What do the players have to complain about?

[wildcard]

I look at all these long term contracts being given out and I wonder what the players are complaining about.  Players around 30 (give or take a couple of years)  sign 4 to 7 year contracts for big money.  Franco getting an 11 year contract in his earlier 20s.

If I am the players I don't want anything they would disrupt the distribution of the cash flow.

[Frobby]

Did you read my thread on payroll ups and downs?  Overall, payrolls are down about $15 mm in the last five years.   That’s what they have to complain about.  

[UMDTerrapins]

I wish I knew more about how much each side is willing to dig in. My assumption is that the owners aren't going to go for a payroll floor, and that the players aren't going to fight to the death for it. I think the players hold firm on the service clock issue, and that it will be changed. I guess the issue players care most about is being paid earlier in their careers, and I think that's not without merit. My hope is that instead of sweeping changes that the owners will resist, they tweak something a little more familiar to the existing system, like making players arbitration eligible quicker. These CBA negotiations are important inflection points that help keep MLB on the right path by giving equal power to the players and owners. They become toxic when the leaders of one or both sides go on a power grab. As much as it looks like both sides are digging in, I'm not seeing either side going on one of those power grabs here, which is encouraging. That doesn't mean this won't take some time. And it might well affect the 2022 Orioles roster. It appears our shopping list is a SS/3B on a short term deal, a veteran SP, and a backup catcher. While a shortened offseason is unlikely to meaningfully harm those pursuits since we're essentially dumpster diving (not pursuing free agents on long term deals), it could help us land a player on a short deal who is a victim to a last second musical chairs scramble. And I'm guessing the upcoming deadline will result in a few deals being made and a flurry of signings. It could be argued that if the O's are going to move Mullins or Means, it becomes much less likely after Tuesday. I'm speculating like mad here. Logic would suggest that the will to compromise will be great given the financial disaster of the 2020 season and the optics of a lockout during a pandemic. 

[wildcard]

5 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Did you read my thread on payroll ups and downs?  Overall, payrolls are down about $15 mm in the last five years.   That’s what they have to complain about.  

There seemed to be a trend away from giving large contract to players over 30 in the past 5 years.   But not this year.

[Sports Guy]

It’s because the players want to see guys get to free agency sooner because they are seeing the older guys getting squeezed out of money.

They want the system changed.

[Roll Tide]

7 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

It’s because the players want to see guys get to free agency sooner because they are seeing the older guys getting squeezed out of money.

They want the system changed.

I imagine most of the owners would like to see a hard cap with a level playing field. That field can include a minimum floor to make it more difficult to tank. BTW, it still woulD be possible since you can take on other teams bad players, eat contracts as part of trades etc.

[owknows]

1 hour ago, Frobby said:

Did you read my thread on payroll ups and downs?  Overall, payrolls are down about $15 mm in the last five years.   That’s what they have to complain about.  

So is the gate.

[waroriole]

32 minutes ago, owknows said:

So is the gate.

Are revenues down? Discounting 2020

[LookinUp]

52 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

It’s because the players want to see guys get to free agency sooner because they are seeing the older guys getting squeezed out of money.

They want the system changed.

While not compromising on a salary cap or fully guaranteed contracts. 

I gotta admit, this entire period seems contrived to me from both sides. A lot of posturing. In the end I predict some tweaks on service time, maybe the DH and maybe some penalty for tanking over time, but nothing massive changes. The money's too good for all right now.

[Frobby]

26 minutes ago, waroriole said:

Are revenues down? Discounting 2020

Well, 2021 attendance was down about 33% from 2019.  It’s unclear whether other sources of revenue were sufficient to make up that deficit.   My guess is, in the short run, probably not.   There are some new TV deals but I don’t know if they’ve kicked in yet or how quickly they ramp up.

[EdwinRip]

MLB baseball is the only US sport without a salary cap.  The mlb players association is a joke and is out of touch with reality.  Yes, the owners are greedy as well but the owners make the $ and pay the salaries of the players so they have more of an entitlement to have the rules align with their interests.  

[wildcard]

If the players want the owners to spend more they should support a system that makes it viable for teams to contend every year.

The O's felt they could compete until the mid season 2018.   When evaluating their  chances to contend for the 2019 playoffs they saw it was not possible, so they tanked.   This happens all around baseball.   If a team thinks it can contend it spends.  If it doesn't see that path, it tanks.

Texas sees a weak division and being ranked as the #3 farm system.   That gives the owner hope so he spends.

The O's see a strong division and the need for more top prospects to graduate to the majors.   The contention bar is much higher for the O's.  So they wait to spend.

The luxury tax is an effort to reign in payroll of the top spending teams in order to allow other teams to contend.  Its a decent start but more help is needed for the mid market teams so those owners see an avenue to contend.   The luxury tax concept needs to be expanded to level the playing field.  Then every team will spend.

[Sports Guy]

23 minutes ago, wildcard said:

If the players want the owners to spend more they should support a system that makes it viable for teams to contend every year.

 

That system exists right now.

Teams who suck generally suck for one of 2 reasons…awful luck and/or their own stupidity.  No system accounts for either of those things.

The NFL is about as even a playing field as there is and yet the same teams stink every year.  That’s not a coincidence.  

[NCRaven]

1 hour ago, Sports Guy said:

It’s because the players want to see guys get to free agency sooner because they are seeing the older guys getting squeezed out of money.

They want the system changed.

Technically, they want to see players compensated earlier in their careers.  This could be done through earlier free agency.  It could also be done with changes to the arbitration system.  Or some combination of the two.  For example, you could move everything up one year, i.e., eligible for arbitration after two years and eligible for free agency after five years.  Add in an increase to the minimum salaries, in years one and two.  I expect to see some tweaking of the current system rather than wholesale changes.

 

[Sports Guy]

I want to see a balanced schedule, no divisions and no more inter league play…or, if you are going to continue to deal with the awfulness of IL play, make it so everyone plays each other one series a year.

BTW, this has nothing to do with thinking it’s unfair that we play in our division and play those teams so many times..it’s simply because it’s boring to watch the same teams so often.  I don’t think that’s good for the sport.