jarman86

Good to see $200+M buys you 3rd place in a division where one team gave up halfway through.

That is what every article has said reporting on this, that it does not include MLB revenue sharing and is only revenue from their operations. I am aware it is an "expense," but...as stated, they are taxed on profits. So...when I see $8M in stock compensation....for someone? Maybe Freddie Freeman or Jorge Soler for all I know. It is a salary or compensation for someone that is either arbitrary or something. Being separate, I assume it was not part of a CEO's salary. So, lets say, CEO of I forget this company's name, decides he wants $50M a year for owning and "running" the Braves. He can do that, that is an expense....That is also an expense someone like Peter Angelos doesn't have to report, so that would be extra profit. So, where after all taxes and financing and rusing, there was $104M "profit" for the Braves and $20M went to CEO salary, that in any other world would be $124M profit because the Angelos or owner is getting a salary than pay. Or he does pay himself, but again, we will never know because no owner is going to release their balance sheets. And 18.3% is better than rate of return on stock market, which contradicts the Poor owners line that Manfred and Co. state.

Have you any experience/idea of what a "high paid internship" at a law firm is? Not livable...speaking as one who went to law school and has friends working at law firms and prestigious law firms at that. My friends who got jobs out of law school with large firms were making starting $100-150k, and I wouldn't compare them to MLB starter level quality when they were getting paid that much. Saying a guy needs 9 years of "internshipping" or sorry.....2-6 years of schooling, and then interning is a hell of a description for a profession that brings in since we don't know what profits are, billions of revenue. And my classmates got nicely compensated for working on those large settlements beyond their regular salary. Which is what the MLBPA is trying to do. It makes sense. Only difference is if those law firms don't compensate the attorneys, they will go elsewhere. And here, the government has made MLB the only game in town. And rules limit the amount of foreign players on teams in another country, such as Japan or Korea, so they can't exactly go to other leagues in other countries. Doesn't help me being bitter about not making as much as they do, or I guess in your case not making it to pro ball or whatever.

You are right, I pulled a morning ruse. However, lets not get confused. So that number is "ticket sales, concessions, corporate sales, retail, suites, premium seat fees and postseason revenue. Liberty Media also earns revenue from local broadcast rights and revenue streams it shares with other Major League Baseball franchises, including national broadcast rights and licensing. " It does not include revenues from any other source, such as MLB TV, Fanatics, etc... basically it isn't the 10-12B under the MLB arm. Payroll, largest expense, $131M would bring that down to $430M. I would assume since rent is $3.1M a year, and I would guess 6-10 for turning lights on etc... Also, the rent is most likely paid for by Suntrust, so that negates it. Not to mention, that as a business person, you should know that lots of profit doesn't exactly get reported. $8M alone written out of "profit" for "stock based compensation." To who that went to or why? I would guess maybe CEO Maffei? But that counts as an expense and not profit.

1. Almost spit out my coffee seeing a poster compare first 3 years of MLB as an internship....I thought MiLB was the internship? Holy crap, a 6-9 year internship to maybe get more than a million a year? If you haven't been flushed out of sport by then. 2. While folks were focusing on Tyler Wilson's investments, I thought it interesting no one pointed out that he made almost as much in 1 KBO season than he did in 3 MLB seasons combined. That says a lot that a low level, albeit fun to watch, baseball league can throw that much money at a subpar pitcher that brings in far less revenue or profit than MLB. Granted they have on-jersey advertisers, etc... but c'mon 3. Only reason we know Braves profits is because it is a publicly traded company and has to file with the SEC. They made more than half a billion dollars last year by annual reports...in profit, from the Braves. Now, several factors are in there, but I assume, since no one is selling their franchises anytime soon, though they are valued at 1.3 to 2 Billion on average, the worst MLB owner is making at least $2-300M a year. But MLB owners won't share that info cause it is detrimental to them in negotiations. 4. No one in here has said "poor players." Most people in here that are being labeled as such are pointing out facts that revenues and generally profits have gone up and costs, the biggest cost of payroll, has gone down. As MLB is not MLB without the players. And revenues are not being shared to fans, ticket takers, Orioles sales folks, or those working in the gift shop, it is going to owners, some of whom literally could care less whether their team goes 0-162 or never sees a world series, or players, some of who may be playing for that BIG contract and never trying after that. I saw something the other day that got me mad, similar to my Severino/Rutchman comp. How the heck, is the best prospect in baseball not on the 40 man roster, when we have 0 catchers if lockout ends today?

Yeah I get it, I just also see why MLBPA wouldn't have offered it up. Got enough headaches.

1.) I think average player career in MLB is 3 years. Some guys are held down till their prime is arb/6 years up. I see less guys being offered arb than I used to. 2.) As I said, Scherzer has nothing to lose and nothing to gain. I'm cool with him being a lead negotiator as a result. Economically salaries going up for younger guys will increase for the older ones. And under new or old system, guys like Scherzer are going to get their money no matter what. 3.) I truly don't know what is more unique. Being able to play at the MLB level or brain surgeon. I was on electrical engineer track until my academic advisor told me to choose EE or rugby. I gathered I could have graduated an EE and been in an upper echelon of folks, I just would have been bottom of my class. I view same with brain surgeons. Study actually showed brain surgeons and rocket scientists aren't necessarily smarter than the average person. Cost, length, etc... of education makes less people do it than baseball, which has less cost and length. Not to mention, I don't think body size and other intangibles other than being able to hold down your food while operating effect ability. I think everyone agrees that ballplayers make too much money just as they agree Manfred is a clown. And we will not agree on what is best for MLB. We can agree to disagree, just explaining the other side.

Right but $80M next year is not $80M in 10 years. Almost half the league was under $80M in 2012. And trying to negotiate raising that $80M every 5-10 years and telling a person how much they must pay to play is not going to go well.

So the problem with your philosophy is you say, I have no problem with a guy being replaced by cheaper labor. And in a perfect world, I don't either. The problem is when you replace Severino with Rutchman because the CBA, OF WHICH THEY ARE NEGOTIATING, allows the Orioles to pay Adley well under his market value which is what is going on. The cheaper labor is young guys that can't negotiate. These young players can't control any of their salaries until year 3 of their MLB career, which is the main sticking point in these negotiations it seems. Bumping up Adley's salary most likely won't increase Severino's any more, but it will help Adley and some of these younger guys. Sure, $675k is 10 times more than the common worker, but the common worker can't throw a 98 MPH fastball or hit a 98 MPH fastball 500 ft. Even as we see in Indy ball and the minors, the top 10-20% of "workers" can't. And when your boss is increasing revenue and the average salary is going down, you might want more of that share. I think that is what you are missing in the argument folks are making for MLBPA. As Passan said, you can't bring in the next 1200 best players in the world and not expect the product to drop, but the 30 owners can change several times over.

Possibly, but the MLB and MLBPA have played enough seasons in history with no agreement and no work stoppage that I would have preferred the owners to continue negotiations before locking out players in December.

When you are the last party to make an offer and the response is to lock you out instead of continued talks....yeah I probably would not respond either...

My understanding is that was a tactic to get public perception against the players. Unfortunately it didn't work as it did in 94/95. Guess that is what happens when you have 65+ year old owners who hire a guy to run the league who doesn't know what social media is... I'm here for the optimism, cause I am a pessimist.

Playoffs have expanded to 14 teams in the past 2 years. Also, of those teams, only recently have they been competitive. We shouldn't have to wait 10-20 years for a team to make the playoffs. For the parity argument, I think it was an article in ESPN a couple years ago that proved statistically MLB had more parity than the NFL. NBA and NHL I think were included in terms of winning the whole thing, but when half your league goes to the playoffs, you increase parity regardless of competitiveness.

So, I guess my question is two fold: 1.) will you be willing to pay $50 to watch the Delmarva Shorebirds a game? Nothing against Delmarva, but those guys aren't beating the Orioles more than 1 out of every 50 games. 2.) If you ARE the product and what people are paying to see, and your collective salary is dropping, and your boss is making loads of money off of you, would you not want your pay to be increased, whether you are being paid $1, $10, $1k or $10k? I'm with you, I don't care what players get paid. And I do think they get paid too much. However, I look at the profits and I know that money isn't going back to me. It isn't going back to my ticket rep for the Os who does a great job and deserves a raise or promotion. It goes to the owners or players. And for me, I side with players.

Because in next bargaining agreement, or even introducing it, you have the problem of negotiating the floor. Owners will always want to keep it as low as possible, regardless of increasing CBT, salaries, and profits. We already see the headache with the ceiling.

Love when you have a minority owner, in many aspects, that wants to compete....and leaves because noone else does....smh. Hated Jeter as a player, but if the attitude of "competitive balance" is forcing those who actually want to compete out, I'm siding with players every time.

Meanwhile I don't think spring training is starting until June or MLBPA caves, which...after COVID season, I don't see happening. MLB isn't feeling any effects. They are getting revenue from other sources. Their regional sports networks can air other programming. When that stops, I think those networks will put lots of pressure on MLB to make a deal. Until then, Manfred and a bunch of outdated owners are just going to continue acting like its 1994.

According to Melewski and several players on Insta stating they were going to Sarasota Sunday (yesterday) appears to be now. Not sure if practices will be open or closed.

Having watched Reyes play, I'm not entirely sure what he did, if anything to help lol. Reyes was terrible, but highly hyped on some sites if I remember correctly, but so was Billy Rowell, another 6'5" 3rd baseman. /shrug.

Got to keep things competitive. (huge eye roll).

Their proposal is to decrease from 180 guys to 150 I think. I guess the reserve list was actually something all along...still don't understand it as MiLB.com shows some guys who haven't played in like 3 years on the reserve list. Either way, the way those guys get treated, they are better off. Can't believe in court last week MLB tried to argue essentially minor leaguers should be paying them in Spring Training to justify not paying minor leaguers. Give me a break...

They are big to develop the prospects. Can't bring in a high school/foreign player pitcher/batter and put him in AAA or AA....I mean you can, but could mess with the player's psyche or development. Not to mention levels of minor leagues helps stash away guys for their 6 year development contract. MLB has been working towards implementing the complex idea for awhile now, my guess is that is where they will go from here on out. Curious to see how it will affect the international players as I think there will be more college aged players drafted who will be more advanced than the 17-18 y/o internationals. High schoolers will at least have option to go to college. Also, odds of having 180 players at low cost increases chances of finding value vs having 100 players at a higher cost.

Yup, speaks highly of the organization. I remember when I'd wear my Arrieta Orioles jersey and people would tell me how we screwed up letting him go. It was like, nope best thing for him. He WAS a good dude too (can't speak to now as last I talked to him was 2012/13?). Remember in Norfolk his last year or two he was so frustrated with the Orioles.

I don't know about this statement. I can't remember his defense either, but I know being a coach doesn't speak to ability. I've seen a lot of hitting coaches, especially at the minor level that make me raise an eyebrow having seen them play. Maybe he had the mechanics down, but didn't translate to play?

Oh wait....they do lol. Also, the other thing that got me is, "the owners can do what they want with their money".....in some cases ITS NOT THEIR MONEY lol. Its the Dodgers or Yankees or whoevers money that is given to the other owners for those owners to either have better chances of beating them or....being an exhibition game in some points. There is literally a tax for, not being too good, but spending too much of THEIR MONEY lol. If the Yankees want to spend 100M a year for Matt Harvey to eat innings for them.....it is their money, but they can't cause they'd be spending too much money, even though we know spending money doesn't mean wins....for example THE YANKEES.