They have nothing to gain from it financially. That's why they haven't done it yet.

But if they care about their ex-teamates, friends, and even sons who might play the game one day - they should. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

Why should they?  What's in it for current players to vote to include minor league players into their union? 

 

What do they lose?  If the union's leadership can't figure out a way for a fully united pool of players to extract minor leaguer gains solely from ownership then perhaps they should step aside for a more capable bunch.  I suspect the lack of incentive isn't with the players, but primarily with complacent union leadership.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, 24fps said:

What do they lose?  If the union's leadership can't figure out a way for a fully united pool of players to extract minor leaguer gains solely from ownership then perhaps they should step aside for a more capable bunch.  I suspect the lack of incentive isn't with the players, but primarily with complacent union leadership.

Hmm what could ML players have to lose by making things easier for those guys in the minors that want their jobs?

Any capital the players use to forward the causes of the minor league players in collective bargaining would be capital that could be used to forward their own cases. 

ML players also pay $85 a day in union dues, the guys in the minors can't pay that yet they will be benefiting from the money the ML players are contributing.

It makes little sense for ML players to want to expand their Union. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

Hmm what could ML players have to lose by making things easier for those guys in the minors that want their jobs?

Any capital the players use to forward the causes of the minor league players in collective bargaining would be capital that could be used to forward their own cases. 

ML players also pay $85 a day in union dues, the guys in the minors can't pay that yet they will be benefiting from the money the ML players are contributing.

It makes little sense for ML players to want to expand their Union.

It makes little sense from a transactional standpoint.  It makes a lot of sense from a moral standpoint.

Also, the players who've already run the gauntlet are much less likely to want to make it easier on the next set of guys coming through.  Someone like George Sherrill spent several years in indy leagues making $1000 a month, he's not going to have a whole lot of sympathy for the next generation.  It's a little like Depression kids who grew up eating the rinds of the watermelon and taking four jobs maybe not being the best advocates for later kids who wanted to spend their 20s finding themselves and turning down jobs that weren't meaningful enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

Hmm what could ML players have to lose by making things easier for those guys in the minors that want their jobs?

Any capital the players use to forward the causes of the minor league players in collective bargaining would be capital that could be used to forward their own cases. 

ML players also pay $85 a day in union dues, the guys in the minors can't pay that yet they will be benefiting from the money the ML players are contributing.

It makes little sense for ML players to want to expand their Union. 

 

 

There is something worse than greed and selfishness and that's calculated greed and selfishness.  Even worse is calculated greed and selfishness made public and worst of all is that mix displayed by a one-percenter.  We have entered a time when entertainers who want to include niceguycommunitypillarsaltoftheearthdogloverfolkhero in their "brand" need to be cognizant of that danger.

The person you describe is little more than a cartoon.  There may be a handful of players who approximate that description, but certainly no more.

To me the burden is on union leadership to bring the rank-and-file on board with the new trend towards inclusivity.  Lord knows it couldn't hurt regardless of the outcome.  They could start by describing the larger pie that ownership will create and put the problem squarely in their lap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, 24fps said:

There is something worse than greed and selfishness and that's calculated greed and selfishness.  Even worse is calculated greed and selfishness made public and worst of all is that mix displayed by a one-percenter.  We have entered a time when entertainers who want to include niceguycommunitypillarsaltoftheearthdogloverfolkhero in their "brand" need to be cognizant of that danger.

The person you describe is little more than a cartoon.  There may be a handful of players who approximate that description, but certainly no more.

To me the burden is on union leadership to bring the rank-and-file on board with the new trend towards inclusivity.  Lord knows it couldn't hurt regardless of the outcome.  They could start by describing the larger pie that ownership will create and put the problem squarely in their lap.

Cartoon like?  It wasn't long ago that the Union collectively bargined:

  1. An end to ML contracts for draftees.
  2. Hard slots for draftees.
  3. International pools.

The players have shown a willingness to put their own needs ahead of those that haven't made it yet.

 

Since they are in a union they have insulation from criticism.  They can profess sympathy while stating it was beyond their ability to change.

Share this post


Link to post
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.

Sign in to follow this  

Orioles Information


Orioles News and Information

Daily Organizational Boxscores
News

Tony's Takes

Orioles Roster Resource

Orioles Prospect Information

2018 End of Season Top 30 Prospects List

Prospect Scouting Reports

Statistics

2019 Orioles Stats

2019 Orioles Minor League Stats

Baseball Savant Stats






×
×
  • Create New...