Dismiss Notice
Guest, I have a big favor to ask you. We've been working very hard to establish ourselves on social media. If you like/follow our pages it would be a HUGE help to us. SoSH on Facebook and Inside the Pylon Thanks! Nip

Baseball Is Broken (on the field, proposed rule changes, attendance, etc.)

Discussion in 'MLB Discussion' started by jon abbey, Apr 10, 2018.

  1. charlieoscar

    charlieoscar Member

    Messages:
    1,209
    According to the CBA, MLB may impose on-field rule changes unilaterally when at least one year of notice is given to the union.
     
  2. Plympton91

    Plympton91 bubble burster SoSH Member

    Messages:
    11,605
    Seems like a hard ass bargaining chip. Implement something the union hates in order to give it back in exchange for something meaningful.
     
  3. jose melendez

    jose melendez Earl of Acie Lifetime Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    18,084
    It especially won't when pitchers who can't get outs have to stay in for an additional two batters.
     
  4. nattysez

    nattysez Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    3,366


    This could get really ugly.
     
  5. soxhop411

    soxhop411 Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    33,592

    It’s going to take baseball a LONNNNNNG time to recover from this strike (if it even recovers)
     
  6. charlieoscar

    charlieoscar Member

    Messages:
    1,209
    Wouldn't this mean that a runner could take a lead off first that is 4.5 inches longer than he did in the past? He would thus get to 2nd base in less time than under the old rule and as long as his slide didn't take him closer to home plate, the catcher would not gain and advantage on the throw. So, will we see more steals of 2nd and/or a higher success rate for those attempts?

    Similarly, both the infielders and the batter gain three inches to the bag; however, a throw is roughly three times as fast in mph as the runner, so the fielder gets the edge. Fewer infield hits? Also, with regard to double plays, in particular those involving a runner on first, the infielder making the play at second could gain more than three inches if his foot hits the bag on the extended portion. Do we expect to see a slight rise in GIDP?
     
  7. SirPsychoSquints

    SirPsychoSquints Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    3,912
    I think you’re thinking about the infield hit thing backwards. The throw travels faster, so it saves 1/3 the time that the runner saves. Assuming the first base bag is centered in the same place, it advantages the runner.

    I don’t know if I’m confident in the exact placement of the bag. Is the corner in the same place it used to be? Or the center?
     
  8. Plympton91

    Plympton91 bubble burster SoSH Member

    Messages:
    11,605
    Jimenez had 3 options: retire, negotiate with the White Sox, wait 7 years for the right to actually have the right to negotiate a fair market-determined salary.

    I don’t understand how you can say, “Nobody forced Jimenez to do so,” when he is prohibited from talking with 29 other potential employers about his current or future value.

    He is forced to play for the White Sox for a minimum of 7 more years. That means the White Sox have massively disproportionate power in the negotiation. That you can’t see and admit that is mind blowing.

    Indentured servitude is exactly what baseball imposes on prospects, with the complicity of American courts and the union that seems to be beholden mostly to star players’ agents.
     
    #358 Plympton91, Mar 23, 2019 at 11:57 AM
    Last edited: Mar 23, 2019 at 12:04 PM
  9. jon abbey

    jon abbey Shanghai Warrior Dope SoSH Member

    Messages:
    39,534
    He got to choose his organization to begin with (international player) and was allowed to start playing without mandatory time in college, that’s two huge plusses over basketball or football along those lines.
     
  10. Plympton91

    Plympton91 bubble burster SoSH Member

    Messages:
    11,605
    And indentured servants got to choose who they did their apprenticeship with.
     
  11. Darnell's Son

    Darnell's Son He's a machine. Dope Lifetime Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    8,164
    The problem with the indentured servitude argument is that it would make it very difficult to root for the home team if players were constantly changing teams. I agree that the system is fucked, but the system is more concerned with consumer than the product (the players).
     
  12. Plympton91

    Plympton91 bubble burster SoSH Member

    Messages:
    11,605
    If the initial decision to choose your organization were a free choice with no salary cap like the international free agent system used to be, and you were signing a convoluted 7- to 13-year contract based on your upfront signing bonus and the assigned annual stipends, that would be a little better. But now that they are so blatantly screwing over poor kids from Latin America with the bonus caps it doesn’t even hold for them.

    There should also be more freedom in that initial time commitment. The very best players used to have the ability to negotiate to be placed on the 40-man immediately, which reduced the 7-year minimum commitment to 3 or 4 years. Players should actually be free to negotiate anything along those lines that fits their development timetable, like saying they have to be put on the 40-man after their first full minor league season rather than after 3 (or sometimes 4) as it is now, but all those nuances have been bargained away by the union, which capitulated on that moderately free market feature, to owners who didn’t like players having that little but more bargaining power.
     
  13. Darnell's Son

    Darnell's Son He's a machine. Dope Lifetime Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    8,164
    We may be talking past each other, but the problem with the indentured servitude argument is that, if it was a totally free market, then the Yankees would have over a hundred World Series trophies. There must be some mechanism to level the playing field. What we have now is sure as shit not perfect, but it's better than nothing.

    Edit: Do you have a practical solution to the problem? I'm not trying to be snarky, or combative, I'm honestly open to ideas. Letting teams negotiate with all players, once their contract is over just seems to be a way to make it a system of haves and have-nots, even more than it is today.
     
  14. Plympton91

    Plympton91 bubble burster SoSH Member

    Messages:
    11,605
    I think that if baseball (or any sport) wants to argue that they need to operate as a monopsony purchaser of labor in order to thrive, then they should be subject to much stricter regulation of their labor practices. For instance, the major league players union should not be able to bargain away the rights of high school baseball players. I am all for the government butting out of competitive markets, but sports aren’t that.
     
  15. Darnell's Son

    Darnell's Son He's a machine. Dope Lifetime Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    8,164
    I get that, but how does a system like that allow Evan Longoria go to the Rays instead of the Yankees (or Red Sox, don't want to hurt Yankees' fans feelings) scooping him up and the Rays ending up with Darnell Plympton?
     
  16. OCD SS

    OCD SS Well-Known Member Lifetime Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    7,208
    No, MLB is worried about the product, which is the game as a whole. It’s looking at incoming revenue and franchise valuations. In your analogy the players provide not only the labor, but are the raw materials that connect fans to the teams, driving up those values.

    The flip side to the players being paid as unrestricted free agents from day one is competitive balance. The economics of the game have shifted in the last 10-15 years; it wasn’t so long ago that conventional wisdom was the Sox really couldn’t go head to head with “the MFY” on the basis of revenue and spending. From a certain perspective of addressing competitive balance, the system is working as it is starting to break up a team that has won its division for 3 straight years…
     
  17. Harry Hooper

    Harry Hooper Well-Known Member Lifetime Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    24,748
    I think you're interpreting this reticence/secrecy by the players the wrong way. The issue is the players are not close to united about striking, which is what happened in the last CBA round where the owners fared better than they had since the 1970's.
     
  18. Darnell's Son

    Darnell's Son He's a machine. Dope Lifetime Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    8,164
    Shifted how? I'm worried that the Yankees, Red Sox, and both Chicago teams have figured out the system, and we'll never see a Cleveland/Oakland/Colorado World Series championship. That's the death knell of the sport.

    The bolded is hot fire.
     
  19. jon abbey

    jon abbey Shanghai Warrior Dope SoSH Member

    Messages:
    39,534
    I don't think the White Sox have figured out anything, their wave of very talented prospects has mostly fizzled so far.

    And Milwaukee was a game from the World Series last year, baseball is too unpredictable for the kind of oligopoly you're describing I think to ever fully happen. That being said, the final four AL playoff teams have been the same two years in a row and there's a good chance they make it three this year.
     
  20. Darnell's Son

    Darnell's Son He's a machine. Dope Lifetime Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    8,164
    Including the less-good Sox was a dumb mistake based on market power.

    However, the italicized is kinda making my point.

    What do we want as baseball fans? More competition is inherently good, I think, but how do we go about achieving that while paying players as much as they deserve?

    To offer an answer to my own question: I think a salary floor is a great way to make teams more competitive. If you can't afford it then move to Montreal, or Oklahoma City, or whatever booming metropolis you want to.
     
  21. Harry Hooper

    Harry Hooper Well-Known Member Lifetime Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    24,748
    Historically, the MLBPA opposed a salary floor since they valued consistency with their position against a salary ceiling. They've managed to stumble into what is effectively a salary ceiling situation via the MLB luxury tax/revenue sharing provisions. Without a salary floor, it's a bit of a lose-lose status for the players now.
     
  22. Max Power

    Max Power thai good. you like shirt? SoSH Member

    Messages:
    3,422
    That doesn't really answer the question. What should baseball do to maintain competitive balance while making sure young players are paid more when they're their most productive? I'm a big believer in maintaining years of control, but removing salary limits, but I recognize that's likely to result in the rich teams getting most of the best young talent in the game. If Blake Snell were making $25 million this year, Tampa probably would have traded away the rights for his next 3 years than keeping him.
     
  23. jon abbey

    jon abbey Shanghai Warrior Dope SoSH Member

    Messages:
    39,534
    A little off topic, but any list of franchises that have been pushing the sport forward in recent years has to lead with the Astros and Dodgers, three World Series plus an ALCS appearance between them in the past two seasons and probably both favorites again this year (BOS/NYY are both knocked down a notch for being in the same division). Both also still have very good farm systems somehow, the latest BA farm rankings from last month of the current powerhouses:

    5-HOU
    9-LAD
    16-CLE
    17-WAS
    20-NYY
    29-CHC
    30-BOS
     

Share This Page