Zulgad: Is MLB really making return about dollars and cents?

[The Wise One]

 

Then let’s also not forget that players at the MLB level get per diem over and above their salary, free bats, gloves, shoes, etc. and that’s just an average guy. The good ones obviously get big endorsement money.

$30 a day in meal money for being on the road is not going to make a player rich. It is a couple thousand a year for the full year. Of course the issue becomes they are not playing for a full year. The tools of the trade arguments? Why not say how much money they make by not having to pay for their work space? Endorsements by ball players is few and far between on the rookie and first year player level.

[USAFChief]

$30 a day in meal money for being on the road is not going to make a player rich. It is a couple thousand a year for the full year. Of course the issue becomes they are not playing for a full year. The tools of the trade arguments? Why not say how much money they make by not having to pay for their work space? Endorsements by ball players is few and far between on the rookie and first year player level.

Not that it makes much difference, but major league per diem is $91/day in spring training and $102/day during the regular season. This stuff is easy to look up so I wont provide a link.

[old nurse]

 

Not that it makes much difference, but major league per diem is $91/day in spring training and $102/day during the regular season. This stuff is easy to look up so I wont provide a link.

https://www.sportingnews.com/us/mlb/news/new-mlb-player-meal-money-rules-cba-agreement/1rcajbyw8vbmo1563qs9d3hxxa

[USAFChief]

https://www.sportingnews.com/us/mlb/news/new-mlb-player-meal-money-rules-cba-agreement/1rcajbyw8vbmo1563qs9d3hxxa

Google "MLB contract" and read attachment 47.

[jorgenswest]

I think you are both correct but the 102 is on road trip days where there is not a clubhouse meal. I guess that would be days without a game. It is also for travel days (no game) when leaving on a trip before noon or arriving back the next day after 6.

 

I sure hope the MLB and MLBPA come to their senses and get a season started July 4. Right now I think they are headed to a lost 2020 and failed contract negotiations in 2021. They have an opportunity to be the only game on in July and capture some new fans or they can lose their fan base and revenues that may never return.

[Vanimal46]

 

This has to be the week to come to an agreement. Otherwise there’s simply not enough time to get this done.

[yarnivek1972]

Drafting has improved, but not really that much. Try looking at draft results 22 of the 42 picks, those boys with the big bucks, from 2015 have not seen the major league leagues. Come up with the data to prove your point. All of those non bonus babies on the Twins last year and non good draft picks hint you are wrong

 

https://legacy.baseballprospectus.com/compensation/cots/american-league/minnesota-twins/

 

 

Eddie Rosario: 200 K bonus

Max Kepler: 800 K

Miguel Sano: 3.15 M

Taylor Rogers: 100 K

Jose Berrios: 1.55 M

Jorge Polanco: unk

Byron Buxton: 6 M

Trevor May: 375 K

Tyler Duffy: 267.1 K

Mitch Garver: 40 K

Luis Areaez: 40 K

 

So, of 11 guys that came up in the organization, 3 had bonuses over $1 mil and

one more was close enough that he had earned $ 1 mil within his first half season at the MLB level. Didn’t I say probably not even half?

 

 

I’m not sure what bringing up the 2015 draft has to do with anything. It was a bad draft all around for the Twins. One of the last of the previous regime and part of why Ryan was let go. Drafting like it was 1990. But other than Jay and Levi Michael, every Twins top pick has made the bigs going back as far as 2000. It’s not surprising. Teams are going to give that top pick every opportunity even if they maybe don’t deserve it. Teams don’t like to throw away money. So, if they have already invested heavily in a guy, they will tend to give him a shot to sink or swim.

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Minnesota_Twins_first-round_draft_picks

[yarnivek1972]

https://twitter.com/karlravechespn/status/1270005587242295310?s=21

 

This has to be the week to come to an agreement. Otherwise there’s simply not enough time to get this done.

I would say unless teams are in camp by July 1 there is no chance. Even then, you’d be looking at 75 games maximum with extended playoffs lasting late into November.

 

That’s 3 weeks from Wednesday.

[Mike Sixel]

 

Mike, could you possibly use this article more dishonestly? It specifically says the number is this low because it includes players with as little os 1 day of MLB service time. Half the players in this "data" had less than 1 year.

The MLB minimum is over 1/2 a million per year, but you already knew that.

 

So, you expect MLB to reverse it's trend, and start using more expensive players in the coming years?

 

Half a million, over 4.17 years, less the max tax rate, less union dues, less agent fees.....how much do you think that nets? 

 

The point of the article, which has lots and lots of data, is that players aren't nearly so rich as the owners want you to think.......

 

BTW, the latest proposal? Owners make $750 million more than the last proposal, and players make $250 million less.....

[Vanimal46]

I would say unless teams are in camp by July 1 there is no chance. Even then, you’d be looking at 75 games maximum with extended playoffs lasting late into November.

 

That’s 3 weeks from Wednesday.

Agreed. I was listening to Gleeman and the Geek last night and think the timeline they mentioned on their podcast resembles yours.

 

- Gotta come to an agreement this week if there will be a season or not.

 

- One week to arrange travel for international players to get back to the team facilities.

 

- 2-3 week Spring Training 2.0. Gleeman said that Wes Johnson needs 20 days to get the pitchers ramped up enough to pitch without fear of immediate injury.

 

- Opening Day the week following 4th of July weekend.

[yarnivek1972]

One of my concerns is that with both sides talking almost exclusively about money, very few are talking about logistical details that will have to be settled before players even report back. Are players going to be effectively quarrantined for the duration of the season? Has there been any agreement as to which venues are going to be used. Hundreds of details. That all need to be figured out before players report.

 

 

Also, I’m not sure one week would be a realistic timeline to get players who are scattered all over the country and world into camp once an agreement is reached. That’s pretty ambitious.

[howeda7]

 

One of my concerns is that with both sides talking almost exclusively about money, very few are talking about logistical details that will have to be settled before players even report back. Are players going to be effectively quarrantined for the duration of the season? Has there been any agreement as to which venues are going to be used. Hundreds of details. That all need to be figured out before players report.


Also, I’m not sure one week would be a realistic timeline to get players who are scattered all over the country and world into camp once an agreement is reached. That’s pretty ambitious.

I assume the July 4th date is already being pushed. Also, I expect "training camp II" won't be longer than 15-20 days or so. Get ready for a lot of "openers" because no starters are going to be ready to go past 3 innings or so on opening day.

[old nurse]

 

Google "MLB contract" and read attachment 47.

) Meals
(i) On days when Clubs are scheduled to play games begin- ning at 1 P.M. and 7 P.M., Clubs shall be required to pro- vide three meals for Players (i.e., lunch or breakfast, pregame, and postgame).
(ii) On days when Clubs are scheduled to play games begin- ning at 4 P.M., Clubs shall be required to provide four meals for Players (i.e., breakfast, lunch, pregame, and postgame).
(iii) The PAC and registered dietitian at each Club shall develop a list of acceptable meal selections at home and on the road. In addition, the PAC and registered dietitian shall identify additional food, snacks and beverages that should be available in the clubhouses (e.g., bottled water, sports drinks, coffee, tea, etc.). All food provided should reasonably accommodate identified food aller- gies, sensitivities, or special dietary needs and requests.
(iv) In-stadium catering and concessions may supply club- house meals, provided those meals comply with the dietary standards established by the Club and its PAC.
297
(v) All dietary supplements and functional foods (e.g., pro- tein bars and shakes) made available at home and on the road must be NSF Certified for Sport.

They have to provide meals, not money. That was in the SI article. Big dealIt is not money going into the pockets of players. 

[yarnivek1972]

I assume the July 4th date is already being pushed. Also, I expect "training camp II" won't be longer than 15-20 days or so. Get ready for a lot of "openers" because no starters are going to be ready to go past 3 innings or so on opening day.

July 4th isn’t a realistic opening day date. They could ratify a deal today and not hit that. 25 days? Are you serious? Even if by some miracle they could get everyone into camps by the 15th. Fewer than 20 days to get ready? I don’t see it. And as I say, that’s if they had a deal ready to sign today. They don’t and by all indications aren’t particularly close to having one.

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

NFL has it's antitrust exemption since 1961. The reason competitors all fail, is because the NFL holds the strict rights to a draft. The competitors can only sign free agents.

 

 

Were the MLB to lose anti-trust exemption means losing the draft. Free Agency starts day one, but the union may survive. Suddenly a level playing field could mean legitimate competition for eyes and talent.

 

It's basically this. The draft, which you have in all sports, is effectively the problem with antitrust. Draft is effectively owners getting together and deciding where players work and how much they make. With the draft, you need an exemption, and those exemptions are typically granted when players are allowed to collectively bargain.

 

This is why the NFLPA decertified during the last lockout. They were going after the NFL's anti-trust exemption, and by decertifying, they could do it. 

[Richie the Rally Goat]

 

It's basically this. The draft, which you have in all sports, is effectively the problem with antitrust. Draft is effectively owners getting together and deciding where players work and how much they make. With the draft, you need an exemption, and those exemptions are typically granted when players are allowed to collectively bargain.

 

This is why the NFLPA decertified during the last lockout. They were going after the NFL's anti-trust exemption, and by decertifying, they could do it. 

my post should be amended - the NFL does not have "strict rights" as has been proven incorrect. I do stand by that the draft and colective bargaining agreement are hte yin and yang of monopoly 

[The Wise One]

 

https://legacy.baseballprospectus.com/compensation/cots/american-league/minnesota-twins/


Eddie Rosario: 200 K bonus
Max Kepler: 800 K
Miguel Sano: 3.15 M
Taylor Rogers: 100 K
Jose Berrios: 1.55 M
Jorge Polanco: unk
Byron Buxton: 6 M
Trevor May: 375 K
Tyler Duffy: 267.1 K
Mitch Garver: 40 K
Luis Areaez: 40 K

So, of 11 guys that came up in the organization, 3 had bonuses over $1 mil and
one more was close enough that he had earned $ 1 mil within his first half season at the MLB level. Didn’t I say probably not even half?


I’m not sure what bringing up the 2015 draft has to do with anything. It was a bad draft all around for the Twins. One of the last of the previous regime and part of why Ryan was let go. Drafting like it was 1990. But other than Jay and Levi Michael, every Twins top pick has made the bigs going back as far as 2000. It’s not surprising. Teams are going to give that top pick every opportunity even if they maybe don’t deserve it. Teams don’t like to throw away money. So, if they have already invested heavily in a guy, they will tend to give him a shot to sink or swim.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Minnesota_Twins_first-round_draft_picks

But the guys that are typically higher draft picks and guys that get big international money are guys that are more likely to make it to the bigs.

That is what you said. In a failed attempt to show you the end results of the high draft picks making it to the bigs I picked a reasonably year in terms of recency to show you just how far off you were on the above statement you made

[The Wise One]

Polonco had a 575k bonus

[Major League Ready]

 

For those saying this is a fight between millionaires and billionaires, I recommend reading this.....

 

short version....more than half of MLB players made less than 400K in their career so far. Also, the average length of a MLB career is dropping, but the late start to actually making the majors hasn't changed much, if at all......and that doesn't count losing money while in the minors for most players. 

 

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-much-money-do-mlb-players-really-make/

 

The negotiation is not between AAAA players or replacement players or however you want to describe the players that have not been able to stick. The people receiving 99.5 percent of the revenue in question are players that actually make the team. You are reaching and consequentially the argument is exceptionally ill-conceived.

 

Your argument appears to be the players who have not made a couple million yet should not suffer. Then, construct the distribution accordingly as opposed to saying the guys with $100M contracts should be protected because some other guys have not or will not make it.

 

Would you support a 27% reduction for players that have made more than $2M in their career? If we take players with a $1.3M salaries and above, these players have already made it through 3 years at the minimum. Their salaries represent 92.1 of total player compensation. A 27% reduction in their salaries would equate to the 25% reduction sought by ownership and none of the 513 league minimum players would have to contribute a dime. There is no doubt the league would accept this proposal. 

 

BTW … the 3 players with 1.3M are Danielson Lamet ? Cody Allen / and Evan White. Lamet is an arb-1 player. White has a $24M contract and Cody Allen has career earnings of $32M.

[The Wise One]

 

The negotiation is not between AAAA players or replacement players or however you want to describe the players that have not been able to stick. The people receiving 99.5 percent of the revenue in question are players that actually make the team. You are reaching and consequentially the argument is exceptionally ill-conceived.

 

Your argument appears to be the players who have not made a couple million yet should not suffer. Then, construct the distribution accordingly as opposed to saying the guys with $100M contracts should be protected because some other guys have not or will not make it.

 

Would you support a 27% reduction for players that have made more than $2M in their career? If we take players with a $1.3M salaries and above, these players have already made it through 3 years at the minimum. Their salaries represent 92.1 of total player compensation. A 27% reduction in their salaries would equate to the 25% reduction sought by ownership and none of the 513 league minimum players would have to contribute a dime. There is no doubt the league would accept this proposal. 

 

BTW … the 3 players with 1.3M are Danielson Lamet ? Cody Allen / and Evan White. Lamet is an arb-1 player. White has a $24M contract and Cody Allen has career earnings of $32M.

Any claim of the AAAA players of being the ones who do not make the money is incorrect. AAAA players like LaMaarre get multiple seasons. Why there is likely a plethora of players with the low claim of career earnings is the AAA pitcher getting their shot, Kohl Stewart , Ian Miller, LaMonte Wade and maybe a quite a few others. There has been the September thank you for your service call ups. also

[rdehring]

Enjoyed reading the comments about meal money.  Recall several years ago Bonnie and I were celebrating our anniversary at the Capital Grille.  Was a Monday night and the Red Sox were in town for a series opening on Tuesday.  We were seated at a booth in the back and shortly after arriving the waiters were hustling around to put several tables adjacent to us together for a group.  The group turned out to be Jason Varitek and 9 members (or maybe 11 as I can't remember if it was 4 or 5 on each side) of the Red Sox pitching staff.

 

Recall Varitek handled the bill which they shared.  Then one of the older pitchers, recognized him but don't recall his name, gave the wine bill to the rookie at the end of the table who was wearing a purple corduroy sport coat.  Do remember that he was John Lester, who wasn't at all pleased by the amount of the bill for wine.   

[yarnivek1972]

But the guys that are typically higher draft picks and guys that get big international money are guys that are more likely to make it to the bigs.

That is what you said. In a failed attempt to show you the end results of the high draft picks making it to the bigs I picked a reasonably year in terms of recency to show you just how far off you were on the above statement you made

So, it is just a coincidence that you picked one of the two drafts out of the last 20 years where the Twins top pick didn’t make the bigs. Sorry, not buying that.

[Major League Ready]

 

Any claim of the AAAA players of being the ones who do not make the money is incorrect. AAAA players like LaMaarre get multiple seasons. Why there is likely a plethora of players with the low claim of career earnings is the AAA pitcher getting their shot, Kohl Stewart , Ian Miller, LaMonte Wade and maybe a quite a few others. There has been the September thank you for your service call ups. also

 

I am sure you have a point but I was trying to simply dismiss the entire notion that these players were relevant to the discussion regardless of how we defined them. This is a negotiation over the distribution of funds. I am not going to try to figure it the percentage exactly but the annual amount paid to the players referenced probably equates to one-tenth of one percent. Suggesting they are the reason players should not accept anything less than 100% of normal rates is not well thought out.

 

Perhaps more to the point, the league recognized that there are many players that are not yet established or are making the league minimum. Their proposal considered the fact that the roughly 60% of players in this category represent only 8% of total player salaries. The leagues proposal considered this fact. The MLBPA rejected the notion of giving special consideration to this group not the owners.

 

Finally, if the concern is the players that have not made it, then construct a plan based on this need. Don’t suggest that all players should be exempt from reduced compensation because some of them have not made millions. This was a poor attempt to cover up a position of prejudice.

[The Wise One]

 

So, it is just a coincidence that you picked one of the two drafts out of the last 20 years where the Twins top pick didn’t make the bigs. Sorry, not buying that.

You can think whatever you damn well please about my intentions. I really don't care. It doesn't change that this

Eddie Rosario: 200 K bonus
Max Kepler: 800 K
Miguel Sano: 3.15 M
Taylor Rogers: 100 K
Jose Berrios: 1.55 M
Jorge Polanco: unk
Byron Buxton: 6 M
Trevor May: 375 K
Tyler Duffy: 267.1 K
Mitch Garver: 40 K
Luis Areaez: 40 K

 

which disproves the big money signed players and reaching the majors

[rdehring]

 

You can think whatever you damn well please about my intentions. I really don't care. It doesn't change that this

Eddie Rosario: 200 K bonus
Max Kepler: 800 K
Miguel Sano: 3.15 M
Taylor Rogers: 100 K
Jose Berrios: 1.55 M
Jorge Polanco: unk
Byron Buxton: 6 M
Trevor May: 375 K
Tyler Duffy: 267.1 K
Mitch Garver: 40 K
Luis Areaez: 40 K

 

which disproves the big money signed players and reaching the majors

If memory serves, Polanco's bonus was close to Kepler's in the high $700's.  So Kepler, Polanco and Sano totaled nearly $5.0mm that year under Bill Smith's watch.  Certainly has to go down as one of his better decisions that continues to impact the team.

[howeda7]

 

July 4th isn’t a realistic opening day date. They could ratify a deal today and not hit that. 25 days? Are you serious? Even if by some miracle they could get everyone into camps by the 15th. Fewer than 20 days to get ready? I don’t see it. And as I say, that’s if they had a deal ready to sign today. They don’t and by all indications aren’t particularly close to having one.

I think they will want to play as few meaningless games as possible. Hitters can be ready in 15 days. Pitchers can't, but they will likely have ~30 man rosters with 12 man bullpens. Give enough games to give every starter 3 ST starts and call it a day. Most of them have probably been throwing on their own.

[yarnivek1972]

You can think whatever you damn well please about my intentions. I really don't care. It doesn't change that this

Eddie Rosario: 200 K bonus

Max Kepler: 800 K

Miguel Sano: 3.15 M

Taylor Rogers: 100 K

Jose Berrios: 1.55 M

Jorge Polanco: unk

Byron Buxton: 6 M

Trevor May: 375 K

Tyler Duffy: 267.1 K

Mitch Garver: 40 K

Luis Areaez: 40 K

 

which disproves the big money signed players and reaching the majors

Other than Tyler Jay, what “big money” signing from more than 4 years ago hasn’t reached the bigs?

[The Wise One]

 

If memory serves, Polanco's bonus was close to Kepler's in the high $700's.  So Kepler, Polanco and Sano totaled nearly $5.0mm that year under Bill Smith's watch.  Certainly has to go down as one of his better decisions that continues to impact the team.

Sportrac listed him as the figure I posted. Could have been higher. Could have ended up with much less after all of the sticky fingers

[The Wise One]

 

Other than Tyler Jay, what “big money” signing from more than 4 years ago hasn’t reached the bigs?

Your list of players that were contributors is different than any list of high draft choices. Your list of this year's contributors would say that high bonus players are not in the majors this year. The point of Mike's initial post was that the average player not having much money.  Yes in years past the bonus baby might have gotten a  shot, hence reached the majors. However the talk was of last year and the money of players. This has spun to absurdity

[rdehring]

 

Sportrac listed him as the figure I posted. Could have been higher. Could have ended up with much less after all of the sticky fingers

The reason I mentioned that Polanco's bonus was in the upper 700's was because you had him listed as unk (unknown).  Don't know why you made the above comment?