Jump to content

Providing independent coverage of the Minnesota Twins.
Subscribe to Twins Daily Email
Photo

What is the end game?

  • Please log in to reply
168 replies to this topic

#161 Mike Sixel

Mike Sixel

    Now living in Oregon

  • Members
  • 27,010 posts

Posted 19 February 2018 - 09:53 AM

8 year deal just signed, after a 6 year deal was. Looks like long term contracts still exist....
  • Sconnie likes this

There's always next year, or the next, or maybe by the time I'm Chief's age, I guess....


#162 Platoon

Platoon

    Minnesota Twins

  • Members
  • 4,844 posts
  • LocationTwinsWorld

Posted 19 February 2018 - 10:26 AM

I always wonder why free market types, no one in particular is intended, have problems when the free market causes wages to rise in certain industries. But defend large companies to set prices and wages due to the same free market. The reality is elite athletes in any sport can do things other human beings can't. Fans pay to see this unique ability. Owners, to each of their internal need to win, bid on these services. It is ultimately that desire, their personal greed, their narcissism, and their revenue stream which set the salaries of the FA MLB players. Anyone who says that in that position they would turn down the money is being disingenuous. I also agree I don't think that the talent level would sink if they were paid less, but that is a moot point. Some owner will always drive up the price. It's a free market. One last proof of the market effect on salaries. Minor sports, with lower attendance, and lower advertising revenue don't pay these kind of salaries, nor profits to the owners. Thus fans have some control over owner profits, player salaries, and overall interest in a given league or team. And everyone is free to exercise their personal preferences for those entities. That's the free market in its purest form.
  • Mike Sixel likes this
TwinsWorld: Did you hear we just updated the Stadium Club?

If I wanted balls and strikes called by a robot, I would get an Xbox!

#163 Sconnie

Sconnie

    Touch ‘em all!

  • Members
  • 3,814 posts
  • LocationNW Wisconsin

Posted 19 February 2018 - 12:54 PM

 

Monopoly status is irrelevant in this context as monopolies do not drive down wages and the laws protecting wages have nothing to do with monopolies.This is a link to the Department of labor Laws. https://www.dol.gov/...utdol/majorlawsIf there is an effect of monopoly status it would be to create the capacity for excess profits and therefore higher than normal wages.

 

You are also mischaracterizing these statement. The OP suggested players were not treated fairly.I wanted to know from what perspective.The comparison to US Military and Homeleand security was a measure of sociological value. So, the comparison is obviously relevant in context. If its not a sociological perspective the other pertinent perspective is that of free market economics which is a perspective most fans look at from an emotional point of view.For example, a primary disagreement here is that we would lose two sport players.Fans say sure we would without any real consideration of the economic factors at play. For example, there are not enough two sport players to make a significant difference or that all of the others sports except the NBA pay considerable less. Fans make this sort of statement don’t stop to consider baseball contracts are guaranteed and NFL contracts are not.

 

You also completely ignored the fact that I posted right after the quote you posted that this was not a debate of what anyone deserves. Anyone who has been part of related negotiation knows eveyone believes their function is where all the value is formed. There were no coaches that helped these players develop and marketing people had nothing to do with the growth of the league, etc.

I ignored a post that happened after my post, I am I supposed to read all of your posts in a thread and go back to edit my post? How do you know I ignored it and just haven't read it yet? 

 

Now I'm ignoring it.

 

So if this isn't a debate about what anyone thinks they deserve, then how is sociological value relevant? If purely an economic discussion, then what I think doesn't matter and only the free market does. Collectively Bargained markets are not free markets. There are forces at play besides what an individual wants and values.

 

The league deserves the growth n revenue it earned. Management as a part of that growth deserves their cut just like anyone else. I just think the lower paid portions of the stakeholders like trainers, coaches, minor leaguers deserve a bit bigger share than what they've historically gotten.  

  • Platoon likes this

#164 diehardtwinsfan

diehardtwinsfan

    G.O.A.T.

  • Twins Mods
  • 12,498 posts
  • Locationthe charred ruins of BYTO

Posted 19 February 2018 - 01:15 PM

 

Because I find the premise baseball players are underpaid ludicrous.A US marine deployed to a combat zone receives "combat pay" at the rate of $225-250 per month.The median pay for a Marine Lance Corporal is $22,800.Annual compensation while in combat = $25,800.Clayton Kershaw get paid roughly $1M per start.That equates to 38.75X the annual salary of a deployed Marine Corporal for one game.That Corporal would need to fight in combat for 1,279 years to receive the same compensation for 1 year of Kershaw’s contract.He would have to fight in combat or 7,093 years to equal Joe Mauers contract or 12,596 years to equal Giancarlo Stanton contract.

 

How about a Homeland Security Agent Special Agent. They would have to work roughly 3,000 years to equal Stanton’s contract or we could say it takes 300 Homeland Security agents to equal one Giancarlo Stanton.The notion baseball players are underpaid is a product of fanaticism.

 

Mostly, I just wanted someone to actually address the question I posed directly.Let’s try again and see if anyone is actually willing to answer a question directly.If the government said the MLB monopoly has pushed ticket prices to a point of being prohibitive to many families paying taxes for these stadiums or the revenue just was not there and MLB paid half of the $4.4M average compensation would we lose any talent?Would an average compensation of $2,2M be considered incredibly lucrative for playing a game?Would players be thrilled to play for that amount of money? Could they go to Japan or Korea and make ½ of what they make in MLB?Let’s see if anyone is actually willing to address these questions.

 

The whole premise to this is economics 101. The reason why a soldier makes so much less is that the supply of people willing and able to be soldiers far exceeds the nation's need for said soldiers. Even though their positions are riskier by trade, it is as simple as that. Add to it that potential employers, AKA the government in this case, don't have the ability to conspire together to decide where you are going to play so to speak. You sign up or you don't and find other options.

 

Your question though, hits on a different issue. If the government capped ticket prices, would MLB lose talent? That answer isn't that difficult. As with any price fixing, that invariably leads to capital fleeing to markets where it can maximize return. This is why prices controls almost always fail. In the short term, players would likely grumble and keep playing. Perhaps they will find creative ways around the price controls, but most likely in the long term, you'll likely find baseball leagues in other countries gaining value as that money will flee somewhere. There's a reason why players right now flock to the US. They pay the most, and it's the toughest stage. That will change over time if ticket prices are capped. Certainly not right away, but it will happen.

 

Look, I don't think ball players are underpaid, but they do take advantage of having a very rare set of skills that millions of people will shell out money to go see. This is true of any entertainer, whether an athlete, singer, etc. If you don't like player salaries. Don't go. Don't watch. Even though I haven't set foot at TF in several years, by simply participating here and visiting sites such as ESPN, mlbtraderumors, etc. I'm contributing to that fact. If their salaries bother you, walk away. It's the ultimate leverage. 

  • Sconnie and Platoon like this

#165 AlwaysinModeration

AlwaysinModeration

    Rochester Red Wings

  • Members
  • 1,917 posts

Posted 19 February 2018 - 03:07 PM

8 year deal just signed, after a 6 year deal was. Looks like long term contracts still exist....


I think you are right. The log jam seems to be broken, and the prices are going down a bit bit but not overly so. Seems like it really was just a confluence of events. But also seems contracts may need to be more creative with opt outs and incentives than they were in the past to make them more palatable than the standard long term deals.

Random side note...did Mauer’s chances of winning the gold glove just go up?

#166 Major Leauge Ready

Major Leauge Ready

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,553 posts

Posted 20 February 2018 - 11:09 AM

 

I ignored a post that happened after my post, I am I supposed to read all of your posts in a thread and go back to edit my post? How do you know I ignored it and just haven't read it yet? 

 

Now I'm ignoring it.

 

So if this isn't a debate about what anyone thinks they deserve, then how is sociological value relevant? If purely an economic discussion, then what I think doesn't matter and only the free market does. Collectively Bargained markets are not free markets. There are forces at play besides what an individual wants and values.

 

The league deserves the growth n revenue it earned. Management as a part of that growth deserves their cut just like anyone else. I just think the lower paid portions of the stakeholders like trainers, coaches, minor leaguers deserve a bit bigger share than what they've historically gotten.  

 

I agree with one of the general constructs of your past couple posts in terms of the money is not getting spread around. The big names are getting paid big-time on guaranteed deals regardless of how they produce going forward. Of course, this too is a value judgment and when they perform their impact on the revenues is worth the salary. At least it would appear the teams have come to this conclusion.

 

Frankly, I have mixed emotions on minor league pay.It's a business expense just like MLM salaries so owners should not care if they are paying MLB or MiLB salaries. I am guessing the players see this as their slice of the pie. If an X percent increase goes to MiLB players it costs the MLB players. Raise the average MiLB slary by $20K means there is roughly $100K less to go to MLB players.

 

One last note.Who deserves what when slicing the pie is a different premise than sociological value.  

  • Sconnie likes this

#167 ewen21

ewen21

    Chattanooga Lookouts

  • Members
  • 793 posts

Posted 20 February 2018 - 11:14 AM

 

Random side note...did Mauer’s chances of winning the gold glove just go up?

Do people still care who wins that thing?


#168 Major Leauge Ready

Major Leauge Ready

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,553 posts

Posted 20 February 2018 - 03:57 PM

 

 

Look, I don't think ball players are underpaid, but they do take advantage of having a very rare set of skills that millions of people will shell out money to go see. This is true of any entertainer, whether an athlete, singer, etc. If you don't like player salaries. Don't go. Don't watch. Even though I haven't set foot at TF in several years, by simply participating here and visiting sites such as ESPN, mlbtraderumors, etc. I'm contributing to that fact. If their salaries bother you, walk away. It's the ultimate leverage. 

 

You are making an assumption that my problem is how much the players are getting paid and that assumption is incorrect. I don’t care.What bugs me is the fans perspective on financial matters. For example, The Twins should sign Darvish no matter what. In other words, the owners should ignore the fact this is a business but players should not.My favorite is MLB owners should be willing to make little or no profit but players should get every dime they can. The realty interesting thing about this particular position is that it is usually made in the context that it would help our team get desirable FAs. If the owners followed this practice it would not change the MN Twins position at all.The players would just get more money. Actually, if all the teams sacrificed their profit the Twins would be in even worse relative financial position because the big market teams would add more to their potential budget then the twins would under such a practice. 

 

Also, positions such as the league would lose talent are formulated with little consideration of the driving factors. For example, you concluded MLB would definitely lose talent in the long run.To whom?There is not another league paying even remotely close to MLB. The NFL pays less than half in terms of average salary. Fans support this positions without any realistic consideration of the factors associate with a potential future state.  

 

BTW … MLB attendance has declined for three consecutive seasons. Do you think the rising ticket prices necessary to pay these enormous salaries has anything to do with this fact?

 

https://www.forbes.c...2/#6b3e3c61326f

Edited by Major Leauge Ready, 20 February 2018 - 03:58 PM.


#169 AlwaysinModeration

AlwaysinModeration

    Rochester Red Wings

  • Members
  • 1,917 posts

Posted 20 February 2018 - 05:32 PM

Do people still care who wins that thing?


I cannot speak for “people.” However, to me, insofar as winning it would help solidify his chances of enshrinement in Cooperstown, yes, I care.
  • Twins33 likes this