Austin Hays called up, Ryan Mountcastle not called up

[interloper]

I'm psyched about Mason Williams though! This is not a joke, lol. It's bugged me all year that we've played infielders in CF while Williams seems like a perfectly decent stopgap CFer. 

[Can_of_corn]

2 minutes ago, mdbdotcom said:

And I was talking about players who haven't. They deserve to make more money.

Sure?

How many guys are we talking about?  I don't think many folks stay on the 40 for long without getting called up at least once.

[mdbdotcom]

12 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Sure?

How many guys are we talking about?  I don't think many folks stay on the 40 for long without getting called up at least once.

Even if they spend two months in the majors, they still won't make 50% of the ML minimum.

[DrungoHazewood]

1 hour ago, mdbdotcom said:

A few random thoughts:

1. If a player with less than a year's service time spends at least half the major league season on the big league team, they will be credited with one year of service time. Computation of service time in subsequent years will remain the same as it is today. This should eliminate a lot of the game playing.
2. Eliminate arbitration and make all players free agents after three years of service time. If the owners want to go young, then free agency should go young.
3. Raise the pay of minor league players who are on major league contracts to 50% of the major league minimum. Because they deserve it.

Thinking out loud about alternate contractual situations... I wonder what would be the impact if they just did away with the Bowie Kuhn rule - the one where he decreed from on high that you can't buy/sell players directly.  Change the rules so that any team can approach any other team and offer to buy a player.  If they agree to a fee, then the new team has X days to negotiate a new contract with the player and his agent.

I think you'd have to keep the same restrictions and discounts that players who stay with their teams would have.  Otherwise you'd have all young players trying to leave so they could get a big raise on their new deal. So if you bought a 3rd-year player they'd still get arb (or an arb buyout) but beyond that they could negotiate anything.

There have to be benefits to shifting from bartering (i.e. trades) to just selling and buying players for a common currency.  It's kind of crazy that you can't work out a transfer of players until you have a surplus or you don't care if you leave a hole.  That artificially restricts player movement, which has to have an impact on compensation.  The rest of the world moved on from trading goats and grape jelly for everything thousands of years ago, perhaps baseball should give it a try.

[Can_of_corn]

6 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Thinking out loud about alternate contractual situations... I wonder what would be the impact if they just did away with the Bowie Kuhn rule - the one where he decreed from on high that you can't buy/sell players directly.  Change the rules so that any team can approach any other team and offer to buy a player.  If they agree to a fee, then the new team has X days to negotiate a new contract with the player and his agent.

I think you'd have to keep the same restrictions and discounts that players who stay with their teams would have.  Otherwise you'd have all young players trying to leave so they could get a big raise on their new deal. So if you bought a 3rd-year player they'd still get arb (or an arb buyout) but beyond that they could negotiate anything.

There have to be benefits to shifting from bartering (i.e. trades) to just selling and buying players for a common currency.  It's kind of crazy that you can't work out a transfer of players until you have a surplus or you don't care if you leave a hole.  That artificially restricts player movement, which has to have an impact on compensation.  The rest of the world moved on from trading goats and grape jelly for everything thousands of years ago, perhaps baseball should give it a try.

I don't follow the NBA closely but it appears to me that, players, even those that are under contract, can control where they play.  I don't care for the idea of a player under contract demanding that his rights be sold to another team.

[NCRaven]

4 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

I don't follow the NBA closely but it appears to me that, players, even those that are under contract, can control where they play.  I don't care for the idea of a player under contract demanding that his rights be sold to another team.

I think this is mostly super stars.  When you only have five players on the court at a time, one star player wields a lot of power.

[Frobby]

29 minutes ago, mdbdotcom said:

And I was talking about players who haven't. They deserve to make more money.

I’m not worried about the guys on the 40-man roster who haven’t played in the majors yet and are making $45 - 90,000 a year.    Those are living wages.    I’m much more concerned with the guys who  aren’t on the 40-man roster who are making $6 - 15,000 a year.    

[Can_of_corn]

Just now, NCRaven said:

I think this is mostly super stars.  When you only have five players on the court at a time, one star player wields a lot of power.

I don't want it at all in MLB. 

[mdbdotcom]

5 minutes ago, Frobby said:

I’m not worried about the guys on the 40-man roster who haven’t played in the majors yet and are making $45 - 90,000 a year.    Those are living wages.    I’m much more concerned with the guys who  aren’t on the 40-man roster who are making $6 - 15,000 a year.    

Expand the players association to include all affiliated leagues and make sure everyone gets at least a living wage. 

[Can_of_corn]

Just now, mdbdotcom said:

Expand the players association to include all affiliated leagues and make sure everyone gets at least a living wage. 

Heh!

Neither side is in favor of that one.

[DrungoHazewood]

37 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

I don't follow the NBA closely but it appears to me that, players, even those that are under contract, can control where they play.  I don't care for the idea of a player under contract demanding that his rights be sold to another team.

Isn't it like trades?  A MLB player can demand to be traded at any time, but that's kind of seen as a nuclear option.  It's rarely used.

I just want to see the flexibility of buying and selling players instead of bartering.

[mdbdotcom]

23 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Heh!

Neither side is in favor of that one.

Exactly, so it's probably a good idea.

[DrungoHazewood]

32 minutes ago, Frobby said:

I’m not worried about the guys on the 40-man roster who haven’t played in the majors yet and are making $45 - 90,000 a year.    Those are living wages.    I’m much more concerned with the guys who  aren’t on the 40-man roster who are making $6 - 15,000 a year.    

I believe that the result of shifting a bunch of players from $8k a year to $40k a year would be the contraction of affiliated minors to 3-4 per MLB team.

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Isn't it like trades?  A MLB player can demand to be traded at any time, but that's kind of seen as a nuclear option.  It's rarely used.

I just want to see the flexibility of buying and selling players instead of bartering.

It seems to happen fairly often.  I don't watch so I can't be sure.

[DrungoHazewood]

40 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

I don't follow the NBA closely but it appears to me that, players, even those that are under contract, can control where they play.  I don't care for the idea of a player under contract demanding that his rights be sold to another team.

Also, the team can tell a guy in year two of a seven year deal to go pound sand.  You don't like your contract, you shouldn't have signed it.