Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

Mike Sixel

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    48,925

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    340

 Content Type 

Profiles

Minnesota Twins News, Rumors & Analysis

Minnesota Twins Videos

2026 Minnesota Twins Top Prospect Rankings

2022 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

Minnesota Twins Trade & Free Agent Rumors

Minnesota Twins Fan Guides & Resources

2023 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

2024 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

2025 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

2026 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by Mike Sixel

  1. Mike Sixel
    Jeffers went right where Fangraphs projected him, as did Lanarch. It's not like teams use 7-10 starters and even more relief pitchers in a year...........
  2. Mike Sixel
    Not in round 2 or 3, apparently.......that leaves only 2 more picks.
  3. Mike Sixel
    They certainly have a type. I'll ask what I always ask....how long do we have to wait to judge not taking pitchers early? Because you need A LOT of pitchers, and only 1 first baseman.....
  4. Mike Sixel
    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.....
  5. Mike Sixel
    Even when articles are written with data, people argue against the actual point of the article and data, while supplying no data of their own.
  6. Mike Sixel
    Well, I managed to buy two stocks that have gone down the last two days.....so not all day trading works for me....good reminder!
  7. Mike Sixel
    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/
  8. Mike Sixel
    Good for them. The Astros, Royals, and Reds all made pretty much the same announcement today. Well, the Royals really went big on keeping people paid.
  9. Mike Sixel
    they didn't offer a 50/50 split in the future. They also won't open their books to show all their revenue. They asked for a split when revenue was down.....
  10. Mike Sixel
    Player salaries as a percent of revenue are dropping. And, that only counts team revenue, not revenue teams make from owning developments around stadiums, or networks, or other things that aren't part of "revenue". Again, why does the revenue matter? The will provide half their services, why should they be paid less than half their wages?
  11. Mike Sixel
    It's not even close. In a free market, the players could go to any team they wanted. That part is never brought up by those arguing that the contracts aren't "fair" because they get paid no matter how they do. They also never point out that the teams pay them MUCH less than they are worth for the first few years of their time in the majors. Much less.
  12. Mike Sixel
    The owners have that right, of course. But then, why do they expect players to share in the losses, but not in gains when revenues are higher than expected? They will play half the games, why are the players taking less than half the money? When they go back to regular, and a team makes way more revenue than planned, will they pay the players more than their contract? Of course not.
  13. Mike Sixel
    People with contracts actually do get 100% of their money, during the term of the contract. That's very different than most employment, yes, but people with contracts get their money. The players will work half the year, why don't they get half their contract? That's all they are asking for.
  14. Mike Sixel
    You always say they get the big money because they take the risk. Well, here is the downside. If they don't take it, there is no real risk, which we already know, because teams never go under in the US.... So, which is it? They take the risk, like you always say, or they don't?
  15. Mike Sixel
    They are asking the players to get 31 percent of wages, for fifty percent of the games....... Owners don't pay bonuses when revenue goes up ... They pay the agreed to contracts
  16. Mike Sixel
    Gamblers don't ask why they won a hand, they just take their money.....
  17. Mike Sixel
    Thank you DAL for going up so much today. Mortgage paid.....
  18. Mike Sixel
    Well done! I did that a few years ago, day traded litecoin for a bit. I started too late to make huge money, but made money....
  19. Mike Sixel
    I mean, investment "experts" thought the market was over valued historically BEFORE 20 million people lost their jobs.....so I am unsure what to think at this point.
  20. Mike Sixel
    Player salaries are rising slower than revenue......meaning in good years, the owners are pocketing more money (which, btw, is every year for more than a decade). The owners aren't going to pay players more money than their contracts demand in good years, why should players give back money in bad years? More money than a pro-rated deal, both sides agreed to in March?
  21. Mike Sixel
    https://blogs.fangraphs.com/after-years-of-profits-mlb-owners-ask-players-to-subsidize-potential-losses/ The short version: The owners have made larger and larger profits over the last few decades, while the percent of revenue spent on players has gone down. NOW that they will lose money, or make less, they want the players to take a hit.....while not giving them more the record profits in previous years. Those arguing the players should give this year, do you expect owners to give more money in future years when revenue goes up? I mean, they don't do that now.....
  22. Mike Sixel
    How do you feel about tax subsidies for ballparks? same as other businesses? And, in theory, that IS the standard other businesses are held to. They own capital, and make more money when there is more revenue, and less money when there is less revenue. I'm guessing most people that are still employed by huge corporations that have hundreds of millions in revenue aren't taking pay cuts beyond having their hours cut....... They have a contract. They agreed to pro-rate salaries in March. They now don't want to honor that agreement.
  23. Mike Sixel
    So if the owners per game revenue goes up in a year, they will pay the players more than their contracts?
  24. Mike Sixel
    No one is asking for a full salary. They should get their pro rated salary. No one is asking for a full salary.
  25. Mike Sixel
    Will the owners increase everyone's salary when revenue rises? Of course not. They'll pay the salary they agreed to. Not one penny more.
×
×
  • Create New...