Will Tigers Pony up for Skubal

[chasfh]

Just now, Tenacious D said:

Chas-logic.  

Meaning you think I’m right, or full of beans?

[oblong]

I looked up the previous sixth place winners.  
 

In 2024 it was the Logans, Webb and Gilbert.  
 

In 2023 it was the Zachs, Eflin and Wheeler. 

[oblong]

14 minutes ago, chasfh said:

Meaning you think I’m right, or full of beans?

I agree with you which is why I picked sixth for a number.  Just enough of a drop, for whatever reason, to say “well, maybe he peaked and he’s not the pitcher he once was”.  

[Shelton]

There will not be an extended work stoppage. The thing players want (more money) can’t really be mandated by rules without completely upending the current system, and these people aren’t smart enough to agree on a system that would satisfy anyone. So at most they are getting an increase in league minimum and some minor adjustment to earning free agency. 
 

Owners want to keep making tons of money, which they already are. They can all afford to spend big if they want to, so all a cap does is help the richest teams make higher profits. But no one wants to lose a season. 
 

there just is not enough to gain for either party at this point.

[Tiger337]

27 minutes ago, chasfh said:

I think because of his recent two Cy Youngs, there’s a recency bias for writers to cast votes for Skubal, so I would think a season that garners him a, say, sixth-place finish for the Cy Young would garner the average non-award-winning pitcher a tenth-place finish in award voting. IOW, if he were to drop to sixth, I would think his season would be worse than the typical sixth-place CYA finisher.

Maybe,  but in this instance I am viewing Cy Young ranks as quality of season ranks.  I am just using the Cy Young prefix because the prior posters did.  

[chasfh]

6 minutes ago, Shelton said:

There will not be an extended work stoppage. The thing players want (more money) can’t really be mandated by rules without completely upending the current system, and these people aren’t smart enough to agree on a system that would satisfy anyone. So at most they are getting an increase in league minimum and some minor adjustment to earning free agency. 
 

Owners want to keep making tons of money, which they already are. They can all afford to spend big if they want to, so all a cap does is help the richest teams make higher profits. But no one wants to lose a season. 
 

there just is not enough to gain for either party at this point.

I want to believe this, although, I wouldn’t underestimate Manfred’s or Tony Clark’s ability to shoot themselves or their constituents in the ****.

[Tiger337]

7 minutes ago, Shelton said:

There will not be an extended work stoppage. The thing players want (more money) can’t really be mandated by rules without completely upending the current system, and these people aren’t smart enough to agree on a system that would satisfy anyone. So at most they are getting an increase in league minimum and some minor adjustment to earning free agency. 
 

Owners want to keep making tons of money, which they already are. They can all afford to spend big if they want to, so all a cap does is help the richest teams make higher profits. But no one wants to lose a season. 
 

there just is not enough to gain for either party at this point.

I don't expect a long work stoppage either.  

[Tiger337]

2 minutes ago, chasfh said:

I want to believe this, although, I wouldn’t underestimate Manfred’s or Tony Clark’s ability to shoot themselves or their constituents in the ****.

Clark will shoot his constituents in the **** 

Manfred will shoot the game in the **** one way or the other.  

[gehringer_2]

3 hours ago, Tiger337 said:

He once saw Gehringer at a game and he recognized him from his avatar and kept looking at him.  

LOL - the avatar is from Harry Nilsson's "the Point", the artwork for it was by Gary Lund. This forum SW doesn't do sig lines, but when I adopted the "Rockman", it was because his tag line was "you see what you want to see, and you hear what you want to hear." and so that was the sig line that went with the Avatar. I did drop Rockman for Trumps 1st term in favor of the Queen of Diamonds, in honor of the "Manchurian Candidate". 

if anyone is interested, there are two versions of 'the Point' out there, one narrated by Ringo, the other by Nilsson himself. Nilsson's is better -- IMHO.

[gehringer_2]

1 hour ago, Shelton said:

There will not be an extended work stoppage. The thing players want (more money) can’t really be mandated by rules without completely upending the current system, and these people aren’t smart enough to agree on a system that would satisfy anyone. So at most they are getting an increase in league minimum and some minor adjustment to earning free agency. 
 

Owners want to keep making tons of money, which they already are. They can all afford to spend big if they want to, so all a cap does is help the richest teams make higher profits. But no one wants to lose a season. 
 

there just is not enough to gain for either party at this point.

I hope you are right. The take is imminently rational. That doesn't seem to be enough in too many spheres anymore. 

[IdahoBert]

This idea that a work stoppage should be short assumes a level of human rationality that’s not on display right now to any significant degree, hardly anywhere in this country. It seems like the stakes should be so high that the two sides can agree on who gets screwed in the deal and that will be the basis of an agreement. 

[papalawrence]

When you are dealing with money discord amongst the wealthiest of people, greed/control/power typically trumps reason. I see a long stoppage. Hope I am wrong

[Shelton]

Everyone said that five years ago, too. They played an entire season. Nothing really changed. 
 

They even agreed to later consider canceling the qualifying offer system in exchange for international draft. But players I think secretly like the QO so that was never going to happen. 
 

 

[Tiger337]

3 minutes ago, Shelton said:

Everyone said that five years ago, too. They played an entire season. Nothing really changed. 
 

They even agreed to later consider canceling the qualifying offer system in exchange for international draft. But players I think secretly like the QO so that was never going to happen. 
 

 

Everyone says that every time the agreement expires and there hasn't been a shortened season in 30 years.  2021 was screwed up a bit at the beginning of the season, but they still played a full schedule.  Nobody has given any convincing reasons why this time is different.  

[Sports_Freak]

People have been complaining about baseball salaries for over 100 years. A famous Babe Ruth quote was when he was asked if he was aware that he was making more than the President of The United States. "I had a better year." was his reply. Or...as the legend goes...

[gehringer_2]

15 minutes ago, Sports_Freak said:

People have been complaining about baseball salaries for over 100 years. A famous Babe Ruth quote was when he was asked if he was aware that he was making more than the President of The United States. "I had a better year." was his reply. Or...as the legend goes...

Contracts are getting extreme, but the teams giving them away don't seem to be losing money yet - the teams that can't afford those contracts so far have been disciplined about not giving them away. The net result is that there probably are not  enough teams under enough financial duress right now to make the owners dig in their heels about claw backs, which would be one thing that would drive to a strike. The other possibility is that the majority of owners gang up on NY/LA and demand the system be made more equitable - that would probably also set off the players because it would almost certainly involve some kind of cap - which they won't accept even if a more equitable $ distribution across the league would almost certainly be in the players' long term interest. But OTOH, the other owners have had a 100 yrs to do that and never have.

Edited Tuesday at 03:28 PM by gehringer_2

[1984Echoes]

1 hour ago, Sports_Freak said:

People have been complaining about baseball salaries for over 100 years. A famous Babe Ruth quote was when he was asked if he was aware that he was making more than the President of The United States. "I had a better year." was his reply. Or...as the legend goes...

Babe Ruth was an exception.

Most players were paid peanuts.

But for the past 50 years, with the advent of free agency...

Yes, fans (and owners too, but they're just "crying wolf"... mostly) have been complaining about the high salaries...

and, legitimately, high game (ticket, parking, concession) costs as a result.

[Sports_Freak]

7 minutes ago, 1984Echoes said:

Babe Ruth was an exception.

Most players were paid peanuts.

But for the past 50 years, with the advent of free agency...

Yes, fans (and owners too, but they're just "crying wolf"... mostly) have been complaining about the high salaries...

and, legitimately, high game (ticket, parking, concession) costs as a result.

A couple of points with regards to salaries; if a salary cap were to be into place, would prices drop? I say no, profits over fans happiness. And...once the TV money drys up, (if it ever does), 2 dozen or so teams will be in serious financial trouble.

I agree with other folks about trying to put in a salary cap, players would go on a prolonged strike. If the owners really want one, we may not have baseball when the CBA comes up.

[oblong]

4 minutes ago, Sports_Freak said:

A couple of points with regards to salaries; if a salary cap were to be into place, would prices drop? I say no, profits over fans happiness. And...once the TV money drys up, (if it ever does), 2 dozen or so teams will be in serious financial trouble.

I agree with other folks about trying to put in a salary cap, players would go on a prolonged strike. If the owners really want one, we may not have baseball when the CBA comes up.

Prices reflect what people are willing to pay.

Baseball is still a cheap option, especially relative to the other 3 pro sports.

 

[Tiger337]

21 minutes ago, 1984Echoes said:

Babe Ruth was an exception.

Most players were paid peanuts.

But for the past 50 years, with the advent of free agency...

Yes, fans (and owners too, but they're just "crying wolf"... mostly) have been complaining about the high salaries...

and, legitimately, high game (ticket, parking, concession) costs as a result.

I doubt these costs would go down if salaries went down.  Now that they know fans (at least the wealthy ones) are willing to pay those prices, they'll never lower them.  

[1984Echoes]

1 minute ago, Tiger337 said:

I doubt these costs would go down if salaries went down.  Now that they know fans (at least the wealthy ones) are willing to pay those prices, they'll never lower them.  

Yep.

100%

[Tenacious D]

In a Post-Covid lockdown, people value and are willing to pay for shared experiences.

Even the WNBA

[chasfh]

21 hours ago, Shelton said:

Everyone said that five years ago, too. They played an entire season. Nothing really changed. 
 

They even agreed to later consider canceling the qualifying offer system in exchange for international draft. But players I think secretly like the QO so that was never going to happen. 
 

 

I agree with this on balance, although one difference this time is the saber-rattling by Manfred years in advance. We could take that to mean either he’s serious about fighting tooth and nail and season be damned if necessary, because they want all the money goddammit; or he’s fronting because he and the owners have got nothing and they’re hoping Tony Clark is naive enough to just cave in a hurry.

[chasfh]

19 hours ago, Sports_Freak said:

A couple of points with regards to salaries; if a salary cap were to be into place, would prices drop? I say no, profits over fans happiness. And...once the TV money drys up, (if it ever does), 2 dozen or so teams will be in serious financial trouble.

I agree with other folks about trying to put in a salary cap, players would go on a prolonged strike. If the owners really want one, we may not have baseball when the CBA comes up.

The TV money is not only drying up, Manfred pulled a rabbit out of the hat with the recent national deals, most notably the MLB.tv package, the operation of which in large part they don’t have to put up the capital to fund anymore. Plus, with baseball now drawing fans instead of flies because of recent changes to the game, telecasts are a lot more attractive to advertisers and RSNs, which should unlock more local money as well. If anything, the increased flow of cash should help players’ negotiating positions substantially.

[Shelton]

1 hour ago, chasfh said:

I agree with this on balance, although one difference this time is the saber-rattling by Manfred years in advance. We could take that to mean either he’s serious about fighting tooth and nail and season be damned if necessary, because they want all the money goddammit; or he’s fronting because he and the owners have got nothing and they’re hoping Tony Clark is naive enough to just cave in a hurry.

I guess it’s hard to remember exactly how much rattling was going on prior to 2021. The Covid year didn’t help, but given how contentious that was, I’m not sure how much worse it could have been leading into 2021. 
 

Anyway, you could be right! If the owners want to take that position they are the ones in a better position to do so. 
 

In my view, the one thing that could hang things up is if the players were committed to pushing for a sweeping change in the way they are paid in the early stages of their career. There are 1200 players on 40 man rosters across baseball. How many truly benefit from a cap-less financial model?

We got dudes like Gleyber out here wanting 5/100 and that’s not happening and it’s never going to happen. The riches aren’t going to be re-distributed via FA contracts. 
 

This reminds me of the classic argument where player X gets 20 million, and folks are like “we should have spent that money on players Y and Z” as if there is a hard budget that is being spent like a 13 year old at Claire’s. 
 

I don’t believe the people actually in charge of the money have the hard limits being cited by media. Evan Petzold keeps suggesting a 170 million “budget” for the tigers this year but that’s just a made up number, and ignores the rolling nature of year to year costs.
 

I think the either/or decisions are almost entirely based on roster spots and marginal value relative to incumbent roster spots (and not the theoretical replacement player). You aren’t passing on a player you need because you already spent money on a different player you need.