MLB Lockout Thread

[Philip]

50 minutes ago, Dipper9 said:

Treat it like wrestling, where the teams that are not ready to compete for the World Championship can compete for the Cruiserweight title.  Now, teams like the Orioles and Pirates can have interesting games because we're not worried that we're 40 games out of first in August, because we're leading the Cruiserweight Standings.*

*This is tongue in cheek of course, but baseball needs to think outside the box if they want to attract younger fans.  Those of us who enjoy the "good ol' fashioned game of baseball" are getting older and older and will someday no longer exist. 

I made a suggestion that accomplishes exactly what you suggested. Give the first draft pick to the best of the worst. The last six teams, the last place team in each of the six divisions competes for the first draft pick. And the best team among those six gets the first draft pick. Yes the Orioles aren’t going to be playing any of the National League bottom dwellers, but so what.

that way every team that would normally be tanking has incentive to be better. And because you’re competing against other terrible teams the degree of improvement necessary is not unreasonable. And that means that when we play a playoff bound Blue Jays, instead of phoning it in, we are also competing against, Say, the Royals, and the Rangers and the Pirates. That way it’s more likely that we will be playing hard instead of more of this BS about not caring about the on-field product, the fans will be more engaged because the teams will be playing to win and not to lose, and the playoff teams can’t rest because they know we’re going to be trying hard because we have a goal of our own.

 

also,Because we will be scrounging around for that extra two or three wins, it makes those washed up old veterans a little bit more valuable, And will tend to make it more likely that prospects will be called up sooner.

That is such an excellent suggestion it is no surprise at all that Manfred has never thought of it.

[jarman86]

39 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

Regarding minor league players and the union. On the face of it, it sounds unfair but when I read Marvin Miller's reasoning behind it, it makes sense.  If there was a union strike minor league players would be more likely to fold before ML players, therefore either breaking lines first or having a majority vote/voice in the union.

Possibly....but I've seen and read too many accounts of MLBers not wanting to make things better for minor leaguers under the whole, "why should you have it easier?" guise. I also don't believe it with the crying from MLBPA about draft picks getting ludicrous signing bonuses. They ruined Miller's reasoning right there. NFL did the same thing, with folks like Sam Bradford not having played a down in the NFL and making more than 20 NFL starters. If I can sign a guy like Adley at a low, controlled price (signing bonus) and can hold onto him, hypothetically, for up to twelve years at a controlled price, why would I want to spend money on, I dunno, Pedro Severino. 

[jarman86]

37 minutes ago, Philip said:

I made a suggestion that accomplishes exactly what you suggested. Give the first draft pick to the best of the worst. The last six teams, the last place team in each of the six divisions competes for the first draft pick. And the best team among those six gets the first draft pick. Yes the Orioles aren’t going to be playing any of the National League bottom dwellers, but so what.

that way every team that would normally be tanking has incentive to be better. And because you’re competing against other terrible teams the degree of improvement necessary is not unreasonable. And that means that when we play a playoff bound Blue Jays, instead of phoning it in, we are also competing against, Say, the Royals, and the Rangers and the Pirates. That way it’s more likely that we will be playing hard instead of more of this BS about not caring about the on-field product, the fans will be more engaged because the teams will be playing to win and not to lose, and the playoff teams can’t rest because they know we’re going to be trying hard because we have a goal of our own.

 

also,Because we will be scrounging around for that extra two or three wins, it makes those washed up old veterans a little bit more valuable, And will tend to make it more likely that prospects will be called up sooner.

That is such an excellent suggestion it is no surprise at all that Manfred has never thought of it.

The only problem with this suggestion is, there really aren't many consensus #1 picks. I think to last year's draft and this year's too I think and I don't believe there is a consensus game changer type guy to want to win for. And baseball isn't like the other sports, because I think its the only one where signability at low cost for the #1 pick is/has been a consideration. 

Edited January 6, 2022 by jarman86

[Philip]

6 minutes ago, jarman86 said:

The only problem with this suggestion is, there really aren't many consensus #1 picks. I think to last year's draft and this year's too I think and I don't believe there is a consensus game changer type guy to want to win for. And baseball isn't like the other sports, because I think its the only one where signability at low cost for the #1 pick is/has been a consideration. 

That’s a relevant, the first pic is better than the second the second pic is better than the third and so on. The incentive remainsThat’s a relevant, the first pic is better than the second the second pic is better than the third and so on. The incentive remains

[RZNJ]

20 minutes ago, jarman86 said:

Possibly....but I've seen and read too many accounts of MLBers not wanting to make things better for minor leaguers under the whole, "why should you have it easier?" guise. I also don't believe it with the crying from MLBPA about draft picks getting ludicrous signing bonuses. They ruined Miller's reasoning right there. NFL did the same thing, with folks like Sam Bradford not having played a down in the NFL and making more than 20 NFL starters. If I can sign a guy like Adley at a low, controlled price (signing bonus) and can hold onto him, hypothetically, for up to twelve years at a controlled price, why would I want to spend money on, I dunno, Pedro Severino. 

Draft picks and bonuses wouldn't be affected by a minor league union because you aren't in the union until you sign your first professional contract.   The vast majority of minor league players get little to no signing bonus at all.

[DrungoHazewood]

1 hour ago, Can_of_corn said:

That makes a lot of sense but I don't think for a second that's the only reason.

There are about five or six times as many minor leaguers as major leaguers, even after contraction.  If all the minor leaguers were part of the union they'd always win.  They'd never vote for anything that primarily benefited major leaguers, or free agents.  If a guy is hitting .230 in A ball what does he care about five or six years for arb?  He may never get to the majors at all.  He's trying to divert resources so that he doesn't have to sleep on an air mattress in an apartment he shares with six other guys. 

The entire perspective of the union would be radically different, and to the detriment of major leaguers, if minor leaguers were included.

[DrungoHazewood]

39 minutes ago, Philip said:

That’s a relevant, the first pic is better than the second the second pic is better than the third and so on. The incentive remainsThat’s a relevant, the first pic is better than the second the second pic is better than the third and so on. The incentive remains

The primary reason for tanking isn't to get the #1 pick.  That's a secondary thing.  The primary thing is saving $50M a year by not signing Kevin Millar and Jay Payton and six of their buddies to try to win 74 games.  And even if you lose 500k in attendance, at $50 a head you're still $25M to the good.

[Can_of_corn]

Yes.

[jarman86]

1 hour ago, Philip said:

That’s a relevant, the first pic is better than the second the second pic is better than the third and so on. The incentive remainsThat’s a relevant, the first pic is better than the second the second pic is better than the third and so on. The incentive remains

In a normal world...yes, but again, we are talking baseball, and I can't think of any other sport where the first overall pick has previously been decided on cost effectiveness....Looking at you Matt Bush(among others)!

[jarman86]

1 hour ago, RZNJ said:

Draft picks and bonuses wouldn't be affected by a minor league union because you aren't in the union until you sign your first professional contract.   The vast majority of minor league players get little to no signing bonus at all.

True, and I don't think I argued the opposite. The point I'm making is, instead of MLBPA, who is a union, keeping an unrestricted bonus system which seemed to benefit all parties, they said no, shot it down because they didn't want...someone like Tim Beckham getting paid more than them at 18. MLBPA is generally short-sided, in part because most MLB careers last 3-4 seasons, and the ones that don't wouldn't care because they will get paid anyways. They have had several opportunities to help minor leaguers, and ultimately themselves out, and they have passed at every point on the ability to do so.

[jarman86]

1 hour ago, DrungoHazewood said:

There are about five or six times as many minor leaguers as major leaguers, even after contraction.  If all the minor leaguers were part of the union they'd always win.  They'd never vote for anything that primarily benefited major leaguers, or free agents.  If a guy is hitting .230 in A ball what does he care about five or six years for arb?  He may never get to the majors at all.  He's trying to divert resources so that he doesn't have to sleep on an air mattress in an apartment he shares with six other guys. 

The entire perspective of the union would be radically different, and to the detriment of major leaguers, if minor leaguers were included.

You've never met a minor leaguer I take it. Most of them aren't playing if they don't think they can make it. Obviously there are some guys who know nothing else but to play baseball and can't function outside of that world. Also, that movement has been effective via advocates for minor leaguers, hence why teams are now being forced to pay for living conditions for most minor leaguers.

[DrungoHazewood]

22 minutes ago, jarman86 said:

You've never met a minor leaguer I take it. Most of them aren't playing if they don't think they can make it. Obviously there are some guys who know nothing else but to play baseball and can't function outside of that world. Also, that movement has been effective via advocates for minor leaguers, hence why teams are now being forced to pay for living conditions for most minor leaguers.

I'm sure most are convinced they're a little tweak to their swing away from hitting .230 at Delmarva to being a starter on the Orioles.  Many are delusional.  But that doesn't mean that if they got union membership they wouldn't act in their immediate best interests. 

Do you really think a union of 5000 people is going to vote to continue a system where David Price makes more money than everyone in A ball combined? (Did a little back-of-the-napkin math and I think that's actually true.  I think it's also true that a very small handful of the best paid major leaguers make more than everyone in the minors combined.)

I think it's inevitable that if you give players making $8000 a voice in the same union as MLBers things will change. Heck, there are probably more guys hitting .220 in the low minors terrified they're about to get cut than there are major leaguers.  They'll vote in their own best interest.

[jarman86]

19 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

I'm sure most are convinced they're a little tweak to their swing away from hitting .230 at Delmarva to being a starter on the Orioles.  Many are delusional.  But that doesn't mean that if they got union membership they wouldn't act in their immediate best interests. 

Do you really think a union of 5000 people is going to vote to continue a system where David Price makes more money than everyone in A ball combined? (Did a little back-of-the-napkin math and I think that's actually true.  I think it's also true that a very small handful of the best paid major leaguers make more than everyone in the minors combined.)

I think it's inevitable that if you give players making $8000 a voice in the same union as MLBers things will change. Heck, there are probably more guys hitting .220 in the low minors terrified they're about to get cut than there are major leaguers.  They'll vote in their own best interest.

First of all, I don't believe I've suggested all players form a union of collectively 6,000 people as one big MLBPA. My point is the MLBPA has had several opportunities to help the minors and themselves. and they've passed. They've had the opportunity to help MiLB players unionize, and they've passed. And now, they have weakened their bargaining stance with MLB. 

However, to your question, it depends. You already have 1,200 individuals, of which maybe 10-15% get more than a $5M a season that are trying to continue a system where David Price can make more than the Tampa Bay Rays entire team in one multiyear contract, so I don't see it so farfetched. You also have a system where players accept as status quo a bonus baby system that gives them enough to get by until they make the Majors and get a possible 9 figure multi year contract...so I don't think its beyond the realm of possibility. 

They could take the NFLPA approach and try to "do what's best for everyone" but that isn't what has made the MLBPA the strongest union of all major sports and isn't why minor leaguers have been historically content to consist on a diet of PBJ sandwiches and sleeping on a couch during the season and grandma's basement in the offseason.  

[Just Regular]

4 hours ago, RZNJ said:

Regarding minor league players and the union. On the face of it, it sounds unfair but when I read Marvin Miller's reasoning behind it, it makes sense.  If there was a union strike minor league players would be more likely to fold before ML players, therefore either breaking lines first or having a majority vote/voice in the union.

I had done a lot of wondering about stuff like...so Adley Rutschman doesn't get to vote but Joey Krehbiel does?   But I read or heard somewhere that the way it works is the Voting Population is the 30 player reps plus Executive Committee members (I believe another half dozen or so guys like Scherzer, Andrew Miller, generally all well-established veterans).   They seem to have a republic, not a democracy.

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, Just Regular said:

I had done a lot of wondering about stuff like...so Adley Rutschman doesn't get to vote but Joey Krehbiel does?   But I read or heard somewhere that the way it works is the Voting Population is the 30 player reps plus Executive Committee members (I believe another half dozen or so guys like Scherzer, Andrew Miller, generally all well-established veterans).   They seem to have a republic, not a democracy.

I'm thinking it's more of an Oligarchy in actual practice.