White Sox Interactive Forums
Talking Baseball

Welcome
Go Back   White Sox Interactive Forums > Baseball Discussions > Talking Baseball
Home Chat Stats Register Blogs FAQ Calendar Mark Forums Read


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #16  
Old 01-16-2014, 03:22 PM
SephClone89 SephClone89 is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Oswego, IL
Posts: 5,990
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kittle42 View Post
A cap would be great, IMO. Look at the parity in the NFL and, really, the NHL to an extent.
I don't really think I'd care for NFL-style parity. I like to know which teams are actually good.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 01-16-2014, 03:34 PM
doublem23's Avatar
doublem23 doublem23 is offline
MMXXIII
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Roscoe Village
Posts: 54,244
Blog Entries: 5
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by voodoochile View Post
Just commenting, don't think anyone is seriously surprised or upset. I do think the owners will push hard for a max salary ala the NBA when the next CBA comes up.
No way the MLBPA allows that to happen
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 01-16-2014, 03:37 PM
Paulwny Paulwny is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: In a Field
Posts: 6,314
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by doublem23 View Post
No way the MLBPA allows that to happen

Agree, the players'union is too strong and will never allow any type of cap.
__________________
She's the foundation I lean on, My woman, my WIFE.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 01-17-2014, 01:31 AM
DSpivack DSpivack is offline
WSI Guru
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Evanston
Posts: 29,005
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paulwny View Post
Agree, the players'union is too strong and will never allow any type of cap.
I wonder if they would allow for more revenue sharing and/or a stricter luxury tax, though.

Because of the luxury tax, even the Yankees have been trying to limit their spending (below $189M) of late.
__________________
Attendance records:
09 : 3-2.
10 : 2-3.
11: 0-1.
12: 2-1.
14: 2-3.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 01-17-2014, 09:25 AM
GoSox2K3 GoSox2K3 is offline
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 1,737
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DSpivack View Post
I wonder if they would allow for more revenue sharing and/or a stricter luxury tax, though.

Because of the luxury tax, even the Yankees have been trying to limit their spending (below $189M) of late.
I agree. I think this is much more likely to happen.

IMO, there is close to a zero percent chance of MLB instituting a salary cap - especially with the owners raking in billions in TV deals.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 01-17-2014, 12:47 PM
DSpivack DSpivack is offline
WSI Guru
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Evanston
Posts: 29,005
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GoSox2K3 View Post
I agree. I think this is much more likely to happen.

IMO, there is close to a zero percent chance of MLB instituting a salary cap - especially with the owners raking in billions in TV deals.
There's more than one way to do a salary cap. Some sports have soft caps and others have hard caps. The NBA has a bit of both, but I wonder if MLB won't eventually have a stricter luxury tax somewhat like the NBA, but without a hard cap in the ability to sign free agents.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 01-17-2014, 01:31 PM
voodoochile's Avatar
voodoochile voodoochile is offline
Soda Jerk/U.P.W./Lester Pooh Bear
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 47,951
Blog Entries: 9
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by doublem23 View Post
No way the MLBPA allows that to happen
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paulwny View Post
Agree, the players'union is too strong and will never allow any type of cap.
Well the owners could argue that if they don't limit high end salaries to say $25M/year lower end contracts will be forced to drop and then the players might take it to spread more money around. So long as the total team cap is a soft one like now I could see the union agreeing to it. Even they have to realize too much money in too few hands isn't good for their overall membership and the game as a whole.
__________________

Riding shotgun on the Sox bandwagon since before there was an Internet...
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 01-19-2014, 09:39 AM
DoItForDanPasqua DoItForDanPasqua is offline
WSI Personality
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Logan Square
Posts: 1,196
Default

The problem is going to be that there will be a huge gap between teams with huge television contracts and those that don't. The Dodgers are getting 280 million yer year, while there are five teams that are making less than 20M a year. That's over 10 million less than Kershaw's average salary.


http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/dodge...-tv-landscape/
__________________

You can't play baseball without Pants.

Last edited by DoItForDanPasqua; 01-20-2014 at 03:38 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 01-19-2014, 11:28 AM
tstrike2000 tstrike2000 is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: 'Burbs
Posts: 6,097
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by voodoochile View Post
Just commenting, don't think anyone is seriously surprised or upset. I do think the owners will push hard for a max salary ala the NBA when the next CBA comes up.
They need to do something. If there's not a cap, maybe use one of the ideas from football or basketball of non-guaranteed contracts or some sort of amnesty.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 01-19-2014, 01:41 PM
doublem23's Avatar
doublem23 doublem23 is offline
MMXXIII
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Roscoe Village
Posts: 54,244
Blog Entries: 5
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tstrike2000 View Post
They need to do something. If there's not a cap, maybe use one of the ideas from football or basketball of non-guaranteed contracts or some sort of amnesty.
Non-guaranteed contracts? No way that gets through the MLBPA, either.

I can't figure out why so many people want to see the owners pocket even more of their money for sitting on their fat asses in the private suites
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 01-19-2014, 06:27 PM
tstrike2000 tstrike2000 is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: 'Burbs
Posts: 6,097
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by doublem23 View Post
Non-guaranteed contracts? No way that gets through the MLBPA, either.

I can't figure out why so many people want to see the owners pocket even more of their money for sitting on their fat asses in the private suites
I don't really, but I guess I'm also not thinking about the owners. I think I'm just looking at it from the other side. Baseball's trying to overcome the PED era, and now it's absolutely insane contracts. There's not a snowball's chance in July most teams could afford the contract given to Kershaw and most likely what Tanaka is going to command.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 01-20-2014, 10:54 AM
PaleHoser PaleHoser is offline
WSI Personality
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 949
Default

Teams are getting these monster deals from cable companies because their subscribers have to pay for the station whether they actually watch them or not.

The big TV money goes away once someone in Congress wises up and allows cable/satellite subscribers the option to pay only for the channels they actually watch. I know that won't happen, but I can still wish.

Back on topic. It's nuts that the Dodgers can give $215M to a starting pitcher after giving $147M to another a year ago.

$215M / 7 years / 34 starts per year / 100 pitches per start.

Kershaw will be making about $9,300 per pitch over the term of that contract. I wouldn't go to Wrigley Field to watch him pitch for free.
__________________
"It's not the high price of stardom that bothers me...it's the high price of mediocrity." - Bill Veeck
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 01-20-2014, 01:01 PM
soxnut1018 soxnut1018 is offline
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Chicago
Posts: 4,817
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PaleHoser View Post
I wouldn't go to Wrigley Field to watch him pitch for free.
Why? He's really, really good.
__________________
"Occasionally I will rock our scouts with a little quote or two from Lil Wayne. No one can put together a phrase better than that gentleman." -Bears GM Phil Emery
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 01-20-2014, 01:11 PM
SephClone89 SephClone89 is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Oswego, IL
Posts: 5,990
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PaleHoser View Post
I wouldn't go to Wrigley Field to watch him pitch for free.
Quote:
Originally Posted by soxnut1018 View Post
Why? He's really, really good.
Uh, yeah. I'm actually planning to do just that this year.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 01-20-2014, 05:42 PM
shes shes is offline
WSI Personality
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,258
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SephClone89 View Post
Uh, yeah. I'm actually planning to do just that this year.
Same here. Why pass up a chance to see one of the best pitchers of this era?
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



Forum Jump




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:42 AM.




Design by: Michelle

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Site-specific editorial/photos Copyright ©2001 - 2008 White Sox Interactive. All rights reserved.