MLB Lockout Thread

[Pickles]

10 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

This is what it's about, I agree.  It's easy to look at the high paid guys and say they're spoiled brats and whiners, but I think the high paid guys would be the first to tell you that it's not always about them.  

Now...Tyler Wilson still made good money.  Not a crazy amount, but 1.022 isn't pocket change.  And he's only 32 years old, plus he pitched in the KBO where he made 800k and then 1.5 million, then 1.6 million.  

That's not generational wealth, but I think practically anyone would like to be 32 years old.  If he did it right, saved and invested properly, he won't have to work really hard for the rest of his life.

Set aside the KBO stuff, 1.022 million is still a decent chunk but it doesn't allow him to retire young.  In regards to the pension, I am not sure if he had enough service time to earn it.

I'm rambling, whatever.  The point is that for every Scherzer, there's dozens of guys like this who don't even come within sniffing distance of that amount of money.

If Tyler Wilson is an example of a guy getting screwed by the labor practices of MLB, let us all be screwed in such a way.

[Pickles]

1 minute ago, DrungoHazewood said:

It was a high level example, and I assumed the owners got 50% of the revenues.  I think that's fairly close to reality, and they take non-payroll operating expenses out of that.

I guess my point was simply that the labor agreement the players have been operating under is not as wildly unfair as some seem to be suggesting.

And again, that's not making any comment upon the current negotiations.  

[forphase1]

53 minutes ago, Hallas said:

Is this controversial?  Making it to MLB is hard, and these players have forsaken a traditional career.  So I think at the very least they need to earn enough so that they can forego working after they wash out for a fairly long period while they figure out alternative career prospects.  Especially considering that all athletes have a far higher injury rate than a typical worker. Maybe not for the rest of their lives but at least for the 10-15 years following their exit from the league.  I don't know if a utility guy making the league minimum for parts of 6 seasons really meets this bar.

It is to me.  A utility guy who washes out at the age of 27-30 still has 40+ years ahead of him.  I'm not sure why we think they should be entitled to earn enough money during that brief period of getting MLB salaries to never work again, or even for 10-15 years.  If they are good enough, then they will earn a good living.  If they are barely able to stay in the league, then they also will be paid accordingly, and even that is a stupid amount of money, in my opinion.  Making 500k+ a year to play baseball?  Heck yeah, sign me up.  Now clearly they have the talent and should earn what the market will bear.  I'm really not against them earning a great living, up to and including millions and millions of dollars a year.  But when the greed to get more means my baseball fix can't be satisfied because both sides are greedy and fighting over billions of dollars, then I care.

And the 'forsaken a traditional career' stuff is silly.  Millions of workers across the USA change jobs/careers each year, or go back to school to do so.  Why we think that a player who has spent 5-6 years earning 500k+ a year can't then figure out how to transition into another line of work is beyond me.   'Normal' folks do it all the time.  Athletes shouldn't be an exception or get an easy way out just because they chose to play sports, and for 99% of the kids in high school or college playing sports today they will NEVER make any money doing so.  The players all chose to be athletes, and part of that choice is the consequences of having to learn something else to do when your playing days are over, whether you made $50k or $50M.  Granted the $50M guy has way more options, but still!

Someone else brought up other entertainers who make tons of money, and they aren't wrong.  I've long thought ALL entertainers, from athletes to musicians to movie stars make WAY more than is reasonable.  I don't blame them really, as all of us would like to make more money.  But when their demands mean I don't get a sequel for a movie I love, or their music is impossible to find, or sporting events get cancelled, then I care.  It just really amazes sometimes how the 'average joe' fan so buys into the 'poor, pitiful players', doesn't matter if we are talking pro-sports or the poor college athletes who until recently were only able to legally get a $100K+ valued scholarship.  They are prime athletes, who are often given every single advantage from the time they can swing a bat or shoot a basketball or run fast on the football field until the time they retire, be it in primary school, high school, college or professional sports.  But woe until them, as the 'man' is making money of their blood sweat and tears!  Give me a break.  

[DrungoHazewood]

12 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

Now...Tyler Wilson still made good money.  Not a crazy amount, but 1.022 isn't pocket change.  And he's only 32 years old, plus he pitched in the KBO where he made 800k and then 1.5 million, then 1.6 million. 

Let's say he saved 1/3rd of his income after taxes, living expenses, whatever.  That works out to 1.64M in the bank.  Put that in a stock indexed mutual fund that makes, say, 8% a year... he's making $131k a year forever.  So go find whatever job he wants, and whatever job his wife wants, because there aren't too many spots in the country where you can't live reasonably comfortably on $131k plus any other two incomes.

Then if he also is getting $35k a year from the MLB pension, he's making $166k before he figures out what he wants to do with his life.

He'll probably be okay unless he blew that 1.64M on cars and booze and lottery tickets and stuff.

[Big Mac]

7 minutes ago, Pickles said:

If Tyler Wilson is an example of a guy getting screwed by the labor practices of MLB, let us all be screwed in such a way.

To be clear that is not what I was using him as an example for.  I was using him as an example of a guy who had minimal MLB service that by all accounts was set up pretty well once his playing career ended. 

[Pickles]

2 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Let's say he saved 1/3rd of his income after taxes, living expenses, whatever.  That works out to 1.64M in the bank.  Put that in a stock indexed mutual fund that makes, say, 8% a year... he's making $131k a year forever.  So go find whatever job he wants, and whatever job his wife wants, because there aren't too many spots in the country where you can't live reasonably comfortably on $131k plus any other two incomes.

Then if he also is getting $35k a year from the MLB pension, he's making $166k before he figures out what he wants to do with his life.

He'll probably be okay unless he blew that 1.64M on cars and booze and lottery tickets and stuff.

But by God!  What if he's a philandering dick and his wife divorces him!  He might have to sell one of his Porsches!  That's a bridge too far!

[Pickles]

Just now, Big Mac said:

To be clear that is not what I was using him as an example for.  I was using him as an example of a guy who had minimal MLB service that by all accounts was set up pretty well once his playing career ended. 

No I understood your point.

[DrungoHazewood]

1 minute ago, forphase1 said:

I've long thought ALL entertainers, from athletes to musicians to movie stars make WAY more than is reasonable. 

My guess is that the median professional athlete is playing in the Atlantic League or the Portugese Basketball League or the German 3. Liga, pulling down $20k, $30k, $60k a year.  The median musician is playing gigs at Stoney's Crab House for $125 on Saturday night, plus tens of dollars selling their music on Bandcamp.  The median movie actor played Guy Next to Elevator in some random superhero movie for the standard union rate.  Actors earned a median rate of $20.43 per hour as of 2019 according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

[Big Mac]

3 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Let's say he saved 1/3rd of his income after taxes, living expenses, whatever.  That works out to 1.64M in the bank.  Put that in a stock indexed mutual fund that makes, say, 8% a year... he's making $131k a year forever.  So go find whatever job he wants, and whatever job his wife wants, because there aren't too many spots in the country where you can't live reasonably comfortably on $131k plus any other two incomes.

Then if he also is getting $35k a year from the MLB pension, he's making $166k before he figures out what he wants to do with his life.

He'll probably be okay unless he blew that 1.64M on cars and booze and lottery tickets and stuff.

This is exactly the point I was trying to make.  Even with modest MLB earnings compared to their peers, these people are set up pretty well when they move on from playing.

[DrungoHazewood]

2 minutes ago, Big Mac said:

This is exactly the point I was trying to make.  Even with modest MLB earnings compared to their peers, these people are set up pretty well when they move on from playing.

Just so long as they were semi-responsible with their money.  A lot of them aren't.  I don't remember the exact quote, but something like 50% of NFL players are bankrupt a few years after leaving the league.  Handing a 19-year-old a check for $1M bonus is kind of like setting the money on fire.  Remember Matt Riley and his monster truck and muti-carat earrings while he was still in AA?

You can't really control irresponsibility, but I'm guessing most Tyler Wilsons have little of their earnings left at 35.

[Ripken]

3 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Just so long as they were semi-responsible with their money.  A lot of them aren't.  I don't remember the exact quote, but something like 50% of NFL players are bankrupt a few years after leaving the league.  Handing a 19-year-old a check for $1M bonus is kind of like setting the money on fire.  Remember Matt Riley and his monster truck and muti-carat earrings while he was still in AA?

You can't really control irresponsibility, but I'm guessing most Tyler Wilsons have little of their earnings left at 35.

Shame on them.  Giving them even more money to piss away isn't a solution (not that you said it was).

 

[owknows]

29 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

It was a high level example, and I assumed the owners got 50% of the revenues.  I think that's fairly close to reality, and they take non-payroll operating expenses out of that.

The owners don't get anywhere close to that number

[Can_of_corn]

6 minutes ago, owknows said:

The owners don't get anywhere close to that number

I posted a link showing that it was around 50% a few years ago.

Do you have a link showing it isn't?

[owknows]

Just now, Can_of_corn said:

I posted a link showing that it was around 50% a few years ago.

Do you have a link showing it isn't?

False.

You posted a link showing the MLB player salaries account for 51% of revenue on average

And that MiLB player salaries account for another 5% of player salaries.

Maybe you think the employees of MLB teams who are not players work free of charge. (they do not)

Maybe you believe that the facilities, travel logistics, lodging, food, and uniforms are free of charge. (they are not)

Maybe you think that the owners don't pay taxes. (they do)

 

In reality... they probably get about 25-30% of team revenue...

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, owknows said:

False.

You posted a link showing the MLB player salaries account for 51% of revenue on average

And that MiLB player salaries account for another 5% of player salaries.

Maybe you think the employees of MLB teams who are not players work free of charge. (they do not)

Maybe you believe that the facilities, travel logistics, lodging, food, and uniforms are free of charge. (they are not)

Maybe you think that the owners don't pay taxes. (they do)

 

In reality... they probably get about 25-30% of team revenue...

Oh sorry, misunderstood you.

I figured when Drungo said "non-payroll operating expenses out of that. " he meant player payroll only.