Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
Page 1 of 2 pages
i hope he has just as much success as aaron crow, luke hochevar, josh fields and matt laporta.
I can't stand how these little ####### think that they have any rights to determine their salary. YOU TAKE WHAT THE TEAM OFFERS YOU AND YOU DON'T GET A PENNY MORE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I know you are being sarcastic, but I absolutely agree with that line. If they were a six year veteran of the majors that might be different, but honestly I don't care what a person who hasn't done a damn thing in the majors makes, and think they should have to prove themselves at the major league level before receiving one penny over league minimum. Anything more than that, they should be happy to get.
Also, didn't Appel end up getting about the same as he would have if he had taken the Astros offer last year? (I didn't follow closely but I thought he turned down a predraft deal for $6M or so.)
The system doesn't work that way and draftees would be fools to act like it does.
Billionaire owners need more rights.
Those players have proven that their expected value is much higher than the amount teams actually give them. That's why teams are so happy to pay them, if they were FA's teams would be falling over themselves to give them 5 times more. They have demonstrated that they are worth more than what they get, and the fact that the veterans have negotiated their rights away, in order to line their own pockets is shameful.
You shouldn't be using the line that you "don't care", cardfansboy. Other than STEAGLES, it would seem that you might care more than anybody else that has posted so far.
At least there is a chance that the owners have actually earned their money. I don't think anybody just graduating college(effectively) has earned a 7 figure paycheck yet.
I don't think anybody just graduating college(effectively) has earned a 7 figure paycheck yet
How would this work? They have no right to receive a salary in line with their achievements, especially their past achievements. You are advocating a system of "make me $10-20-30 million then we can talk about how much I'm willing to pay you based on my beliefs about your FUTURE production ... and don't expect that money to be guaranteed."
Then explain to me why the Cardinals didn't pay Albert Pujols the money that the Angels offered him when he was last a free agent?
I mean, he'd obviously "earned his money", so he definitely deserved an enormous contract from the Cardinals.
Yet, they seemed to decide that maybe he wasn't going to be worth that much in the future, so didn't offer him that much.
But...but...I thought the paychecks were for past performance, not future value!
Top draft picks clearly have. They've dominated their competition well enough to convince MLB teams they have a good chance of turning into a valuable MLB players.
He was paid close to $100 mil while playing for the Cardinals.. I think he got his money.
And MLB has the leverage to screw them as much as they want. I would be perfectly fine with them doing so.
I just don't see a young player in a field that has a high percentage of washouts being worth the money.
None ever has or likely ever will.
Soooo... 1.2m per win? Owners should apparently be allowed to pocket 90% of the revenue.
They haven't earned $6 mil, but they have earned $1.5 mil?
As far as I'm concerned anybody who makes 10+mil a year should be happy. I don't care what the owner is making beyond that.
Steagles, why the hate?
I understand that MLB pays them that way.... because the owners are nice
Why did you name Matt LaPorta?
You really think that Jeffrey Loria, for example, gave Andrew Heaney $2.6MM last year cause he's a nice guy?
LaPorta was drafted in the 14th round after a down, injury-plagued junior season. He came back, had a huge senior season, got taken in the first round and did much better for himself. You'd be hard-pressed to spin that as anything other than a perfectly reasonable decision working out, let alone as evidence of some kind of significant character flaw.
So you resent appel because he went back and finished college? Maybe he decided the oppertunity cost of leaving school early was more then what the pirates offered
I've never understood the anti-player attitude some fans have.
It might help to not think of the huge signing bonus and salary for high draftees as "getting a huge paycheck they haven't earned on a major league field." Instead, think of it this way: That person has something of value to sell—their expected future performance—and they are selling it.
Doesn't work for me. In the real world, nobody gets a 7 figure signing bonus for finishing college, and that is what is effectively happening here. MLB isn't college football or basketball, where it has a proven track record that the top prospects are ready for the top level. The failure rate for top MLB prospects is high enough that I just have a visceral reaction against giving unproven commodities large bonus's.
reading what you said in #23, i think you'd prefer the NHL's system significantly more than MLBs.
For the life of me I can't understand why anybody would think athletes should have less right to negotiate the terms of their employment than graduates in basically every other field there is.
. These players are proven.
If someone wants to sell a house for $6 million, or a business, and someone else is happy to pay that, do you have a visceral reaction to that transaction just because you can't buy or sell anything for anything close to $6 million? I think that would be bizarre if you did. I think your reaction to big signing bonuses is exactly that bizarre.
Cardsfanboy sounds like a complete moron here. Players should earn what teams are willing to pay them.
I don't buy it. Your only reason for not wanting these players to make money is that they are young and unproven. It has nothing to do with the merits of their work.
I don't consider college success to have earned it.
Wait so you're fine with NBA draftees getting 40 million off the bat?
Every major company hires/pays college graduates based upon the perceived value that the employees will bring to the company.
Correct, and they don't routinely pay them more money than an established 5 year veteran of the same company and on top of that
What is the failure rate of NBA first round draftees versus MLB first round draftees? From 1981 until now, there is not one single MLB draft class that had more than 11 players earn 10+ war in a career.
At this point I think the windmill you are tilting against is capitalism in general.
JDs and MBAs get big signing bonuses.
At this point I think the windmill you are tilting against is capitalism in general.
Under the old system being a college senior was death on your ability to get a bonus. Here's 10 grand and if you don't like it, go be an insurance salesman. Appel signed for below slot but still got $6.3 million.
Players should earn what teams are willing to pay them.
at a cost of a year of free agency
If you graduate in Computer Science, the problem is being hunted by hordes of slobbering recruiters.
There is no proof of that at all. It's a cost of doing business if you are going to run a MLB team. While technically possible, you can't run a franchise and expect to sell tickets to fans if you don't draft players. Fans don't care about economics and to the extent that they are aware of how much money draft picks get, the attitude is "not my money ..."
Paying the luxury prices to draft picks makes sense for the Yankees and Dodgers, but not really anybody else. Even if you got 26-28 teams to agree to stop being held hostage, the Yankees wouldn't agree. So even the teams that can't really afford to give out contracts have to do it. Which means they raise the price of tickets and souvenirs to get the money back. The owners aren't stupid, they are just stuck paying the price but that doesn't mean they won't find somebody else to pay it.
I'm not sure the players being drafted know just how much of a steal their contracts are but I'm sure that the agents do. But since a team can't singularly opt-out of the draft, the agents take full advantage of teams drafting players they know aren't worth the price they have to pay.
Not really, but the fact that this type of discussion brings out the simple black/white worldview of the lawyers on this site, means comments like that get parsed ad nauseum. So I enjoy writing stuff like that.
Shorter cfb: "draftees should be treated the same as all other people, except for the some of the ways in which they're different, but NOT ANY OF THE OTHER WAYS. Also, one arbitrary and large number is totally fine because leverage, but a somewhat higher market-driven number is lunacy, because leverage?"
If there were no draft, it's probably true that initially the very top prospects could get a whole lot more, but I wonder how long that would last before a few high-profile washouts made teams more loath to get into bidding wars for the Harpers and Strasburgs. The draft system, especially with straitened and modest slot values, spreads the risk around quite a bit (and insures to some extent against front-office stupidity, because even if you draft ineptly you can't go broke doing so).
Anyone remember when cfb stated that nobody real eats Japanese food, that the very idea that any American does was part of some coastal elitist conspiracy? After much mocking he amended that to say, well, he does not eat Japanese food here because it's tough to find the regional specialties with which he became familiar when he lived in Japan
If there were no draft, it's probably true that initially the very top prospects could get a whole lot more, but I wonder how long that would last before a few high-profile washouts made teams more loath to get into bidding wars for the Harpers and Strasburgs
I think it would last pretty long. There have always been draft washouts, but every time a high-profile talent comes along, the collective baseball world starts the drooling process all over again. [...] Even for those who have a keen sense of history, it seems incredibly easy to talk one's self into thinking that ... THIS GUY, well, obviously THIS GUY is different.
If there were no draft, it's probably true that initially the very top prospects could get a whole lot more, but I wonder how long that would last before a few high-profile washouts made teams more loath to get into bidding wars for the Harpers and Strasburgs.
Just once, I'd like to see a scouting director say, "We like this guy, but who knows? History tells us the draft, especially after the first five or 10 picks, is mostly a crapshoot."
ever read Moneyball? I mean the actual book itself not people commenting on it. The A's/Beane's take on the draft was just that, it had historically been a crapshoot, so there was no real downside to trying something new... (of course Lewis portrayed the resulting draft as being one of the greatest in history - it wasn't).
Also, I'm pretty sure Sabean also once said something to the effect that the draft was a crapshoot when he forfeited his 1st rounders a couple years running (to sign FAs).
I was talking about quotes from scouting directors on draft day, not a book that wasn't published on draft day or random quotes about draft picks a team didn't use.
I was trying to have a discussion not an argument.
OK. Leading your comment with "Ever read Moneyball?" implied you wanted the latter.
now he might could be lying, but there hasn't been any papers signed and how callis KNOWS what the bonus amount WILL be i don't know, unless he is guessing from what the rest of the guys have already been paid
This is absolute bat poop crazy. Draft picks are a steal. The pick itself does nothing more than allow you an exclusive negotiating window, during which you generally purchase a valuable commodity for pennies on the dollar.
Anyone know of such as study?
For their first ten picks Minnesota has $8,264,400 to spend.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
Login to Join (0 members)
Page rendered in 1.0380 seconds, 70 querie(s) executed