- This topic has 445 replies, 34 voices, and was last updated 3 years, 11 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Feb 6, 1958 – Ted Williams signed a contract with the Red Sox for $135,000 making him the highest paid player in MLB history.
$1 in 1958 = $9.65 today so lets round that to 10.
In today’s dollars the Splendid Splinter would be getting $1,350,000 as the highest paid player.
These guys can cry me a river.
Of course, since 1964 (the earliest data I could find), TV revenues alone have risen from just over $21 million to approximate $1.8 billion for the national deals alone, with an addition $2.1 billion for the local deals. Not only that, the oldest team sale I can find is the Yankees, sold for $8.7 million in 1971 and currently valued at $5.2 billion.
So, for some math, the highest paid player is 325 times higher than in 1957. The tv revenues are 185 times higher than in 1964, and at least one team is 603 times more valuable than 1971. So it’s not a perfect apples to apples comparison, but players have made some gains and owners have made some gains.
Certainly players are not entirely the villains, nor are the owners. Should the performers in an act be the primary beneficiaries of their efforts, or the provider of the venue? That seems to be the dividing line between fans on both sides of the debate. For me it’s easily the players…for you, it seems the opposite.
Yes, and I remember when I was in college paying $1.50 for nice grandstand seats in the old Busch Stadium. I haven’t been to a game in St. Louis in a long while, but my guess is that equivalent seats are a bit more these days.
If the players want to run baseball then they can buy the teams and work out the math for themselves.
Remember that the players get paid, whether they perform well or not, for the terms of their contracts with each club.
It’s about risk vs. reward. A business owner takes on almost all the financial risk.
Nobody is forcing anyone to play baseball for a living.
What you have to guard against is collusion between the owners to artificially suppress player market value.
It’s about risk vs. reward. A business owner takes on almost all the financial risk
What risk? Is there a single franchise that has lost money long term in baseball? The risk is nigh unto 0 for almost every owner in baseball.
The player, meanwhile, who blows out a knee or elbow in his first six years ends up out of baseball with a couple years of minimum salary as his reward. Talk about risk.
With all due respect, you have it perfectly backward.
According to the MLB Network last night there are meetings scheduled starting today, and perhaps more this week. The guy said we should know more where things stand by the end of the week.
I feel the opposite of the way Pugs feels. I think that not only will the regular season be impacted but I am also wondering if there is going to be a regular season at all.
r/Esteemed Rat
In Tuesday's @stltoday: MLB commissioner Rob Manfred is a problem in the clubhouse https://t.co/mCNdTBdtKk
— Ben Frederickson (@Ben_Fred) February 8, 2022
I am not a fan of Manfred at all, but it would be naive to think that if he was fired today and a different commissioner (still hired by the 30 diverse owners to represent their interests) would come in that the new guy would resolve this stalemate any sooner.
This lockout is about money – lots of it – not personalities.
There was little question that this thing was going to go right down to the deadline (of jeopardizing regular season play). I’d give this agreement about a 92% chance of being signed, sealed and ratified by month’s end. Play ball!
The situation in sports labor-management negotiations is different than most other industries. We are not talking about poor working conditions or abuses of labor. It is all about how to slice the revenue.
And because of that, each side needs to be cautious not to push too far, because losing some battles at the negotiation table is a lot better than a work stoppage. Bottom line, labor and management have it incredibly good no matter where the agreement ends up. It is far more important to hammer things out, whether or not you get everything you want, than to stop the cash cow.
This should be entertaining.
MLB commissioner Rob Manfred is scheduled to address the media on Thursday, via multiple sources. pic.twitter.com/4ZxNB9nu5N
— FOX Sports: MLB (@MLBONFOX) February 9, 2022
I don’t think this is only about the money. Everybody involved already has way more money than they need. IMO, from the players’ perspective, it’s more about power and the political agenda of ‘leveling the playing field’. That’s where these Millennials have their head, and that’s why they’re
‘galvanized’. For the owners, it’s all about control….’This is my sandbox and you can’t play in my sandbox unless you follow my rules’.mud said:
Everybody involved already has way more money than they need.
I would be more careful to avoid generalities. Do Juan Yepez and Ivan Herrera have more than they need? Minor leaguers sacrifice for years in hopes of reaching the top and making a fair wage for the first time, only to be locked out.
One of the items the players are pushing is to direct more money to players sooner in their careers. The current system artificially keeps salaries below market value from years 0-6 and especially 0-2+.
I am not a fan of Manfred at all, but it would be naive to think that if he was fired today and a different commissioner (still hired by the 30 diverse owners to represent their interests) would come in that the new guy would resolve this stalemate any sooner.
This lockout is about money – lots of it – not personalities.
Leadership and relationships matter. Manfred has done little as commissioner to build a relationship with the players and fans IMO. I know he works for the owners but if he thinks that is his only constituency and obligation he is mistaken.
Bud Selig was far from perfect but after the 1994 debacle he presided with labor peace for two decades.
If the players really want to get more money to the players sooner, all it would take is for the top paid players to agree to less money. It’s going to balance out one way or another. It is a business for the owners and they will want to make a profit. I have no problem giving more to the young players but the elite should not complain when they end up getting less.
Or the alternative is to make all contracts non-guaranteed.
I think the players want a certain share of the overall revenue pie so just shifting their current percentage of the pie around probably wouldn’t fly.
Another way to get more money to players sooner is to make players eligible for arbitration sooner. Owners have for the most part stopped giving out big contracts to older unproductive players, which is smart. But they can’t have it both ways. Cutting out the spending on older players while artificially holding down the spending on younger players squeezes the players to a relatively short window to maximize their value.
And I have no problem with teams making a profit. They are businesses of course. I have no reason to believe that most teams, if not all, aren’t making a profit. We don’t know for sure since their books are closed to the public.
Ivan Herrera and Juan Yepez are not major league players and are not part of these negotiations. However, the minute that they start playing at the major league level, these twenty-something kids start collecting on a starting salary of $560,000. They get this money whether they strike out 50% of the time, or hit 40 HR. They get this money on top of the signing bonuses most of them already collected. They get this money no matter what. And the major league minimum is going to go up with these negotiations. Can someone explain to us fans as to how this is not enough money for a kid just starting out in life? I don’t know how much the owners are making, and I don’t really care. I do care about the cost of attending a major league game. And it is clear that the current negotiations are not going to do anything about that. What’s going to happen is ticket prices are going to go up some more.
I don’t know how much the owners are making, and I don’t really care. I do care about the cost of attending a major league game.
Average Cost of a ticket for an MLB game:
2016: $31
2021: $34.22 (Rose every year)Average MLB player salary:
2016: $4.38M
2021: $4.17M (stayed very level then tanked in 2021)Median MLB player salary:
2015: $1.65M
2021: $1.15M (dropped every year)MLB Total Revenue:
2016: $9.03B
2019: $10.7B (increased every year til COVID)So… explain to me how player salaries are driving ticket price increases. Revenue is up and salaries are down. Must be something else, huh?
“They get this money no matter what”.
Actually no. They strike out 50% of the time and they will be demoted. When demoted they make 40man pay (91K), not active roster pay (570K).
Active roster pay is the minimum salary above, divided by a service years days, to get a daily rate.
Even our best prospects can be demoted (Carlson).
mud said:
“Ivan Herrera and Juan Yepez are not major league players and are not part of these negotiations.”
That is incorrect. All 40-man roster players are in the union and are governed by their salary agreements and are currently locked out, the same as Waino and Yadi.
Watch how consistent the Cardinals are in comparison…
Here is a progressive timeline of MLB Team Payrolls accumulated since 2000 💵📈
See how your favorite team has ranked throughout the past 20+ years and see the gaps between some teams grow wide over that timespan. #BringBackBaseball ⚾️‼️@Jomboy_ @jaysonst @Ken_Rosenthal pic.twitter.com/JMy6euf6dO
— Greg Harvey (@BetweenTheNums) February 9, 2022
Those who don’t appreciate what the players are asking for, please take 5 minutes to read this.
Agree with the basic concept of younger players getting the short end of the deal. Even though the Cardinals paid Albert well above the minimum in his pre-fre agency years I always thought his salary rediculously low. Possible reason for his defection to Los Angeles.
Several missing bits of information and unfortunately some like profit levels are not available.How much have team profits increased. Also how the current system favors the big market teams and how do you fix that.
Also no information on the effect of the system on the fans. How much has the cost of attending a game gone up in the same time period. Also how about having your favorite player gone to the big money teams. I don’t believe in the old system before free agency. Unfortunately, the owners exploited that system and the Cardinals Sam Breadon was one of the major exploiters.
Also what is the inflation of the minor league players salaries during the same period. How about a deal where minor league salaries are tied to revenue growth.
IMHO the losers in the current system are the fans, the young stars and the minor league players. Also the minor league owners. Television has made the owners and the high paid players with free agent contracts much richer. The minor leagues were much more robust when the fans had to go to their local ballpark to see baseball. Of course I among most would not want daily TV access to Cardinal games go away.
Unfortunately, the total picture is not available or unwanted. In this day and age people seem more inclined to base their opinions on only the information that supports their bias. Until that changes the hope of the best and fairest system is probably beyond our reach.
I agree 100% that the fans are the losers and the frustration that goes with it is real. But if anyone actually believes that the cost of attending a ball game would go down if the players agreed to a huge pay cut, then you just don’t understand reality. Why couldn’t the owners just as easily take a “profit cut”? The reason is that no one cares about fans. Sadly, that isn’t going to change no matter how much we complain about it.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.