Scott Boras is insane.

[OriolesMagic83]

This is only fair, if there is another panel that determines that a ML player is not performing to ML standards either in on field or off field performance and they can be demoted to the minors and paid a minor league salary until their performance improves.

[DrungoHazewood]

Boras simply wants to petition for his Minor League prospects to make a Major League salary. A percentage of that raise goes in his pocket.

Nothing wrong with someone looking out for themselves, or for someone to propose radical restructuring of things they have no control over. We do the latter here all the time. Of course nobody will take this proposal seriously. He's suggesting that teams cede control of who is on their roster to a council of learned experts. He sounds like someone who is bitter over an election result and starts talking about how democracy is broken, and we should only let people who can pass some kind of test participate.

[DrungoHazewood]

This is only fair, if there is another panel that determines that a ML player is not performing to ML standards either in on field or off field performance and they can be demoted to the minors and paid a minor league salary until their performance improves.

Maybe the council of learned elders should also have the power to set salaries and agent commissions. If The Oracle says an agent should get a flat fee of $1000 for every contract negotiated, who is Scott Boras to say that's wrong?

[Can_of_corn]

He isn't expecting anything to change.

This is about him getting out there and publicly advocating for his clients and future potential clients.

[Camden_yardbird]

He's a genius. His job is maximize profits for his players. He knows that a panel of experts won't ever happen, but it highlights the issue (mostly by being absurd) and makes it ripe for more moderate change down the road.

[TonySoprano]

Boras simply wants to petition for his Minor League prospects to make a Major League salary. A percentage of that raise goes in his pocket.

He also wants to push them into free agency a year earlier. Right now clubs are doing roster maneuvers to get that extra year.

[Can_of_corn]

He's a genius. His job is maximize profits for his players. He knows that a panel of experts won't ever happen, but it highlights the issue (mostly by being absurd) and makes it ripe for more moderate change down the road.

I wouldn't hold my breath for changes down the road. The player's union is more likely to trade away the rights of non-members then to bargain to improve their situation. Remember every time a Bryant gets called up someone who is already a union members loses his MLB job.

[Camden_yardbird]

I wouldn't hold my breath for changes down the road. The player's union is more likely to trade away the rights of non-members then to bargain to improve their situation. Remember every time a Bryant gets called up someone who is already a union members loses his MLB job.

I've heard this argument before. It's rote, it's an easy answer and it's wrong. The MLB players union does not care if a no name player with a three year shelf life gets replaced by a stud prospect who will make more money in his first year of arbitration than the player he is replacing. The best thing for the Union is to maximize contracts and maximize value. The replaced player is a vote, he's not improving the bargaining position of anyone else in the Union. The potential franchise player, he could change a lot.

[Can_of_corn]

I've heard this argument before. It's rote, it's an easy answer and it's wrong. The MLB players union does not care if a no name player with a three year shelf life gets replaced by a stud prospect who will make more money in his first year of arbitration than the player he is replacing. The best thing for the Union is to maximize contracts and maximize value. The replaced player is a vote, he's not improving the bargaining position of anyone else in the Union. The potential franchise player, he could change a lot.

It isn't wrong. What have the players' union done to improve conditions for minor leaguers?

Did the players' union not recently bargain away the rights of draftees? They had no problem at all with agreeing to a slotting system that greatly decreases the leverage of draftees and as well eliminating the ability of said players to sign major league contracts.

The union has had multiple opportunities to change the way service time is accumulated and hasn't been willing to give up anything to make it happen.

Where the rubber hits the road the union has shown us time and time again that they are only concerned with their current membership.

[weams]

It isn't wrong. What have the players' union done to improve conditions for minor leaguers?

Did the players' union not recently bargain away the rights of draftees? They had no problem at all with agreeing to a slotting system that greatly decreases the leverage of draftees and as well eliminating the ability of said players to sign major league contracts.

The union has had multiple opportunities to change the way service time is accumulated and hasn't been willing to give up anything to make it happen.

Where the rubber hits the road the union has shown us time and time again that they are only concerned with their current membership.

Minor leaguers are not in the union. So in actuality, they just made the process to get into the union a bit harder to protect the rights of those who are in.

[Can_of_corn]

Minor leaguers are not in the union. So in actuality, they just made the process to get into the union a bit harder to protect the rights of those who are in.

Right, the union has shown itself to only be concerned about its membership. They really stuck it to draftees in the last CBA.

That is their right and it doesn't bode well for future changes. I don't see them giving anything back so kids like Bryant can get to FA a year faster.

[PA724_Oriole]

Wheres the Os news? Does this not belong in the MLB section?

[gmelson26]

He isn't expecting anything to change.

This is about him getting out there and publicly advocating for his clients and future potential clients.

Bingo. Boras likes to hear himself talk.

[DrungoHazewood]

It isn't wrong. What have the players' union done to improve conditions for minor leaguers?

Did the players' union not recently bargain away the rights of draftees? They had no problem at all with agreeing to a slotting system that greatly decreases the leverage of draftees and as well eliminating the ability of said players to sign major league contracts.

The union has had multiple opportunities to change the way service time is accumulated and hasn't been willing to give up anything to make it happen.

Where the rubber hits the road the union has shown us time and time again that they are only concerned with their current membership.

Completely agree. If the MLBPA included minor leaguers or amateur players there mightn't even be a draft. There wouldn't be minor league players sleeping six to an apartment and eating McDonalds every day, or living with host families because they can't afford rent. While the MLBPA has dramatically improved the lot of Major League players over the past 40 years, you could argue that the position of minor leaguers and amateur players is worse. When Brooks Robinson signed with the Orioles it was his own free will, he could have signed with the Yankees or the Cardinals, but he chose the path that was most likely to get him to the majors quickest. That's simply not an option today, unless maybe you've just come over on a makeshift boat from a Caribbean country. The union only cares about current members.

[DrungoHazewood]

I don't see them giving anything back so kids like Bryant can get to FA a year faster.

More clear evidence of favoring union members over non-members: 34-year-old washed up journeymen veterans almost always make more money than 22-year-old superstars and absolutely always make more than 21-year-old five-star prospects contending for the AA triple crown. Like most union shops pay is based on seniority as much as performance.