Chass On Collusion

Could players or agents be waiting for the MLB Network to get up & running so their deals will be covered?
Aren't MLB offices closed for the holidays anyway?

Deals can be accepted electronically, so no one has to be in the office.

And it isn't in the best interest of the agents or the teams to wait to pull the trigger on deals because of the network. They get enough play as it is on ESPN.

They should just raise the luxury tax for now till they figure out a better solution.

I'm pretty sure the NHL restricts individual player salaries to a percentage of the overall team payroll. So Chass was wrong on that.

First, thanks for posting that Tim, it was a great read.

My opinion is that while wild spending sprees like the yankees do is fun to watch, it is a little hard to swallow when the economy is tanking. I'm a Cubs fan, and while I was happy to see them spend big on soriano and lilly all the others a few years ago, they were just buying their way back to respectability after 2006's 96 losses. I get annoyed that they have to spend big money because they can't develop their own positional talent, outside of soto and theriot. That said, I'm thankful they have a competitive team out there, which obviously hasn't been the case all the time. We pack that place every game, the least they can do is spend our money wisely.

However, for a team like the brewers, it's a different story. It's no guarantee they're going to sell tickets next year. cc's gone, sheets is gone, and there's kind of a feeling that last year was their real shot at it. It's tough for them to remain competitive every year (and I'm not taking a shot at brewers fans with that) and them offering cc $100 mil is a huge deal for them. To their credit they've got talent in the minors because they've drafted well, but it's not really fair for a mid-market team to have to wait every 4-5 years to have a shot. There's only so many great baseball minds out there to produce good young talent all time, a la the braves and twins. I think there needs to be a bigger penalty for wild spending sprees. The yankees and red sox basically print their own money, and now the yankees have a new park. These offers they make are easy for them. I feel that while spending money doesn't guarantee winning, it does virtually guarantee being competitive. Teams like the yankees and red sox really should have to think twice before offering insane amounts of money that no one else can match.

You are so right 100. While I'm sure sprees like the Yankees is great for their fans, the competetive balance in baseball is so far out of whack it's insane. I like the offseason for the rumors and such, but once the season starts, I'll be looking forward to the June draft.

Basebally needs more revenue sharing and a far steeper luxuary tax.

However it needs to be very firm in how this money is to be spent.

In order to qualify for money your payroll must be at a certain level.

That level decided by the teams revenue and what it could support without the sharing/tax dollars.

If the teams break even point was 40 million, then they would have to have a 30-35 million dollar payroll.

They'd get cash then but what they didn't spend would have to be returned.

WHat would be left then would either go towards programs that MLB sponsors to get baseball more global or renew interest in he US or would be kicked back to the teams that provided it.

I don't want to see the high market teams able to do whatever they want with minimal reprocussions because they can print money, but I also don't want to see that money going into other owners pockets as well.

they should create a minimum investment annually for owners on their roster/scouting/facilities/etc
...
maybe then pirates fans don't have to draft poop like bullington/moskos/JvB.
the pirates get over 20 million a year in revenue sharing and the payroll is like 40 million, time for ownership to pay up or put the team up for sale. i'd rather have the pirates in another city and be successful(.500 record) than have them stay around and be doomed to futility at the hands of nutting
as well as cap salaries at like 200 million at least just as a starting mark for future consideration in lowering.

there sometimes is a situation where a player takes less money to play for a winner but it doesnt happen that often. the Teixeira situation i think was different because even the lesser amount from NY was so high. as a Jays fan i also hate to see the Yankees spending so much money on anyone.
if its a big difference in salary then i can sometimes accept that the player chooses the higher salary, but in alot of situations its not that much of a difference. i wish Sabathia would have chosen the Brewers offer, eventhough it was so much lower than the Yankees offer ..but then im biased because i like the Jays and dont like the Yankees.
one of the situations that comes to mind was one that actually worked out in the Jays favour, atleast from what i remember. few years ago AJ Burnett had an offer from St.Louis at 5 years $50 MIL. i think he was all set to accept that when the Jays came in at 5 years $55 MIL. only an additional $1 MIL a year difference and all of a sudden he takes the Jays offer.
i think i would like to see baseball free agency work something like what happens in college with recruiting. bring a player to the city. take him around the city and out for dinner. take him to the stadium and show him around. have him talk to multiple players from that team about how things are off the field. basically wine and dine the player and show him a good time. that free agent player can do that for the teams he is possibly interested in playing for.. and then the agent can get involved and take offers from those teams. then the player can decide where he wants to play not only based on the contract but also from his experience in meeting with each team.

i was thinking of something for the smaller market teams and the larger market teams that pay more into revenue sharing. in a way its unfortunate to say a smaller market team HAS to pay a certain amount because then they could simply overpay a player just to get up to that minimum payroll, and thats not good for baseball because then other players at a similar level are going to want to be paid the same amount. they will say well X player got this amount and im better than him so i should get more.
i think it would be nice to see all contracts work on some type of incentive type thing. the way it currently is everyone is basically getting paid on what they have allready done. a free agent signs with a new team based on what he has done for his former team. if contracts were based on incentives you would get more money if you could produce that upcoming season. but im sure even soemthing like that has flaws.

agents always scream "collusion!" when the markets contract. Is it really collusion that no one wants to sign Jason Varitek to a Posada-sized contract that means losing a draft pick? Do the owners need to get together to decide that's a raw deal or is it obvious?

Part of the problem is that the agents tell their clients they're worth so much (raising their expectations), they tell the teams that their player will only take so many years and so much money and if you can't meet that, don't bother and when the phone doesn't ring because their demands are outrageous, they scream bloody hell.

When the Yankees were winning World Series in the late 90's. They did it with solid value veterans (like O'Neill and Brosius) and homegrown talent like Jeter, Rivera, Pettitte, Bernie Williams, Posada, et al. In 1998, their payroll was about 30% of what it is now. The Yankees were similar to the 2007 Red Sox where they had some big names mixed with cheap, homegrown talent.

Tampa Bay's ridiculously low payroll that won the AL Pennant is another example of how you don't have to buy a championship.

The Yankees spent big on Teixeira, Burnett and Sabathia. CC hasn't won in the postseason, Tex has never led a team to the postseason (minus Anaheim this season which was already a lock when he showed up), and Burnett who is an injury risk. Don't give the Yankees the trophy yet, because they aren't guaranteed to get it.

In my opinion, raising the luxury tax will not keep teams like the yankees from spending obscene amounts of money. For example, teams in the NBA pay a much higher luxury tax percentage, and it seems to be no deterrent. The Yankees and other big market teams are always going to spend huge amounts of money because their team earns their owners more money than small market teams. The system seems to work, by making all of the signings that the Yanks made this offseason they sacrafice their draft picks. Small market teams need to follow the Rays blueprint and make smart draft picks and trades. It is frustrating when the Yankees (who don't get me wrong I am not fond of in any way, shape, or form) swoop in and take 3 of the top free agents, but its their money to spend and their decision to make. How can you knock a team for generating the most revenue and in turn having the highest payroll. It seems to make sense and there is really no need for a salary cap on teams or individual players. If teams want to continue to give out huge deals, so be it.

BTW, a good point was touched on earlier. A player like Tex, ARod, or Manny is a superstar and should come at a premium. Also, none of these players would make a team like the Nationals or Baltimore competitive in their first year with the team. While they certainly would not hurt, it takes a full team to win a championship not a single superstar.

Tim, I never bought into these rumors in the last month of the Nationals being willing to increase their offer. Why would they wait to do this if they really wanted to lure him away? If they were "willing" to go higher then why didn't they? Teixeira is on the verge of signing with multiple teams and they do not put all their cards on the table. Cannot say that one passes my smell test.

"Tim,
You need to lay off the Yankees Kool-Aid if you really think that SpecialFNK's comments about Agents ruining the sport by getting clubs into bidding wars. I realize that this is Capitalism at work, but this type of bargaining will ruin baseball. What's Pujols going to go for in '11, 300-400MM? Get Real, NO ONE is worth that much."

Says who, you? Are you our chief economist here? How do you know the value of a player?

Says anyone with even a little common sense. All this is going to equate to is owners looking for other ways to increase revenue to pay these outlandish salaries, and where to you think the first place they're going to look is? My guess is at the ticket booth.

"You need to lay off the Yankees Kool-Aid if you really think that SpecialFNK's comments about Agents ruining the sport by getting clubs into bidding wars. I realize that this is Capitalism at work, but this type of bargaining will ruin baseball. What's Pujols going to go for in '11, 300-400MM? Get Real, NO ONE is worth that much."

Don't you think the people that spend every moment of their day studying baseball, and how players contribute to wins and runs, would know more about the value of a player than you do?

I think we can trust that ML front offices have a better idea of player value than any of us do.

And if they don't, then well, then that's just sad.

Gosser, read Baseball Between the Numbers. The "increasing ticket prices because of increasing payroll" theory is a myth.

I could care less if the owners are making money hand over fist.

All I want is for the league to have competitive balance and for teams to be able to keep their stars.

I don't want to have to have a media guide to know who are the impact players on the Marlins this year.

I agree no cap or revenue sharing will drop the prices.

Only demand dropping off a cliff will do that.

"All I want is for the league to have competitive balance and for teams to be able to keep their stars."

League contraction will solve that, which is probably a good idea anyway. The league will be out of balance as long as the local markets are unequal. Some of the markets are either not big enough to support a competitive ML team (ie KC) or are too saturated by other franchises(TB/FL). I think theres also a shortage of ML talent to support the current league size, specifically when it comes to starting pitchers. See Matt Hendrickson, toronto's 2-5, etc.

"All I want is for the league to have competitive balance and for teams to be able to keep their stars."

Salary cap will not make the teams be able to keep their stars any better really. The biggest problem with any argument that the league needs better balance no matter how obvious it may be after what the yankees just did is that MLB is actually in a period of great parity at the moment. The real reason that not much is going to happen is that everything is fine except the yankees and no major sport in their right mind is going to attempt to soley handcuff their biggest market.

"I don't want to have to have a media guide to know who are the impact players on the Marlins this year."

You really don't need one. You just need to pay a small amount of attention. Ramirez, Hermida, Maybin, Uggla, Cantu, Bonifacio, Ross, Sanchez, Miller, Johnson, Volstad, Nolasco, Sanchez and Linstrom.

"You really don't need one. You just need to pay a small amount of attention. Ramirez, Hermida, Maybin, Uggla, Cantu, Bonifacio, Ross, Sanchez, Miller, Johnson, Volstad, Nolasco, Sanchez and Linstrom."

Right, and all for the lowest payroll in baseball. Less money than ARod made all by himself last year. And for a while they really looked like they were going to win the NL East. They were maybe one good pitcher away from making a real run at the postseason.

The Marlins were just a example because they change over their roster fairly frequently. I follow the game and know most of the non-impact talent

I want dynasties to be able to be constructed in any market.

Teams that draft and scout well shouldn't lose their talent after only a few years because their market won't allow them the cash needed to keep them around if they want to.

Best ran teams win, and can keep winning.

Its hard to maintain a fan base if after every excellent season you trade off all the talent and reload.

"Its hard to maintain a fan base if after every excellent season you trade off all the talent and reload."

You do have a point, but players like Ramirez and Uggla don't seem to be going anywhere. Roster changes happen to all teams and free agency helps teams too. It is well known that players seem to have career years in the final year of their contract. Such a performance could allow a team to reach the playoffs or win the world series. If things went back to the "old days" and teams owned players for their entire careers, there would be less motivation. It sounds sad, but nearly everything is driven by some sort of incentive and money seems to be one of the most persuasive and general incentives.

I want the Twins to be able to keep Santana, without losing Morneau or Mauer, I want the Indians to be able to keep CC, I want Florida to be able to keep their stars without having said stars give a extremely team friendly contract to do so.

There are players that like where they are at and want to stay, but the team can't come close to what they are worth on the open market. I want teams to be able to make fair offers to these players without crippling the team.

I want Pujols to be a Cardinal for life, even though as a Reds fan that is very bad for me.

What I want is for every team to be able to be ran somewhat like the Red Sox.

Alot of their team was assembled by good trades and home grown. Because of their market they are able to keep their home grown talent and add to it.

I just don't want to see small/mid market teams having really one or two years to be good then have five years of rebuilding or more, even if they are very well ran.

Teams that are poorly ran are going to stink regardless of the system.

"I didn't say anything about popularity, I said that without a salary cap baseball would fade as a sport and grow as a spectacle. The possibility exists that the public would embrace a spectacle over a sport. More people watch American Idol than the Stanley Cup finals.... one is a spectacle and the other is a great sport.

In my humble opinion, baseball was once a great sport that saw talent, balance and loyalty. Today, if you aren't a fan of a New York, LA, Chicago, Boston team, you are either on the outside looking in or soon will be."

Sorry, I misunderstood what you were trying to say.

But, I'm not really sure what you mean by "on the outside looking in or soon will be."

teams should have the option of matching their leaving free agent's best offers like restricted free agents in football

And yes I would love for baseball to get rid of free agency but keep the draft.

Give players the right to ask for a trade after five years, and have yearly arbitration if they don't sign a multi-year deal.

Never going to happen though with the union. In fact massive change which needs to happen won't happen because of the union.

Sorry svengoolie,

I confused you and schellis in that last post, it was a post that was a combination to both of you :)

I was kind of torn on a salary cap up until now. Like pretty much everybody, I'm disgusted with certain teams' abilities to simply buy their way out of any problem, even when the problem arises from them having bought themselves out of a previous problem. I don't like that they can throw bad contracts at mediocre players and the only penalty to them is that the next year they have to throw even more money around.

But then I saw one of Gosser's comments and I think it hit home for me. The comment was: "What's Pujols going to go for in '11, 300-400MM? Get Real, NO ONE is worth that much."

For starters, that's a strawman argument; you make something up that nobody has ever actually said and then argue against it to try to validate your point.

But let's pretend it's true. Let's even pretend it's true on your high end, to make sure things are as universally outrageous as possible. IE, Pujols is asking for $400MM. You say nobody is worth that much money. I say people are worth what somebody is willing to pay them.

Here's the bottom line: NOBODY IS ENTITLED to sign Albert Pujols, nor Tex, nor Sabathia. Nor for that matter is anybody entitled to employ you. The difference is that best chances are you're a fairly interchangable cog with no bargaining power, and these are people regarded by those who need to open up their wallets as the heads of their industry. The best people in an industry have ALWAYS been able to make whatever salary demands they want. Worst case scenario is nobody meets them and you either bring down your price or you get nothing.

I do think there's something wrong with the game when a team like the Marlins can have a payroll approximately 10 times lower than somebody like the Yankees. Then again, the Marlins have won two World Series' in the last 10-ish years. Maybe we're getting our underwear ruffled over nothing.

If we want to raise a stink, I think we should start on the opposite end of the spectrum: Let's start by lambasting and riding out of town the owners who simply refuse to ever spend any money; who think they can field respectable teams with laughable payrolls divided among players who will never get the job done. Teams like the Marlins, Rays and Athletics provide us good examples that you can field a good team without a zillion-dollar payroll, but you have to be both thrifty AND smart--not just thrifty. I think raising that lower end of the spectrum would do more good for competitive balance than punishing the Yankees.

Ironically there is the cry of collusion by players and agents...yet it is now the agents themselves who collude.

Can anyone honestly say that an agent representing multiple players does not influence just how those agents work the system to negotiate contracts?

Something which absolutely needs to be added to baseball, all sports really, is a complete non-disclosure rule. No disclosure of wages, revenue or anything. I have worked for companies where a person can be fired simply for discussing your compensation package with a co-worker.

By releasing player salary info into the wild I know it has made me less of a fan of the game. Money comes hard to us peons. Which makes how we spend it even more significant, when I see these cry-babies whine about being "disrespected" and needing to feel "appreciated" while they earn more in a single year than 99% of the people in the US will earn in a LIFETIME, I lose interest.

Keep the money info behind closed doors...then let the players earn our respect via effort on the field and the owners by providing a CLEAN and SAFE stadium as well as concession stands which do not require 3-innings in line to buy a $10 hot dog & $8 soda...