Will Jacob Nottingham be on our Opening Day roster?

[Ohfan67]

1 hour ago, wildcard said:

Paying players through arbitration for the first three years may be fair to the players but its not fair to low revenue teams that paid to develop them.   A player has a great rookie year and all of a sudden he is getting paid 15-20m a year.  That  would kill the low revenue teams.  They would have to trade every good player they developed soon after he reaches the majors.     Franco would not have signed a long term contract with the Rays because he would not be earning 1-8m a year for the first 5 years. He would be getting 15m the first year.

Tough. If the team can't afford to pay players, then they should be shut down. If MLB was dumb enough to put a team in a horrid coliseum that's not in the city that's on the player's jerseys, then that's on MLB. If MLB wants a team in that market, then they can deal with it via revenue sharing. Conversely they can allow the team to move to a better market. The Rays are a great organization, but they are in a fairly unsustainable financial situation. 

 

There seems to be a misunderstanding that before free agency there were no rich and poor teams, that there was a level financial playing field. Of course there were poor teams that stunk for years and years and sold prospects to the Yankees and the like whenever they could. MLB owners will never agree to full revenue sharing so there will never be parity and poor teams will always have a hard time. A new labor agreement is not going to change that fact. 

[Frobby]

2 hours ago, emmett16 said:

I remember someone posted on here about avg. age of MLB debut by year.   I need to try to find the data but I remember being shocked/surprise that the avg. age of MLB debut has been just about the same for many many decades.   

That was me.  I looked at the first year of each decade from 1950 to now (actually, I used 2019 for the final number because 2020 was a short year).  The median age in 2019 was 24.287  It’s never been lower than 23.182 in the last 70 years, which goes back 25 years before free agency.  Data here:  https://forum.orioleshangout.com/forums/index.php?/topic/40683-mcgregor-on-rutschman-theyre-throwing-it-fastballs-by-him-right-now/page/10/&tab=comments#comment-2641510

 

[wildcard]

21 minutes ago, Ohfan67 said:

Tough. If the team can't afford to pay players, then they should be shut down. If MLB was dumb enough to put a team in a horrid coliseum that's not in the city that's on the player's jerseys, then that's on MLB. If MLB wants a team in that market, then they can deal with it via revenue sharing. Conversely they can allow the team to move to a better market. The Rays are a great organization, but they are in a fairly unsustainable financial situation. 

 

There seems to be a misunderstanding that before free agency there were no rich and poor teams, that there was a level financial playing field. Of course there were poor teams that stunk for years and years and sold prospects to the Yankees and the like whenever they could. MLB owners will never agree to full revenue sharing so there will never be parity and poor teams will always have a hard time. A new labor agreement is not going to change that fact. 

I don't know how the CBA turns out but so far the Commish is using the competitive  disadvantage of the low revenue teams to justify not agreeing with some of the Players Unions positions.

[Sports Guy]

20 minutes ago, wildcard said:

I don't know how the CBA turns out but so far the Commish is using the competitive  disadvantage of the low revenue teams to justify not agreeing with some of the Players Unions positions.

Anything this commish does should be automatically dismissed.

[OsFanSinceThe80s]

40 minutes ago, wildcard said:

I don't know how the CBA turns out but so far the Commish is using the competitive  disadvantage of the low revenue teams to justify not agreeing with some of the Players Unions positions.

The owners crying poverty.