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

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.

 

BYH, in what way would the union make their life a living hell? 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.

 

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?

 

I never accused the union of doing such things. You did. Now, go ahead (just to demonstrate that you're not just making shit 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.

 

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.

 

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 hell 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?

 

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

 

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.

 

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.

 

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 shit 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 shit up."

 

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.