Agree with both fo you. We don't see the NBA or NFL have these squabbles over money nearly as much as the MLB does everytime CBA negotiations come around. Just wondering a loud if MLB had a salary cap if we would have the same money issues.mathguy86 said:Bulldog73 said:
I'm pretty sure the players are dead set 100% against any sort of salary cap.
I'm even more sure the player's agents are dead set 100% against any sort of salary cap.
*****Official 2019/2020 Houston Astros offseason thread*****
1,092,955 Views |
9892 Replies |
Last: 4 yr ago by BMX Bandit
Realistically, for an NFL or NBA style salary cap to work, MLB would have to institute revenue sharing. That's never going to happen.
I read Buster Olney's latest column on the negotiations to start the season...and he used Springer's FA situation an as example of the mistrust between players and owners.
clearly no one knew about the COVID threat back in 2014, but the Astros' decision to keep George in the minors until April 16th of that year...will cost him millions of dollars.
if Springer had been an FA after 2019, he may have gotten a 5 or 6-year deal somewhere...in the neighborhood of $120 MM. Maybe pushing $130 MM.
but with the current financial situation, his next contract might just be in the $80 MM to $100 MM range and for only 3 or 4 years. (and being a year older doesn't help either)
clearly no one knew about the COVID threat back in 2014, but the Astros' decision to keep George in the minors until April 16th of that year...will cost him millions of dollars.
if Springer had been an FA after 2019, he may have gotten a 5 or 6-year deal somewhere...in the neighborhood of $120 MM. Maybe pushing $130 MM.
but with the current financial situation, his next contract might just be in the $80 MM to $100 MM range and for only 3 or 4 years. (and being a year older doesn't help either)
I wonder if Springer is actually pissed at the Astros or if Olney just thinks he should be because it plays into ESPN's narrative.
If I was Springer, I'd be more mad at the MLBPA that agreed to the rules that rewarded the Astros for holding him back than I would be at the Astros for doing what any other smart team would do in the same situation.
If I was Springer, I'd be more mad at the MLBPA that agreed to the rules that rewarded the Astros for holding him back than I would be at the Astros for doing what any other smart team would do in the same situation.
It's pretty well-documented there's a lot of bad blood between Springer & management. The agreed payment this year without having to go to arbitration may have soothe that over some.
Going back to the post regarding Springers agent messing up. In 2014, he was offered seven years $23 million, which he turned down. In six years, he's made about 28 million. So even with just 5 million or so this year, he still made close to $10 million then he would have if he had accepted that deal.
Going back to the post regarding Springers agent messing up. In 2014, he was offered seven years $23 million, which he turned down. In six years, he's made about 28 million. So even with just 5 million or so this year, he still made close to $10 million then he would have if he had accepted that deal.
Pretty well documented?
Can you share those documents?
Can you share those documents?
That was kinda my question. Are Springer or his management team actually upset about it, or are national columnists assuming that he's upset about it because it helps write stories about the upcoming labor battle?
If there's actual record of him or his team complaining, I'll withdraw my critique.
If there's actual record of him or his team complaining, I'll withdraw my critique.
Players should not get upset when teams take advantage of the system to save money or gain an extra year of service, because players do everything they can to get as much money from the teams as possible. There's very little loyalty in this sport. It's a business with both sides doing what is best for them.
Deluxe said:
That was kinda my question. Are Springer or his management team actually upset about it, or are national columnists assuming that he's upset about it because it helps write stories about the upcoming labor battle?
If there's actual record of him or his team complaining, I'll withdraw my critique.
https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2014/03/union-george-springers-agent-considering-grievance.html
https://ts.la/eric59704
How in the world is that a step backwards?
Thanks. Looks like they considered filing a grievance back in 2014. Since then he agreed to 2 year arbitration avoidance deal in 2018-2019 and the Astros settled in his favor in 2020. Would be interesting to know how he feels today. Guessing the service time topic has come up in extension talks but probably more as a negotiation tactic.
Perhaps Olney is just using Springer's example to illustrate the general issue between owners and players? Springer is a fairly well-known star on a powerhouse team that many dislike, right now. Easy way to get clicksDeluxe said:
I wonder if Springer is actually pissed at the Astros or if Olney just thinks he should be because it plays into ESPN's narrative.
If I was Springer, I'd be more mad at the MLBPA that agreed to the rules that rewarded the Astros for holding him back than I would be at the Astros for doing what any other smart team would do in the same situation.
just a guess
That's consistent with my line of thinking
so getting out the calculator...
a player set to earn $20 MM in 2020...
pro-rated factor: 76 games / 162 = 0.469
$20 MM x 0.469 = $9.38 MM
then $9.38 MM x 0.75 = $7.04 MM
and back to the top...$7.04 MM / $20 MM = about 35.2% of the original salary
a player set to earn $20 MM in 2020...
pro-rated factor: 76 games / 162 = 0.469
$20 MM x 0.469 = $9.38 MM
then $9.38 MM x 0.75 = $7.04 MM
and back to the top...$7.04 MM / $20 MM = about 35.2% of the original salary
I can see where an older player (with a long-term contract already) would not be excited / motivated to play
Mookie Betts is another good example.
did not reach an extension agreement with the Red Sox after the 2019 season (or didn't want to). So he signs a 1-year $27 MM contract and then gets traded to the Dodgers.
based upon the current negotiations...Mookie would end up making about $9.5 MM in 2020 and then become a free agent (in a depressed market).
the Dodgers really got over on that deal thanks to the COVID
did not reach an extension agreement with the Red Sox after the 2019 season (or didn't want to). So he signs a 1-year $27 MM contract and then gets traded to the Dodgers.
based upon the current negotiations...Mookie would end up making about $9.5 MM in 2020 and then become a free agent (in a depressed market).
the Dodgers really got over on that deal thanks to the COVID
Only if games are played this year.
Even in a depressed market, Betts is going to get stupid money.
Even in a depressed market, Betts is going to get stupid money.
Quote:
the Dodgers really got over on that deal thanks to the COVID
They traded away some of their best prospects and may not even get to have a season. Don't think they are high fiving one another at Chavez ravine
https://theathletic.com/1859504/
So Angel Hernandez got in trouble...for not missing a call?
Hopefully this guy gets fired after his lawsuit is dropped. He's an absolute joke.
Quote:
According to MLB legal filings Friday in the lawsuit, after the July 24 Rays-Red Sox contest, the league under then-chief baseball officer Joe Torre launched an investigation into the confusion and interviewed the umpires involved in the game. Torre then later claimed Hernandez did not get off the phone when his interview ended and listened to the interview of umpire Ed Hickox. MLB conducted a separate call with Hernandez on Aug. 19 to question him on the alleged eavesdropping.
"As you know, members of the Commissioner's Office interviewed you and then Ed Hickox in back-to-back telephone conversations regarding the July 24 incident," Torre wrote Hernandez in an Aug. 23 letter, a copy of which was attached to MLB's filings. "These were purposefully scheduled as separate conversations, both to ensure confidentiality and to avoid the tainting of recollections. At the conclusion of your interview, unknown to anyone else at the time, you remained on the line during Hickox's interview.
"You acknowledged that you were aware prior to the calls that they were intended to be separate and did not dispute that you remained on the line. Instead, you offered a number of excuses for why you remained on the line. You claimed to not know whether you were supposed to stay on the line and that you wanted to be available if anything further was asked of you your purported justification for staying on the line (to address any further questions) strains credulity in light of your claim that you only heard portions of the Hickox call and the fact that you remained silent even when you heard statements by Hickox that you later claimed to be inaccurate. Simply put, we find your asserted justifications for remaining on the line to be implausible, internally inconsistent, premised on facts that are incorrect and not credible. As a result, we have concluded that you remained on the line in an effort to intentionally and deceptively eavesdrop on a confidential conversation in order to hear what Hickox would say about the July 24 incident. This is an egregious offense."
Torre then wrote he was stripping Hernandez of his acting crew chief status.
So Angel Hernandez got in trouble...for not missing a call?
Hopefully this guy gets fired after his lawsuit is dropped. He's an absolute joke.
the last of the bohemians
Joined:
Jan 30, 2019
Posts:
2,376
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The playoffs format sux balls for good teams. But I guess it is better than nothing.
the last of the bohemians said:
The playoffs format sux balls for good teams. But I guess it is better than nothing.
Whoever wins the title will have an asterisk for this season in the eyes of a lot of fans
that's true. If the entire season is cancelled then the Red Sox are the big winners of the trade.Farmer1906 said:
Only if games are played this year.
because they were supposed to contribute $16 MM to Price's 2020 salary...and because Mookie becomes a free agent after 2020.
so if the season is indeed cancelled, the Red Sox would have received 3 prospects (including one very highly regarded-Verdugo) in exchange for David Price and $32 MM cash.
(Boston is still on the hook to contribute $16 MM to Price's 2021 salary and another $16 MM to his 2022 salary)
and speaking of the Red Sox...there's another team that might be okay with not playing in 2020.
Chris Sale is out for the year. So one way or the other he's not earning his $30 MM salary on the field this season.
the Sox could burn a year of Eovaldi's terrible contract ($17 MM per year)...and burn a year on injured Pedroia's contract too ($13 MM)
Chris Sale is out for the year. So one way or the other he's not earning his $30 MM salary on the field this season.
the Sox could burn a year of Eovaldi's terrible contract ($17 MM per year)...and burn a year on injured Pedroia's contract too ($13 MM)
tjholley16 said:the last of the bohemians said:
The playoffs format sux balls for good teams. But I guess it is better than nothing.
Whoever wins the title will have an asterisk for this season in the eyes of a lot of fans
I'd be ok with "another" asterisk!
I love Texas Aggie sports, but I love Texas A&M more.
Agreed. I'm sure the people of SA don't count the spurs win in the shortened season right????
They sure show off the trophy with all of the othersbigjag19 said:
Agreed. I'm sure the people of SA don't count the spurs win in the shortened season right????
I agree. Though technically, the worst team in baseball could also win 3/5. At this point, I'm pretty much accepting that this year will be much more of a "crap shoot" than any other year.
Believe it would have been Astros and Rangers in the first round last year.
On the owner's latest offer, saw break down but it's the same offer they keep making just with different games. And every offer, the players are still getting roughly 35%
Time for the players to realize the offer isn't going to change, pick how many games you want to play or it's going to be 48 games.
On the owner's latest offer, saw break down but it's the same offer they keep making just with different games. And every offer, the players are still getting roughly 35%
Time for the players to realize the offer isn't going to change, pick how many games you want to play or it's going to be 48 games.
Featured Stories
See All
27:22
7h ago
2.4k
19:50
17h ago
4.2k
Donors can now earn priority points by giving to Texas Aggies United
by Texas Aggies United
A&M's approach remains the same with NMSU coming to Aggieland
by Olin Buchanan
61:40
18h ago
2.3k
4:53
6h ago
693
Game Highlights: No. 23 Texas A&M 78, No. 21 Ohio State 64
by Matthew Dawson