Collusion

Discuss all things Cardinals Baseball
Post Reply
MDCardsFan
All-Star
Posts: 2008
Joined: May 24 06, 10:48 am
Location: Annapolis, MD

Re: Collusion

Post by MDCardsFan »

Who cares? Players expect to paid for what they did, not what they are likely to do. Maybe finally, owners are wising up. If he wants top dollar for a short-term contract, I'm sure he can get it. Demanding that he be paid like an all-star till he's 40, no thanks. Here's an idea, if baseball is making so damn much money, stop putting tax-payer dollars into stadium deals.

dmarx114
Hall Of Famer
Posts: 24006
Joined: December 20 07, 2:45 pm

Re: Collusion

Post by dmarx114 »

Popeye_Card wrote:That sure sounds like J.D. Martinez, under the influence of Scott Boras. Who doesn’t seem to have a whole lot of sustained interest this winter.

If so, I still don’t think it is overt collusion. It is MLB teams being collectively smart about not giving a Martinez type the deal he is reportedly seeking. In the past, it only took a couple of idiots to chase the bait. Now the teams with money have generally moved past huge deals for deeply flawed players.
Yup, that's exactly it. Management is getting smarter. If non superstar players want big bucks, they will need to take shorter deals.

User avatar
Jocephus
99% conan clips
Posts: 63661
Joined: April 18 06, 5:14 pm

Re: Collusion

Post by Jocephus »

Guest
12:36
Jeff Passan's recent article on MLBPA

Eno Sarris
12:38
It was good. For those blaming sabermetrics and the fact that teams are gradually valuing contracts the same way, I just ask why there would be such a stark difference this year over last year? Sabermetrics just wants efficient use of funds, if one type of player is overvalued, there should be another that gets the money instead. I think it's more likely that the penalties in the CBA are working and the three big teams that would have signed big contracts by now are all taking a pause on this offseason.

dmarx114
Hall Of Famer
Posts: 24006
Joined: December 20 07, 2:45 pm

Re: Collusion

Post by dmarx114 »

Jocephus wrote:
Guest
12:36
Jeff Passan's recent article on MLBPA

Eno Sarris
12:38
It was good. For those blaming sabermetrics and the fact that teams are gradually valuing contracts the same way, I just ask why there would be such a stark difference this year over last year? Sabermetrics just wants efficient use of funds, if one type of player is overvalued, there should be another that gets the money instead. I think it's more likely that the penalties in the CBA are working and the three big teams that would have signed big contracts by now are all taking a pause on this offseason.
It's both.

cardsfantx
Hall Of Famer
Posts: 10728
Joined: November 6 10, 10:58 am

Re: Collusion

Post by cardsfantx »

Jocephus wrote:
Guest
12:36
Jeff Passan's recent article on MLBPA

Eno Sarris
12:38
It was good. For those blaming sabermetrics and the fact that teams are gradually valuing contracts the same way, I just ask why there would be such a stark difference this year over last year? Sabermetrics just wants efficient use of funds, if one type of player is overvalued, there should be another that gets the money instead. I think it's more likely that the penalties in the CBA are working and the three big teams that would have signed big contracts by now are all taking a pause on this offseason.
the reason the 3 teams are taking a pause, is because of machado and harper next offseason. They're getting under the luxury tax for this year, so it resets...then they can go hog wild next offseason on those 2 (and others...next FA class on a whole is good).

couple that with this being one of the worst crop of FA in recent memory?

Those 2 reasons are the main things causing a slow offseason IMO.

If machado and/or harper were FA this year, the 3 teams would be active this offseason.

User avatar
Jocephus
99% conan clips
Posts: 63661
Joined: April 18 06, 5:14 pm

Re: Collusion

Post by Jocephus »

E
12:41
Does anyone know how the players are feeling about this offseason? Are they worried at all? Or still mostly confident they will get theirs?

Travis Sawchik
12:42
I have to think anxiety is starting to creep in. It will really creep in for those unsigned players in mid Feb when they watch MLB Network and see players reporting for camp
Just think two years ago, David Freese was asking for a multi-year/$10m+AAV deal in November and settled for a one-year, $3 million in March

User avatar
Famous Mortimer
Perennial All-Star
Posts: 3636
Joined: November 14 14, 5:23 am
Location: Cherokee

Re: Collusion

Post by Famous Mortimer »

Bear in mind that, with the recent hiring of Dave Cameron, every writer for FG (and, Michael Baumann aside, every professional baseball writer) is going to be thinking of working for one of those front offices. Chances of them saying anything other than what Eno Sarris said in the quoted post above? Pretty small.

No owner has lost money, ever. Look at the obscene profit Loria made from selling the Marlins. So many articles, without even thinking about it, act as a proxy for a front office - we've all seen dozens of "here are the worst contracts in baseball" articles, but worst for who? Not the players, who get paid. Not the fans, who get to watch their favourite players play. Just bad for the front office. The entire debate is predicated on people like Scott Boras being bad, and people like Bill DeWitt being...well, not good, but value-neutral. How dare Boras want a fair share of the oceans of money that baseball is swimming in for his players?

I'm sure the free agents will, eventually, sign for much less than they ought. There is no competition for their services (the teams barely pretend to compete with each other when it comes to free agent contracts - MLB is a racket).

User avatar
Jocephus
99% conan clips
Posts: 63661
Joined: April 18 06, 5:14 pm

Re: Collusion

Post by Jocephus »

Famous Mortimer wrote:Bear in mind that, with the recent hiring of Dave Cameron, every writer for FG (and, Michael Baumann aside, every professional baseball writer) is going to be thinking of working for one of those front offices. Chances of them saying anything other than what Eno Sarris said in the quoted post above? Pretty small.

No owner has lost money, ever. Look at the obscene profit Loria made from selling the Marlins. So many articles, without even thinking about it, act as a proxy for a front office - we've all seen dozens of "here are the worst contracts in baseball" articles, but worst for who? Not the players, who get paid. Not the fans, who get to watch their favourite players play. Just bad for the front office. The entire debate is predicated on people like Scott Boras being bad, and people like Bill DeWitt being...well, not good, but value-neutral. How dare Boras want a fair share of the oceans of money that baseball is swimming in for his players?

I'm sure the free agents will, eventually, sign for much less than they ought. There is no competition for their services (the teams barely pretend to compete with each other when it comes to free agent contracts - MLB is a racket).
you have a really stupid FG theory.

User avatar
Transmogrified Tiger
Puppy Murderer
Posts: 9334
Joined: April 25 06, 6:07 pm
Location: Across the River

Re: Collusion

Post by Transmogrified Tiger »

'the blogosphere is anti-labor' is just an incredible hill to die on, both for how demonstrably false it is and how little effort it takes to find that proof.

Also, Dave Cameron isn't the first or even the 50th writer to go work for a team.

User avatar
misterManager
Everyday Player
Posts: 356
Joined: June 6 17, 11:03 am

Re: Collusion

Post by misterManager »

I don't think that the 'blogosphere' being anti-labor is the point as much as the insistence from a lot of more mainstream guys that 'this is the deal the players signed' as justification for what will likely be depressed salaries. And that's everyone from Ken Rosenthal to Dave Cameron to Jeff Passan. The truth is never in one shade of white or black, and there is plenty of nuance going on I'd imagine--but at the end of the day the owners are definitely standing to benefit this offseason, and it will be at the expense of the Lance Lynn's of the world. Whether that's morally reprehensible or not is another question, since it's baked in that we want our team to get good deals on players, but also want our favorite players to be paid in measure for their performance. It seems like the argument online is that the situation is nuanced and that's not untrue. But saying it's nuanced and not listening to the fact that a lot of players are looking at getting bilked come contract day? That's another thing.

Post Reply