Jump to content

The collective-bargaining agreement did not expire on Dec. 1, 2016 (Updated)


weams

Recommended Posts

Clark expressed frustration that top players are still on the free agent market in February. (Presumably, Clark is referring to players like Ian Desmond, Dexter Fowler and Yovani Gallardo, who remain on the market after rejecting qualifying offers months ago. “I think it’s disappointing when there are as many talented players still without a home,” he said. “I don’t think it’s in anyone’s best interest to be in a world where very talented players are at home for whatever reason they are there. It will likely be a part of the conversation in bargaining.”

Clark also said he might be in favor of some sort of draft lottery system. As opposed to the current system, which awards draft picks merely on reverse order of record, a lottery system might somewhat disincentivize the kind of so-called “tanking” seen in recent years from teams like the Astros (who got three straight No. 1 overall picks from 2012 through 2014) and Braves. “It will be beneficial to look at that, and not look at it in a vacuum but appreciate whatever it is that we attempt to negotiate there or propose there, that it ties into the other moving pieces and doesn’t create an imbalance,” Clark said.

There are “very significant issues” with the idea of an international draft, Clark said, although he expects the idea will come up in CBA negotiations. (This isn’t the first time Clark has expressed doubt about the possibility of an international draft.)

Unsurprisingly, Clark believes the luxury tax threshold should rise. The figure remains at $189MM, and its growth has not kept pace with industry revenue. The threshold has arguably constrained player salaries, as it has likely played a role in preventing some traditional big spenders (such as the Angels) from signing key free agents this offseason.

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2016/02/tony-clark-on-qualifying-offers-draft-luxury-tax.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 101
  • Created
  • Last Reply
No, I don't think the minor league owners will ever have a place. The minor leagues totally sold out 75 years ago or more. They agreed that they don't have to do work to acquire players and try to win, accepting that their whole league/championship/integrity of competition thing is a charade, and MLB agreed to fund them at some semi-stable level. Minor league owners know they need to get down on one knee and kiss the ring or they'll have to work to field a real team and make money.

So many teams would go out of business. I know that Bowie and Fredrick would.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So many teams would go out of business. I know that Bowie and Fredrick would.

They might. Or mightn't. In 1948 there were something like 500 minor league teams, many of them independent. In 1960 there were probably half that, and almost none that were independent.

But it's hard to tell what would happen if AA or AAA leagues weren't charades, if they were free to sign the players their budget would support and try to field a stable team and win games. There are a number of pretty stable indy leagues that seem to be on sound financial ground using that model but fairly low-level players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They might. Or mightn't. In 1948 there were something like 500 minor league teams, many of them independent. In 1960 there were probably half that, and almost none that were independent.

But it's hard to tell what would happen if AA or AAA leagues weren't charades, if they were free to sign the players their budget would support and try to field a stable team and win games. There are a number of pretty stable indy leagues that seem to be on sound financial ground using that model but fairly low-level players.

Yeah, you're right. I just know that Frederick and Bowie are losing $1 million a year.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They might. Or mightn't. In 1948 there were something like 500 minor league teams, many of them independent. In 1960 there were probably half that, and almost none that were independent.

But it's hard to tell what would happen if AA or AAA leagues weren't charades, if they were free to sign the players their budget would support and try to field a stable team and win games. There are a number of pretty stable indy leagues that seem to be on sound financial ground using that model but fairly low-level players.

Minor League Baseball is healthy and by all counts fans love it. Hard to imagine placing huge financial burdens on ownership would result in anything positive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we could get rid of these ridiculous opts outs that would be a win for baseball. QO thing will be addressed and will likely go in the favor of the players, so I could see something like comp picks being given to the teams with no loss of draft pick.

Otherwise, I am fine with things staying as they are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think MLB will do something about roster size. IMO there is too much roster change and the curious oblique, sore arm injuries allowing this to happen. Maybe a 27 man roster, dress 25 on a given night. I also think September ball is crazy. Call up who you want on the 40 man, but dress no more than, I don't know, 28 or so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, you're right. I just know that Frederick and Bowie are losing $1 million a year.

No way Frederick is losing $1m a year. They have the highest attendance in the Carolina League (heck all Advance A teams in all leagues) at 328,789, or roughly 4,900 a game (just 500 shy of sell outs). Average ticket price is $11. That's $3.6m in ticket sales. They will also get money from naming rights this year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Minor League Baseball is healthy and by all counts fans love it. Hard to imagine placing huge financial burdens on ownership would result in anything positive.

I'm sure it would upset the status quo. I don't think it's terribly difficult to have a healthy business model when someone else pays for both your stadium and your players. In fact, you can make money without any regards to winning or losing or making the playoffs or even keeping your best players for more than a couple months.

You know my agenda - I'm not a fan of leagues full of teams that really don't care if they finish first or last. Sure, the players try to win, and the team would rather win, but it's at best a secondary concern for all involved. I just don't like it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No way Frederick is losing $1m a year. They have the highest attendance in the Carolina League (heck all Advance A teams in all leagues) at 328,789, or roughly 4,900 a game (just 500 shy of sell outs). Average ticket price is $11. That's $3.6m in ticket sales. They will also get money from naming rights this year.

I'm curious about how he "knows" they're losing $1M a year, too. Without player expenses it would seem pretty hard to lose money. Revenues from tickets have to be something like 4000 x $10 x 77 games = $3M. Concessions have to be about that much, judging from how much I spend at a game with my kids. Could rent and various salaries really cost more than that? I don't know, seems unlikely. $5M divided by $40k is 125 employees. I'd guess they don't have nearly 125 employees and most make less then $40k. I'm probably missing something, maybe something important.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...