PDA

View Full Version : Collusion?


Viva Magglio
01-14-2003, 09:11 AM
Mike Murphy seems to be insinuating that the owners are engaged in collusion again. Do you agree?

34 Inch Stick
01-14-2003, 09:38 AM
No, not at all. Why would there be no suitors for Maddux or Clemens in a league where most teams only have two good starters?

duke of dorwood
01-14-2003, 10:24 AM
I disagree. The Montreal situation has had quite an effect on movement as long as they have quality players to TRADE.

gosox41
01-14-2003, 11:36 AM
Originally posted by 34 Inch Stick
No, not at all. Why would there be no suitors for Maddux or Clemens in a league where most teams only have two good
starters?




As dumb as the owners are, I don't think they'd be engaging in collusion again. After the last time the judge ruled that if the owners colluded again it would cost the owners 3 or 5 times what the final verdict would be. I can't believe they are that dumb.


I think it's more of an issue about the economic environment being so lousy then anything else. Is Clemen worth $10 mill. a year almost at the age of 40? I wouldn't want the Sox to spend that much on him when they could have gotten Millwood for the same money or Colon for less. Is Maddux worth a 3 year $15 mill. contract? As good as he is I think his best days are behind him and the changing economic environment makes it thwat much tougher when his agent is still going by 2000 and 2001 economics.

Bob

voodoochile
01-14-2003, 12:30 PM
Originally posted by gosox41
As dumb as the owners are, I don't think they'd be engaging in collusion again. After the last time the judge ruled that if the owners colluded again it would cost the owners 3 or 5 times what the final verdict would be. I can't believe they are that dumb.


I think it's more of an issue about the economic environment being so lousy then anything else. Is Clemen worth $10 mill. a year almost at the age of 40? I wouldn't want the Sox to spend that much on him when they could have gotten Millwood for the same money or Colon for less. Is Maddux worth a 3 year $15 mill. contract? As good as he is I think his best days are behind him and the changing economic environment makes it thwat much tougher when his agent is still going by 2000 and 2001 economics.

Bob

The only thing I believe is that they're not stupid enough to leave a paper trail this time. Wouldn't be surprised if there was an agreement to hold down salaries at all.

I still think JR gave the group go ahead when he made his statement to the press saying owners could and should pay down debt first. Uncle's Bud and Jerry working their magic, creating their spin...

Dan H
01-14-2003, 01:09 PM
Originally posted by ˇViva Mágglio!
Mike Murphy seems to be insinuating that the owners are engaged in collusion again. Do you agree?

All I know is that the Cubs had a meeting with Jim Thome only to tell him that they had no interest. I think that sends a message that free agents were going to have a hard time in the market, at least with the Cubs. And this is a team that hasn't been to a World Series in almost 60 years and a team that just hired a high profile manager. Connect the dots.

Daver
01-14-2003, 05:56 PM
The players set themselves up for this by signing the new CBA,they knew it was going to happen the minute they agreed to any kind of salary restraint,in fact last offseason was an open reminder to what they faced the minute they signed the new CBA.

The players agreed to a deal that they knew was aimed at driving down the salary structure,and it is doing just that,they can't have it both ways.

The countdown to baseball strike 2006 is underway.

hold2dibber
01-14-2003, 06:12 PM
Originally posted by daver
The players set themselves up for this by signing the new CBA,they knew it was going to happen the minute they agreed to any kind of salary restraint,in fact last offseason was an open reminder to what they faced the minute they signed the new CBA.

The players agreed to a deal that they knew was aimed at driving down the salary structure,and it is doing just that,they can't have it both ways.

The countdown to baseball strike 2006 is underway.

Agreed - and even more so if the cheap owners in places like K.C. don't start to spend their revenue sharing $ to improve their teams.

gosox41
01-14-2003, 07:00 PM
Originally posted by voodoochile
The only thing I believe is that they're not stupid enough to leave a paper trail this time. Wouldn't be surprised if there was an agreement to hold down salaries at all.

I still think JR gave the group go ahead when he made his statement to the press saying owners could and should pay down debt first. Uncle's Bud and Jerry working their magic, creating their spin...

As much as I can't stand Jerry I find it hard to believe. Why weren't they listening to him in the late '90's?

Bob

gosox41
01-14-2003, 07:01 PM
Originally posted by Dan H
All I know is that the Cubs had a meeting with Jim Thome only to tell him that they had no interest. I think that sends a message that free agents were going to have a hard time in the market, at least with the Cubs. And this is a team that hasn't been to a World Series in almost 60 years and a team that just hired a high profile manager. Connect the dots.


I thought Jim Thome had requested the meeting with the Cubs in a way to get a bidding war going between them and the Phillies. At least that's what they reported on the radio when he was in town.

Bob