Quote:
Originally Posted by Silent George
check this out:
Their free market share is the share of money they would have if MLB were a free market.
And I should said, if I were being more specific (and I know I must with you) that the owners have fought against any advancement towards that free market, and have attempted to push back towards more artificial salary control. Since day 1.
|
Actually, the players don't want too many free agents in any given year because that itself will suppress salaries. This is one of the key visions of Marvin Miller. The fewer FA, the higher FA salaries. Teams are taking that money they're saving on team control players and overpaying the very best of the players who make it to free agency.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Silent George
What's funny about this question is that the answer is: whatever an owner will be willing to get them without constraints in place limiting that pay.
so do they want a BILLION MORE DOLLARS? Sure. If that's what a competitive market place yields. It's not like they write the players union one big check.
The players don't want things that constrict money, like salary caps, luxury tax thresholds that increasingly penalize teams that don't get under it, or an arb system that traps players for 6 years and can be easily manipulated by teams, such as in the case of Kris Bryant.
And then with those artificial depressors in place, they want to see what they are worth to a ballclub trying to compete. And then the owner will decide what their payroll is, or what they are willing to spend on an individual. And yeah, that might add up to a billion more dollars if the owners want to do it. Or if the owners don't want to do it, then they risk another team having that talent - or the price of the player comes down.
What do any of you want out of your jobs? arbitrary ceilings on your position salary industry wide just so your company can justify not paying you more? maybe a higher payroll tax, so your company is incentivized to not offer you as much? Or perhaps you'd prefer to work for 6+ years (including the minors) at artificially low wages that incentivize them not to give you a raise after, when they can just give your job to someone else just out of school?
MLB is different. Because league wide health needs to be addressed. So in the good of the league, some things have to be in place to allow small market teams to compete easier. But on balance it's 90% owner driven right now, and they aren't looking to keep things the same. They aren't offering to play on under the same contract. No, the owners are pushing for more.
|
There is no doubt the player's share of MLB revenue has decreased, although some of that is offset by better benefits. The players are going to try and get some/most of that back. The main issue right now is team revenue is less tied to winning that it was in the past, so they spend less trying to win. That's what makes the tanking issue an issue.
IMO there is really only one way to get that share of revenue for the players...a massive increase minimum salary (to like $2m/yr). Otherwise they're fighting on the fringe. Of those fringe battles (ie the best way to stop the bleeding), the best move IMO is to change the draft order to create another cost for losing. And FFS get rid of the ridiculous notion of service days and make it service years!