• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

2020 MLB Season Thread -- Rays v. Dodgers -- Small Payroll v. Large Payroll

Guess those baseball players that traveled to TX participating in this week’s College Summer Baseball Invitational and playing for nothing are total daredevils. Same for all the college baseball players participating in Summer baseball leagues.


How about all of those risky PGA golfers and caddies traveling en masse from Texas to SC to CT to Michigan to Ohio over the next month. More than half of those guys won’t get paid a dime as only the top 70 get a paycheck each week.

You didn’t really address or refute anything I said.

But since you brought up the CSBI those players were all attempting to get one last showcase in before the draft this week. Just about everyone on that field yesterday was auditioning for one of those 20k UDFA contracts (maybe one top 5 rounder in there). Certainly not playing for nothing, in their minds. And another example of ownership going cheap and hurting future players and the game itself, in an effort to save money. If you prefer to not focus on the greed, then focus on the harm it is doing to the overall game. None of that was caused by MLB players.
 
Come on, of course it’s about about money! There may be a few individual examples examples where safety issues are paramount, but on a macro level, money is the issue.

And that’s not intended to be a value judgment by me, because money is the issue on both sides. When it comes down to it, the owners are more able to eat the losses than the individual players and there need to be some consideration to “the good of the game.” That onus falls on the owners.

This is also about not giving in for the upcoming cba negotiations. But you would think there will ultimately be a compromise.
80ish games, full prorated salaries, but with some deferred money, expanded playoffs, and some give backs in the short terms on pre-arb compensation. The owners can recoup their losses on the imminent expansion fees.
 
Even if they add two teams at $1B each, after MLB takes its cut, the existing teams wouldn't likely get much more than $30-50M. They will probably lose a lot more than that this year.
 
To update a classic line from the 1981 strike, none of this would be happening if Rob Manfred was still alive.
 
Glad I got to see the Cubs win a WS before baseball killed itself. Being the last sport back is going to severely hurt a sport that still hasn’t recovered from 94.
 
Why would an owner be eager to lose money?

Getting baseball back on the field ASAP, even if it loses some money in the short term, keeps the sport popular enough that they can make more money next year and in the long term. A lost season would tank things worse in the future.
 
Getting baseball back on the field ASAP, even if it loses some money in the short term, keeps the sport popular enough that they can make more money next year and in the long term. A lost season would tank things worse in the future.

Have you seen anything on the economics of a new league starting up? I'm assuming a lot of the current MLB teams have agreements of some sort with their city because of stadium financing assistance or otherwise. Bringing top level teams to cities currently with only minor league teams (such as Charlotte, Indy, Las Vegas) would require stadium expansion to make things work from a $ standpoint. Let's hope we don't get to that point.
 
The financial loss incurred by the owners playing games in an empty stadium isn't chump change. An empty stadium doesn't put money in the pockets of the vendors and businesses associated with baseball games. From an owners perspective it would cost less to compensate everyone associated with the franchise for the season than to incur the loss they would sustain playing games in an empty stadium. It would improve their public image as well. Take care of the people who sell tickets, peanuts and beer and the unseen work that makes the games possible.

Both sides need to compromise for baseball to be played this summer. Nobody bargained for a pandemic but it arrived nonetheless. Millions of people will be hurt financially this year. It's easy to talk about incurring huge financial losses when the money isn't coming out of your pocket.

It's all about the money. It will always be about the money.
 
While its assumed that the parks will be empty for the season, it's possible/likely that in August and September they will allow at least partial capacity in certain jurisdictions. For example, for the Memorial PGA event in 5 weeks, Ohio has agreed to allow 8,000 fans to attend. Would not be surprised to see states like Florida, Texas, Georgia, Missouri, Colorado, Arizona and Ohio to allow some fans to attend in August and September as those states have already taken steps to allow fans for football games in September.

To the extent that players do agree to any reduction in their pro rata pay when/if the games return, I would think the players would recover some of that if fans start attending games at any point during the season.
 
Baseball, like all of the other major sports, needs a salary cap (and floor) based on revenues. As things stand, the two sides will always fight over everything. They need the cap as the mechanism to make them work together for the success and growth of the game as higher revenues will mean more money for everyone. As is, they are slowly swirling the game down the drain towards irrelevancy. I'm sure Boras and his ilk as well as some large market advantaged teams would be against it, but it's time to do it before it's too late.
 
Agree. The salary cap rules in the NBA which has a floor requiring every NBA team to spend at least 90% of the cap limit has led to ever increasing salaries in the NBA. Realize that the MLBPA has always opposed any type of salary cap, but there are so many MLB teams that are far below (like more than 50%) the luxury tax threshold that it's the lack of a salary floor which has had the most impact on MLB spending. That said, I've never heard of even a hint that the MLBPA would consider a salary cap in any labor negotiation scenario. Short-sighted.

In the short term, it does appear that MLB and MLBPA are inching toward a deal. MLB continues to blow a major opportunity to be the only major US team sport in action.
 
Last edited:
And the lack of revenue sharing in MLB means the "haves" don't want a salary cap either. The Yankees, Red Sox, Dodgers, Angels, et al want to spend freely, if unwisely.
 
Anyone have impressions on the first round? I used to follow all the prospects religiously, but don't know anything about this year's draft class. From the little reading I've done, it seems like Royals did well to get Lacey at 4th.
 
Agree. The salary cap rules in the NBA which has a floor requiring every NBA team to spend at least 90% of the cap limit has led to ever increasing salaries in the NBA. Realize that the MLBPA has always opposed any type of salary cap, but there are so many MLB teams that are far below (like more than 50%) the luxury tax threshold that it's the lack of a salary floor which has had the most impact on MLB spending. That said, I've never heard of even a hint that the MLBPA would consider a salary cap in any labor negotiation scenario. Short-sighted.

In the short term, it does appear that MLB and MLBPA are inching toward a deal. MLB continues to blow a major opportunity to be the only major US team sport in action.

The green highlighted sentence is absolute crap. What's led to increasing salaries in the NBA is an explosion of revenues and a semi-reasonable deal with the players. Few teams are in the Sterling Tax area each year. It has virtually no impact on salaries around the league.
 
The experts claim that the Blue Jays did well by taking Vandy's Austin Martin with the 5th pick. Heading into the draft, Martin was considered likely to go #1 and #2 as he was considered to have the best bat in the draft. With lots of young stud position players (Vladdy jr. Cavan Biggio, Bo Bichette, Teoscar Hernandez) the Jays could be an offensive force soon. Otherwise, the two big draft day surprises were:

- The Red Sox taking HS 2B Nick Yorke with the 17th pick. Most pre-draft mocks didn't have Yorke in the top 100, and the Red Sox have no 2nd round pick. mlb.com called it the most surprising 1st round pick in 10 years.
- The Orioles taking Arkansas OF Heston Kjerstad with the 2nd pick. As mentioned above, the conventional wisdom was that Austin Martin would go #2, and if not Martin, Texas A&M pitcher Asa Lacy would go #2. Rumor was that Orioles don't want to deal with Scott Boras, and he represented Martin.

FWIW, the MLB draft gets very little attention, but this draft is supposed to be one of the deepest ever, and MLB decided to limit the draft to 5 rounds, which means a lot of really good HS and college players won't get drafted. College baseball will be remarkably deep in 2021.

Also, I will not let rj derail another thread.
 
Me derail? You posted something totally BS and can't defend it.
 
I am very happy with Martin. Slightly concerned that he may not sign though.
 
The experts claim that the Blue Jays did well by taking Vandy's Austin Martin with the 5th pick. Heading into the draft, Martin was considered likely to go #1 and #2 as he was considered to have the best bat in the draft. With lots of young stud position players (Vladdy jr. Cavan Biggio, Bo Bichette, Teoscar Hernandez) the Jays could be an offensive force soon. Otherwise, the two big draft day surprises were:

- The Red Sox taking HS 2B Nick Yorke with the 17th pick. Most pre-draft mocks didn't have Yorke in the top 100, and the Red Sox have no 2nd round pick. mlb.com called it the most surprising 1st round pick in 10 years.
- The Orioles taking Arkansas OF Heston Kjerstad with the 2nd pick. As mentioned above, the conventional wisdom was that Austin Martin would go #2, and if not Martin, Texas A&M pitcher Asa Lacy would go #2. Rumor was that Orioles don't want to deal with Scott Boras, and he represented Martin.

FWIW, the MLB draft gets very little attention, but this draft is supposed to be one of the deepest ever, and MLB decided to limit the draft to 5 rounds, which means a lot of really good HS and college players won't get drafted. College baseball will be remarkably deep in 2021.

Also, I will not let rj derail another thread.

Blue Jays got a steal in getting Martin to fall to them. If it takes Martin three years to make the bigs, that has potential to be a very deep lineup. Jays just need to get some pitching to compliment it.

Nick Yorke pick was a bit confusing, especially since he's a high school kid.
 
Back
Top