Baseball thread No. 7: Somebody slip the pinstripers a Mickey

[Michael_ Gee]

BYH, in terms of behavioral economics, you are about as wrong as can be. Investment bankers go free agent from JP Morgan to Goldman Sachs and back again every time the money goes up a nickel, and they're making more than ballplayers. It's human nature. Nobody needs a union for that.

 

[JC]

BYH, in what way would the union make their life a living heck? I'm not saying you're wrong just curious as to what the union could do.

If the player is going to listen to his agent and his agent only then he is always going to sign for the most money, if the player takes control of the situation then he will weigh in all factors. The latter being the preferable method.

 

[outofplace]

Why is it "union's work" when a player goes for the most money possible? Don't ALL of us go for the most money possible?

Yes. Because for most of us, it's a difference between $80,000 and $70,000. for these guys, it's a difference between $42 million and $40 million.

I'm still waiting, not surprisingly, for someone to explain why Tom Glavine left the Braves for an extra year (and, again, when Glavine pitches three healthy and effective years for the Braves, there is NO WAY IN heck he is putting his hat in his hand and begging for a job 10 wins or so shy of 300) with the dog-ass Mets. Why Jim Thome left Cleveland, where he enjoyed God-like status, for the Phililes, especially when he was over 30 and already battling a bad back. Why Billy Wagner, down-home boy thru and thru, went to the Mets. Why Keith Foulke, down-home boy thru and thru, went to the Red Sox. Why CC Sabathia, west coast guy thru and thru, went to the Yankees. For every Mark Teixiera, a robotic product of the Scott Boras Factory, there are five or 10 guys like the ones I just described who have to be steered to the most money.

None of these guys took the highest offer b/c it was the difference, prorated over the next 20 years. between paying for their kids' college education and having to take out multiple mortgages. They did it b/c the union would have made their life miserable if they didn't.

I can go on and on, but obviously the fact no one's managed to come up with a list of multiple players who told the union to go eff themselves and took less money on the free agent market is pretty clear proof I'm right and that anyone arguing otherwise is either a grumpy old biscuit with a bug up his ass or the board's biggest fan of the players' union and all the mighty awesomeness and gentleness that it represents.

First of all, when you get into those types of dollar figures, it ceases to just be about practical matters. It is about pride and status for a lot of these guys. The higher the paycheck, the higher the status. You don't think that matters among athletes?

Glavine is an extreme example due to his high level of involvement in the union. I'd really like to see some evidence, even one player admitting that the union pressured him to take the bigger contract. I just haven't seen it.

I also want to know what the union can really do to make these guys' lives miserable. I'm not dismissing it. I'm really asking. How does that happen?

 

[cranberry]

BYH, why don't you explain to us exactly how the union makes "lives miserable" for players who provide their clubs with a hometown discount.

Why don't you?

I never accused the union of doing such things. You did. Now, go ahead (just to demonstrate that you're not just making shirt up in a lame attempt to sound knowledgeable on a topic about which you really don't have a clue) and explain to us know how the union enforces its evil campaign to force every player to sign contracts at the highest possible dollar figure.

 

[BYH]

It's the pressure, oop. The inference that if YOU don't sign for the top dollar, then YOU'LL screw it up for the rest of us. Every winter, someone else has to re-set the bar. If it doesn't happen, it'll negate four decades of progress. It happens every single winter. Just read the words of Jonathan Papelbon to get an idea of what these guys are thinking at the top level of the union.

http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/23472510/

Do they threaten to send family members to the bottom of a lake with cinder blocks? No. They don't have to do that to make the free agents miserable though.

I refuse to believe that Jim Thome, et al, would have left the comforts of home and gone to the big markets if they didn't feel as if they absolutely had to.

 

[Bob Cook]

Why is it "union's work" when a player goes for the most money possible? Don't ALL of us go for the most money possible?

Yes. Because for most of us, it's a difference between $80,000 and $70,000. for these guys, it's a difference between $42 million and $40 million.

I'm still waiting, not surprisingly, for someone to explain why Tom Glavine left the Braves for an extra year (and, again, when Glavine pitches three healthy and effective years for the Braves, there is NO WAY IN heck he is putting his hat in his hand and begging for a job 10 wins or so shy of 300) with the dog-ass Mets. Why Jim Thome left Cleveland, where he enjoyed God-like status, for the Phililes, especially when he was over 30 and already battling a bad back. Why Billy Wagner, down-home boy thru and thru, went to the Mets. Why Keith Foulke, down-home boy thru and thru, went to the Red Sox. Why CC Sabathia, west coast guy thru and thru, went to the Yankees. For every Mark Teixiera, a robotic product of the Scott Boras Factory, there are five or 10 guys like the ones I just described who have to be steered to the most money.

None of these guys took the highest offer b/c it was the difference, prorated over the next 20 years. between paying for their kids' college education and having to take out multiple mortgages. They did it b/c the union would have made their life miserable if they didn't.

I can go on and on, but obviously the fact no one's managed to come up with a list of multiple players who told the union to go eff themselves and took less money on the free agent market is pretty clear proof I'm right and that anyone arguing otherwise is either a grumpy old biscuit with a bug up his ass or the board's biggest fan of the players' union and all the mighty awesomeness and gentleness that it represents.

I don't see any evidence proving that the union twisted these guys' arms. Anyway, I saw no reports that union gave Mark Buehrle holy heck when he actually gave the White Sox a hometown discount.

An athlete's career is extremely limited. You take all the money you can when you can. Plus, if you give back the money, it's goes only one place -- the owner's pocket. Or do you think the owners would lower ticket prices if everyone were paid less?

As much as we all like to think players are in it for the glory of the hometown team, the only sure thing they have in their world is their paycheck, and it's not that sure a thing. I guess, unlike you, I have a hard time begrudging players what they make.

Why does Jim Thome leave Cleveland for huge money in Philadelphia? Because he knew his days were growing shorter, and he wanted to cash in as much as he could, when he could. Why does anyone from a certain city take a job in another one?

 

[Oz]

It's the pressure, oop. The inference that if YOU don't sign for the top dollar, then YOU'LL screw it up for the rest of us. Every winter, someone else has to re-set the bar. If it doesn't happen, it'll negate four decades of progress. It happens every single winter. Just read the words of Jonathan Papelbon to get an idea of what these guys are thinking at the top level of the union.

So did Josh Beckett signing for three years and $30 million in 2006 screw it up for the Gil Meches of the league?

 

[BYH]

BYH, why don't you explain to us exactly how the union makes "lives miserable" for players who provide their clubs with a hometown discount.

Why don't you?

I never accused the union of doing such things. You did. Now, go ahead (just to demonstrate that you're not just making shirt up in a lame attempt to sound knowledgeable on a topic about which you really don't have a clue) and explain to us know how the union enforces its evil campaign to force every player to sign contracts at the highest possible dollar figure.

I just figured there was nobody tighter with the union than you. You're the guy who thinks ex-MLBPA honcho Tony Bernazard is a good guy, after all. So I figured you'd have some tales to tell. Of course, I was foolish to think you'd actually TELL the tales, b/c the next time you paint ballplayers and the union in anything but the most positive light possible will be the first sign of the end of the world.

And while I don't have players over for sleepovers and cookouts and while I'm not nearly as accomplished as you or anyone else here, I've got plenty of clues, thank you very much. I presented plenty of evidence and anyone who is not in bed with the players can see it quite clearly. So you can cram your smug superiority up your ass.

 

[BYH]

As much as we all like to think players are in it for the glory of the hometown team, the only sure thing they have in their world is their paycheck, and it's not that sure a thing. I guess, unlike you, I have a hard time begrudging players what they make.

I don't begrudge the players what they make. At all. I'll always take their sides over the owners. Check any of the salary cap arguments we've had here.

It doesn't mean I can't recognize the union's role in "steering" guys to the biggest dollar, or criticize it for pulling guys out of comfortable situations for the betterment of the union. Screw that.

And Oz, we'll see where Beckett ends up when he's actually on the free agent market. Even A-Rod signed a below-market deal in Seattle. Totally different story when these guys get to free agency.

 

[BYH]

Oh and Cranberry? Ken Davidoff wrote exactly what I said last year re: the union and Thome in particular. (read the snippets) I bet you don't go telling Ken Davidoff he's just making shirt up, do you?

http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/liberty/

 

[Armchair_QB]

Oh and Cranberry? Ken Davidoff wrote exactly what I said last year re: the union and Thome in particular. (read the snippets) I bet you don't go telling Ken Davidoff he's just making shirt up, do you?

http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/liberty/

I tell him that all the time.

Just the other day I said to him, "Ken, you're just making shirt up."

 

[JC]

BYH is right in the sense that the union does steer players to take the highest offer, I think any union would do that. In the end the players should take control of the situation after the agents do their jobs by getting them multiple offers.

If we want players to not always go to the same few teams, there is a solution, a salary cap. A sentiment I don't really agree with for Baseball.