Baseball needs revenue sharing (1 Viewer)

[kaa]

Sure its my team that got blown apart a few hours ago. But as I peruse the ratings for the World Series.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Series_television_ratings

This ratings decline is a good thing. I hope Major League Baseball fades into oblivion - unless of course they stop feeding the major market teams these ridiculous advantages. A lot of people have walked away from this product over the past 20 years, and I think I'll join them. I'm not going to support this product anymore. There's no chance this will change unless the sport really feels pain. Wake me when they start sharing revenue.

 

[Capella]

Umm...they do share revenue.

 

[bostonfred]

Sure its my team that got blown apart a few hours ago. But as I peruse the ratings for the World Series.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Series_television_ratings

This ratings decline is a good thing. I hope Major League Baseball fades into oblivion - unless of course they stop feeding the major market teams these ridiculous advantages. A lot of people have walked away from this product over the past 20 years, and I think I'll join them. I'm not going to support this product anymore. There's no chance this will change unless the sport really feels pain. Wake me when they start sharing revenue.

I think it's great that you're taking such a liberal stance. Forget personal responsibility, we need to tax the successful teams and give it to the poor teams. Let's make decisions based on emotion and based on the way the have-nots feel. PS thanks for Victor Martinez.

 

[PatsWillWin]

PS thanks for Victor Martinez.

Umm...they do share revenue.

 

[Pip's Invitation]

Sure its my team that got blown apart a few hours ago. But as I peruse the ratings for the World Series.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Series_television_ratings

This ratings decline is a good thing. I hope Major League Baseball fades into oblivion - unless of course they stop feeding the major market teams these ridiculous advantages. A lot of people have walked away from this product over the past 20 years, and I think I'll join them. I'm not going to support this product anymore. There's no chance this will change unless the sport really feels pain. Wake me when they start sharing revenue.

Unlike the NFL, MLB is driven by local interest, not national interest. You'll never see the MLB playoffs pull the kinds of numbers that the NFL playoffs do, regardless of whatever MLB does. Especially in the age of hundreds of TV channels, internet, video games, etc.

 

[Unlucky]

Sure its my team that got blown apart a few hours ago. But as I peruse the ratings for the World Series.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Series_television_ratings

This ratings decline is a good thing. I hope Major League Baseball fades into oblivion - unless of course they stop feeding the major market teams these ridiculous advantages. A lot of people have walked away from this product over the past 20 years, and I think I'll join them. I'm not going to support this product anymore. There's no chance this will change unless the sport really feels pain. Wake me when they start sharing revenue.

I think it's great that you're taking such a liberal stance. Forget personal responsibility, we need to tax the successful teams and give it to the poor teams. Let's make decisions based on emotion and based on the way the have-nots feel. PS thanks for Victor Martinez.

Beat me to it.

 

[Balco]

Baseball can be fixed 2 ways (and this is coming from a Red Sox fan):

1. Salary cap (both a floor and a ceiling).

2. Clean up the Draft:

a. There are way too many loopholes that help the haves rather than the have nots. Because of signability concerns, the worst teams don't always get the best prospects, while the big market clubs sign these players later in the draft by throwing money at them (Ton of examples here, recent ones being Rick Porcello, Rick Ankiel, JD Drew).

b. Make foreign players eligible for the draft.

c. Slot rookie salaries, like the NBA.

 

[Balco]

Sure its my team that got blown apart a few hours ago. But as I peruse the ratings for the World Series.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Series_television_ratings

This ratings decline is a good thing. I hope Major League Baseball fades into oblivion - unless of course they stop feeding the major market teams these ridiculous advantages. A lot of people have walked away from this product over the past 20 years, and I think I'll join them. I'm not going to support this product anymore. There's no chance this will change unless the sport really feels pain. Wake me when they start sharing revenue.

I think it's great that you're taking such a liberal stance. Forget personal responsibility, we need to tax the successful teams and give it to the poor teams. Let's make decisions based on emotion and based on the way the have-nots feel. PS thanks for Victor Martinez.

And this is another thing wrong with baseball. I will just focus on my favorite team, the Red Sox. They can afford to whiff on not 1, but several contracts (i.e. JD Drew, Julio Lugo . . . etc), and are not overly effected. Just go out and spend more money. But teams like the Indians are crippled when they make mistakes (i.e. Travis Hafner, Jake Westbrook, Kerry Wood), and have to slash salary other ways, which often means trading away tradeable players that make good money. They are also hamstrung by the salary albatross' so they cannot pursue help at positions of need.I have a ton of respect for GM's like Billy Beane, that craft bullpens on shoestring budgets, and find reclamation projects off the scrap heap.

 

[Wrigley]

Umm...they do share revenue.

do tell

 

[kaa]

Sure its my team that got blown apart a few hours ago. But as I peruse the ratings for the World Series.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Series_television_ratings

This ratings decline is a good thing. I hope Major League Baseball fades into oblivion - unless of course they stop feeding the major market teams these ridiculous advantages. A lot of people have walked away from this product over the past 20 years, and I think I'll join them. I'm not going to support this product anymore. There's no chance this will change unless the sport really feels pain. Wake me when they start sharing revenue.

I think it's great that you're taking such a liberal stance. Forget personal responsibility, we need to tax the successful teams and give it to the poor teams. Let's make decisions based on emotion and based on the way the have-nots feel. PS thanks for Victor Martinez.

I've heard that analogy more than a few times and its misses the point. I like competition, but when it comes to sports, the competition I'm interested in is on the playing field. I want a front office to win a title because they are more skilled at identifying, assembling and coaching good players. While it is true that franchises competing for revenue is a free market system, that is a competition that isn't on the playing field. If I wanted to watch that sort of competition, I'd turn on CNBC and watch Microsoft, Apple and Google compete. Maybe I'd pick a corporation to root for and do that. I doubt many baseball fans are interested in that sort of competition. The competition in MLB is mostly a revenue stream competition. I'm not interested in that when it comes to baseball entertainment so I have no choice but to stop following the sport.

 

[kaa]

Umm...they do share revenue.

I'm pretty sure you know what I mean. Not a luxury tax. I mean total revenue sharing. All of it into one big pile and split it equally. I'll accept nothing less.

 

[kaa]

Sure its my team that got blown apart a few hours ago. But as I peruse the ratings for the World Series.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Series_television_ratings

This ratings decline is a good thing. I hope Major League Baseball fades into oblivion - unless of course they stop feeding the major market teams these ridiculous advantages. A lot of people have walked away from this product over the past 20 years, and I think I'll join them. I'm not going to support this product anymore. There's no chance this will change unless the sport really feels pain. Wake me when they start sharing revenue.

Unlike the NFL, MLB is driven by local interest, not national interest. You'll never see the MLB playoffs pull the kinds of numbers that the NFL playoffs do, regardless of whatever MLB does. Especially in the age of hundreds of TV channels, internet, video games, etc.

How do you know? Maybe if MLB shared revenue like the NFL, ratings would go up. What can it hurt? The ratings for MLB have been in decay for over 20 years. Maybe they should rethink their assumptions and try something new.

 

[dparker713]

Umm...they do share revenue.

I'm pretty sure you know what I mean. Not a luxury tax. I mean total revenue sharing. All of it into one big pile and split it equally. I'll accept nothing less.

Year to year, only the Yankees pay a luxury tax, but many teams contribute to revenue sharing. And Im fairly certain the Yankees, Red Sox, Mets, Dodgers and Angels dont care one iota of what you'll accept. Even the NFL doesnt have complete revenue sharing. Yes, they split the money from the TV contracts, NFL films and NFL network, but each team has several other revenue streams that give advantages to certain teams. Meanwhile, in MLB the national TV money is fairly small in comparison to local TV and radio deals and gate receipts. BTW, I find those TV numbers a bit weird. If Im reading the numbers right, the total TV audience in 1985 and 2009 were both right around 60 million people despite a rather significant increase in population in the US. Oh, and last year's numbers were bound to be poor with the markets involved and the rain delays. Im fairly certain a Cubs v. Yanks series would still draw a big number.

 

[dparker713]

Sure its my team that got blown apart a few hours ago. But as I peruse the ratings for the World Series.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Series_television_ratings

This ratings decline is a good thing. I hope Major League Baseball fades into oblivion - unless of course they stop feeding the major market teams these ridiculous advantages. A lot of people have walked away from this product over the past 20 years, and I think I'll join them. I'm not going to support this product anymore. There's no chance this will change unless the sport really feels pain. Wake me when they start sharing revenue.

Unlike the NFL, MLB is driven by local interest, not national interest. You'll never see the MLB playoffs pull the kinds of numbers that the NFL playoffs do, regardless of whatever MLB does. Especially in the age of hundreds of TV channels, internet, video games, etc.

How do you know? Maybe if MLB shared revenue like the NFL, ratings would go up. What can it hurt? The ratings for MLB have been in decay for over 20 years. Maybe they should rethink their assumptions and try something new.

You might want to take a look at overall revenue across the league before you start claiming the league has been in decline for 20 years.

 

[Spartans Rule]

Baseball is naturally a sport of parity. The best MLB teams usually only win about 60% of their games. The playoffs involve a bunch of teams that have winning percentages within 10% of each other playing best-of-5 and best-of-7. Variance can be the deciding factor.

In the last 9 years, 14 different teams have played in the World Series and 8 different teams have won it. 23 different teams have been to the playoffs in that time span, and 28 have had winning seasons.

Maybe some people want to see every team go 81-81 and have the playoffs be an even bigger crapshoot than they already are. I don't.

 

[Balco]

Baseball is naturally a sport of parity. The best MLB teams usually only win about 60% of their games. The playoffs involve a bunch of teams that have winning percentages within 10% of each other playing best-of-5 and best-of-7. Variance can be the deciding factor.

In the last 9 years, 14 different teams have played in the World Series and 8 different teams have won it. 23 different teams have been to the playoffs in that time span, and 28 have had winning seasons.



Maybe some people want to see every team go 81-81 and have the playoffs be an even bigger crapshoot than they already are. I don't.

I want to see teams be able to get rewarded for great scouting and not have to trade off players because they are going to be too expensive. The Yankees can keep Jeter, Bernie Williams, Mariano Rivera, Andy Pettite, Jorge Posada. . . etc. because they have the cash, the A's however, cannot keep Miguel tejada, Jason Giambi, Dan Haren, Tim Hudson . . . . etc. because they don't. It is not fair.I am not looking for parity, I am looking for the teams that draft well, and scout well to be given the opportunity to keep their players.

Look at who some of these teams have to shop due to $$$$$: Jake Peavy, Roy halladay, Cliff Lee, Adrien Gonzalez, Victor Martinez, Matt Holliday . . . etc.

 

[dparker713]

Baseball is naturally a sport of parity. The best MLB teams usually only win about 60% of their games. The playoffs involve a bunch of teams that have winning percentages within 10% of each other playing best-of-5 and best-of-7. Variance can be the deciding factor.

In the last 9 years, 14 different teams have played in the World Series and 8 different teams have won it. 23 different teams have been to the playoffs in that time span, and 28 have had winning seasons.



Maybe some people want to see every team go 81-81 and have the playoffs be an even bigger crapshoot than they already are. I don't.

I want to see teams be able to get rewarded for great scouting and not have to trade off players because they are going to be too expensive. The Yankees can keep Jeter, Bernie Williams, Mariano Rivera, Andy Pettite, Jorge Posada. . . etc. because they have the cash, the A's however, cannot keep Miguel tejada, Jason Giambi, Dan Haren, Tim Hudson . . . . etc. because they don't. It is not fair.I am not looking for parity, I am looking for the teams that draft well, and scout well to be given the opportunity to keep their players.

Look at who some of these teams have to shop due to $$$$$: Jake Peavy, Roy halladay, Cliff Lee, Adrien Gonzalez, Victor Martinez, Matt Holliday . . . etc.

The Padres were shopping people because their scouting and drafting sucked incredibly badly and the only way to restock their young talent was to trade the few assests people wanted. They can and should keep Adrian Gonzalez long term. The Blue Jays are shopping people because of a somewhat bad contract to Alex Rios and a horrendous contract to Vernon Wells. The Indians were similarly crippled by their deal with Travis Hafner. Oakland could have afforded to offer Holliday arbitration next season, but there is more value to their procuring players that could develop.The peak years of hitter generally is 28 or 29. For a pitcher its probably a couple of years later. MLB teams have control of new players for 6 years after they reach the majors. 3 years of fixed salary followed by 3 years of arbitration. Most players dont reach the majors until 25, meaning teams have control over a player's entire peak years. Even stars are rarely brought up before the age of 22, giving teams a good chance at these player's absolute peak, and teams have routinely locked up players early and buy out their first couple of years of free agency. Teams like the Yankees, Red Sox and Mets sign FAs on the downside of their careers at a fairly sizable risk. The major asset of these teams isn't even the ability to write off the many mistakes they make, no their major asset is in the procurement of talent in the draft and foreign markets. They can spend over slot year after year and sign high priced foreign players. Fix that imbalance and you'll see a much more level playing field than a salary cap would create.

 

[TLEF316]

Baseball is naturally a sport of parity. The best MLB teams usually only win about 60% of their games. The playoffs involve a bunch of teams that have winning percentages within 10% of each other playing best-of-5 and best-of-7. Variance can be the deciding factor.

In the last 9 years, 14 different teams have played in the World Series and 8 different teams have won it. 23 different teams have been to the playoffs in that time span, and 28 have had winning seasons.



Maybe some people want to see every team go 81-81 and have the playoffs be an even bigger crapshoot than they already are. I don't.

I want to see teams be able to get rewarded for great scouting and not have to trade off players because they are going to be too expensive. The Yankees can keep Jeter, Bernie Williams, Mariano Rivera, Andy Pettite, Jorge Posada. . . etc. because they have the cash, the A's however, cannot keep Miguel tejada, Jason Giambi, Dan Haren, Tim Hudson . . . . etc. because they don't. It is not fair.I am not looking for parity, I am looking for the teams that draft well, and scout well to be given the opportunity to keep their players.

Look at who some of these teams have to shop due to $$$$$: Jake Peavy, Roy halladay, Cliff Lee, Adrien Gonzalez, Victor Martinez, Matt Holliday . . . etc.

The Padres were shopping people because their scouting and drafting sucked incredibly badly and the only way to restock their young talent was to trade the few assests people wanted. They can and should keep Adrian Gonzalez long term. The Blue Jays are shopping people because of a somewhat bad contract to Alex Rios and a horrendous contract to Vernon Wells. The Indians were similarly crippled by their deal with Travis Hafner. Oakland could have afforded to offer Holliday arbitration next season, but there is more value to their procuring players that could develop.The peak years of hitter generally is 28 or 29. For a pitcher its probably a couple of years later. MLB teams have control of new players for 6 years after they reach the majors. 3 years of fixed salary followed by 3 years of arbitration. Most players dont reach the majors until 25, meaning teams have control over a player's entire peak years. Even stars are rarely brought up before the age of 22, giving teams a good chance at these player's absolute peak, and teams have routinely locked up players early and buy out their first couple of years of free agency. Teams like the Yankees, Red Sox and Mets sign FAs on the downside of their careers at a fairly sizable risk. The major asset of these teams isn't even the ability to write off the many mistakes they make, no their major asset is in the procurement of talent in the draft and foreign markets. They can spend over slot year after year and sign high priced foreign players. Fix that imbalance and you'll see a much more level playing field than a salary cap would create.

great posting.The draft and foreign free agency is the main thing that needs to be fixed.

 

[Balco]

Baseball is naturally a sport of parity. The best MLB teams usually only win about 60% of their games. The playoffs involve a bunch of teams that have winning percentages within 10% of each other playing best-of-5 and best-of-7. Variance can be the deciding factor.

In the last 9 years, 14 different teams have played in the World Series and 8 different teams have won it. 23 different teams have been to the playoffs in that time span, and 28 have had winning seasons.



Maybe some people want to see every team go 81-81 and have the playoffs be an even bigger crapshoot than they already are. I don't.

I want to see teams be able to get rewarded for great scouting and not have to trade off players because they are going to be too expensive. The Yankees can keep Jeter, Bernie Williams, Mariano Rivera, Andy Pettite, Jorge Posada. . . etc. because they have the cash, the A's however, cannot keep Miguel tejada, Jason Giambi, Dan Haren, Tim Hudson . . . . etc. because they don't. It is not fair.I am not looking for parity, I am looking for the teams that draft well, and scout well to be given the opportunity to keep their players.

Look at who some of these teams have to shop due to $$$$$: Jake Peavy, Roy halladay, Cliff Lee, Adrien Gonzalez, Victor Martinez, Matt Holliday . . . etc.

The Padres were shopping people because their scouting and drafting sucked incredibly badly and the only way to restock their young talent was to trade the few assests people wanted. They can and should keep Adrian Gonzalez long term. The Blue Jays are shopping people because of a somewhat bad contract to Alex Rios and a horrendous contract to Vernon Wells. The Indians were similarly crippled by their deal with Travis Hafner. Oakland could have afforded to offer Holliday arbitration next season, but there is more value to their procuring players that could develop.The peak years of hitter generally is 28 or 29. For a pitcher its probably a couple of years later. MLB teams have control of new players for 6 years after they reach the majors. 3 years of fixed salary followed by 3 years of arbitration. Most players dont reach the majors until 25, meaning teams have control over a player's entire peak years. Even stars are rarely brought up before the age of 22, giving teams a good chance at these player's absolute peak, and teams have routinely locked up players early and buy out their first couple of years of free agency. Teams like the Yankees, Red Sox and Mets sign FAs on the downside of their careers at a fairly sizable risk. The major asset of these teams isn't even the ability to write off the many mistakes they make, no their major asset is in the procurement of talent in the draft and foreign markets. They can spend over slot year after year and sign high priced foreign players. Fix that imbalance and you'll see a much more level playing field than a salary cap would create.

I disagree agree with you a little on your first paragraph. No doubt the Padres drafting and scouting have been horrid, but I think a big reason was the cost of Gonzalez. Pirates fans (not sure if it was you), are saying that McLouth was dumped because of his salary, and he only make 2.5 mil a year. Gonzalez makes significantly more. But the end of your second paragraph, would be my first step in improving MLB (next would be cap floor and ceiling). I was looking over Baseball prospectus preseason top 100 prospect again, recently and it was littered with foreign players signed as free agents. It boggles my mind that these players are not in the player pool to be drafted. Raise the age limit to be drafted to 18, and stick them in the draft pool. I will say that it looks like the smaller market teams are beginning to realize that spending 5 mil on replacement level players is not the route to go. Instead, spread that 5 mil to several Latin American free agents. Rick is high, but the reward is outstanding. You hit on a Vladimir Guarrero, Miguel Cabrera, Pedro Martinez . . . etc (and by the way, it is amazing how many elite players were not drafted, but were instead signed as free agents) it is well worth the 5 mil you spend on 4 flameouts and the one stud.

 

[dparker713]

Baseball is naturally a sport of parity. The best MLB teams usually only win about 60% of their games. The playoffs involve a bunch of teams that have winning percentages within 10% of each other playing best-of-5 and best-of-7. Variance can be the deciding factor.

In the last 9 years, 14 different teams have played in the World Series and 8 different teams have won it. 23 different teams have been to the playoffs in that time span, and 28 have had winning seasons.



Maybe some people want to see every team go 81-81 and have the playoffs be an even bigger crapshoot than they already are. I don't.

I want to see teams be able to get rewarded for great scouting and not have to trade off players because they are going to be too expensive. The Yankees can keep Jeter, Bernie Williams, Mariano Rivera, Andy Pettite, Jorge Posada. . . etc. because they have the cash, the A's however, cannot keep Miguel tejada, Jason Giambi, Dan Haren, Tim Hudson . . . . etc. because they don't. It is not fair.I am not looking for parity, I am looking for the teams that draft well, and scout well to be given the opportunity to keep their players.

Look at who some of these teams have to shop due to $$$$$: Jake Peavy, Roy halladay, Cliff Lee, Adrien Gonzalez, Victor Martinez, Matt Holliday . . . etc.

The Padres were shopping people because their scouting and drafting sucked incredibly badly and the only way to restock their young talent was to trade the few assests people wanted. They can and should keep Adrian Gonzalez long term. The Blue Jays are shopping people because of a somewhat bad contract to Alex Rios and a horrendous contract to Vernon Wells. The Indians were similarly crippled by their deal with Travis Hafner. Oakland could have afforded to offer Holliday arbitration next season, but there is more value to their procuring players that could develop.The peak years of hitter generally is 28 or 29. For a pitcher its probably a couple of years later. MLB teams have control of new players for 6 years after they reach the majors. 3 years of fixed salary followed by 3 years of arbitration. Most players dont reach the majors until 25, meaning teams have control over a player's entire peak years. Even stars are rarely brought up before the age of 22, giving teams a good chance at these player's absolute peak, and teams have routinely locked up players early and buy out their first couple of years of free agency. Teams like the Yankees, Red Sox and Mets sign FAs on the downside of their careers at a fairly sizable risk. The major asset of these teams isn't even the ability to write off the many mistakes they make, no their major asset is in the procurement of talent in the draft and foreign markets. They can spend over slot year after year and sign high priced foreign players. Fix that imbalance and you'll see a much more level playing field than a salary cap would create.

I disagree agree with you a little on your first paragraph. No doubt the Padres drafting and scouting have been horrid, but I think a big reason was the cost of Gonzalez. Pirates fans (not sure if it was you), are saying that McLouth was dumped because of his salary, and he only make 2.5 mil a year. Gonzalez makes significantly more. But the end of your second paragraph, would be my first step in improving MLB (next would be cap floor and ceiling). I was looking over Baseball prospectus preseason top 100 prospect again, recently and it was littered with foreign players signed as free agents. It boggles my mind that these players are not in the player pool to be drafted. Raise the age limit to be drafted to 18, and stick them in the draft pool. I will say that it looks like the smaller market teams are beginning to realize that spending 5 mil on replacement level players is not the route to go. Instead, spread that 5 mil to several Latin American free agents. Rick is high, but the reward is outstanding. You hit on a Vladimir Guarrero, Miguel Cabrera, Pedro Martinez . . . etc (and by the way, it is amazing how many elite players were not drafted, but were instead signed as free agents) it is well worth the 5 mil you spend on 4 flameouts and the one stud.

Gonazles signed a 4 year 9.5 million deal in 2007 with a club option for 5.5 mil in 2011. Any team in baseball can afford that contract, especially since he's performed at over a 3 WAR per year player every year with the club and he's only getting better. The only reason they even considered moving him is because they need so many players at so many positions. They started talks at 6 good prospects. Their price was higher than many teams could even consider offering. And McLouth wasnt just dumped for salary reasons. He was pretty much too old to fit in with their rebuilding schedule and he's just not that good anyway. They traded him at the height of his value (though you can disagree that they actually got such value in return)And the Strasburg and Harper negotiations will likely lead to some form of formal slotting in the next CBA, though trading of draft picks and making the player pool include all players may not be included. But atleast it will be a step in the right direction.

 

[Balco]

Baseball is naturally a sport of parity. The best MLB teams usually only win about 60% of their games. The playoffs involve a bunch of teams that have winning percentages within 10% of each other playing best-of-5 and best-of-7. Variance can be the deciding factor.

In the last 9 years, 14 different teams have played in the World Series and 8 different teams have won it. 23 different teams have been to the playoffs in that time span, and 28 have had winning seasons.



Maybe some people want to see every team go 81-81 and have the playoffs be an even bigger crapshoot than they already are. I don't.

I want to see teams be able to get rewarded for great scouting and not have to trade off players because they are going to be too expensive. The Yankees can keep Jeter, Bernie Williams, Mariano Rivera, Andy Pettite, Jorge Posada. . . etc. because they have the cash, the A's however, cannot keep Miguel tejada, Jason Giambi, Dan Haren, Tim Hudson . . . . etc. because they don't. It is not fair.I am not looking for parity, I am looking for the teams that draft well, and scout well to be given the opportunity to keep their players.

Look at who some of these teams have to shop due to $$$$$: Jake Peavy, Roy halladay, Cliff Lee, Adrien Gonzalez, Victor Martinez, Matt Holliday . . . etc.

The Padres were shopping people because their scouting and drafting sucked incredibly badly and the only way to restock their young talent was to trade the few assests people wanted. They can and should keep Adrian Gonzalez long term. The Blue Jays are shopping people because of a somewhat bad contract to Alex Rios and a horrendous contract to Vernon Wells. The Indians were similarly crippled by their deal with Travis Hafner. Oakland could have afforded to offer Holliday arbitration next season, but there is more value to their procuring players that could develop.The peak years of hitter generally is 28 or 29. For a pitcher its probably a couple of years later. MLB teams have control of new players for 6 years after they reach the majors. 3 years of fixed salary followed by 3 years of arbitration. Most players dont reach the majors until 25, meaning teams have control over a player's entire peak years. Even stars are rarely brought up before the age of 22, giving teams a good chance at these player's absolute peak, and teams have routinely locked up players early and buy out their first couple of years of free agency. Teams like the Yankees, Red Sox and Mets sign FAs on the downside of their careers at a fairly sizable risk. The major asset of these teams isn't even the ability to write off the many mistakes they make, no their major asset is in the procurement of talent in the draft and foreign markets. They can spend over slot year after year and sign high priced foreign players. Fix that imbalance and you'll see a much more level playing field than a salary cap would create.

I disagree agree with you a little on your first paragraph. No doubt the Padres drafting and scouting have been horrid, but I think a big reason was the cost of Gonzalez. Pirates fans (not sure if it was you), are saying that McLouth was dumped because of his salary, and he only make 2.5 mil a year. Gonzalez makes significantly more. But the end of your second paragraph, would be my first step in improving MLB (next would be cap floor and ceiling). I was looking over Baseball prospectus preseason top 100 prospect again, recently and it was littered with foreign players signed as free agents. It boggles my mind that these players are not in the player pool to be drafted. Raise the age limit to be drafted to 18, and stick them in the draft pool. I will say that it looks like the smaller market teams are beginning to realize that spending 5 mil on replacement level players is not the route to go. Instead, spread that 5 mil to several Latin American free agents. Rick is high, but the reward is outstanding. You hit on a Vladimir Guarrero, Miguel Cabrera, Pedro Martinez . . . etc (and by the way, it is amazing how many elite players were not drafted, but were instead signed as free agents) it is well worth the 5 mil you spend on 4 flameouts and the one stud.

Gonazles signed a 4 year 9.5 million deal in 2007 with a club option for 5.5 mil in 2011. Any team in baseball can afford that contract, especially since he's performed at over a 3 WAR per year player every year with the club and he's only getting better. The only reason they even considered moving him is because they need so many players at so many positions. They started talks at 6 good prospects. Their price was higher than many teams could even consider offering. And McLouth wasnt just dumped for salary reasons. He was pretty much too old to fit in with their rebuilding schedule and he's just not that good anyway. They traded him at the height of his value (though you can disagree that they actually got such value in return)And the Strasburg and Harper negotiations will likely lead to some form of formal slotting in the next CBA, though trading of draft picks and making the player pool include all players may not be included. But atleast it will be a step in the right direction.

We have beaten that horse into the ground. I do think Gorky's Hernandez does have some value as a starting defensive center fielder, if McCuthceon ever gets moved to a corner, though. That would give the Pirates an outstanding defensive outfield. And Hernandez should hit for a high avergae, although he will offer no pwer. More of a 4th outfielder, but his defense would really help them.I just look at the top of recent drafts. The Twins couldn't sign Prior who was considered a once in a generation pitching prospect with textbook mechanics (how did that theory work out). They had to sign a player more for signability reasons (a decent catcher name Joe Mauer). Wow, that was a bad example, but the draft is littered with better ones, most notably from the Pirates and Royals. Why can't the bad teams have the opportunity to sign the best prospect on their board, not the one who is more likely to sign? It simply is not fair at all.

Rick Porcello is one of the most recent examoples, and the Wall Street Journal had a fantastic article on him and how the draft is broken (very good read):

WSJ Article

 

[bostonfred]

I like competition, but when it comes to sports, the competition I'm interested in is on the playing field. I want a front office to win a title

 

[Darth Cheney]

We have beaten that horse into the ground. I do think Gorky's Hernandez does have some value as a starting defensive center fielder, if McCuthceon ever gets moved to a corner, though. That would give the Pirates an outstanding defensive outfield. And Hernandez should hit for a high avergae, although he will offer no pwer. More of a 4th outfielder, but his defense would really help them.

I just look at the top of recent drafts. The Twins couldn't sign Prior who was considered a once in a generation pitching prospect with textbook mechanics (how did that theory work out). They had to sign a player more for signability reasons (a decent catcher name Joe Mauer). Wow, that was a bad example, but the draft is littered with better ones, most notably from the Pirates and Royals. Why can't the bad teams have the opportunity to sign the best prospect on their board, not the one who is more likely to sign? It simply is not fair at all.

Rick Porcello is one of the most recent examoples, and the Wall Street Journal had a fantastic article on him and how the draft is broken (very good read):

WSJ Article

The article briefly talks about the slotting salary in the NFL draft as if it were a solution. Is there a rule in the NFL that dictates this...or is it an argeement amongst the owners to not pay out of turn?

 

[dparker713]

We have beaten that horse into the ground. I do think Gorky's Hernandez does have some value as a starting defensive center fielder, if McCuthceon ever gets moved to a corner, though. That would give the Pirates an outstanding defensive outfield. And Hernandez should hit for a high avergae, although he will offer no pwer. More of a 4th outfielder, but his defense would really help them.

I just look at the top of recent drafts. The Twins couldn't sign Prior who was considered a once in a generation pitching prospect with textbook mechanics (how did that theory work out). They had to sign a player more for signability reasons (a decent catcher name Joe Mauer). Wow, that was a bad example, but the draft is littered with better ones, most notably from the Pirates and Royals. Why can't the bad teams have the opportunity to sign the best prospect on their board, not the one who is more likely to sign? It simply is not fair at all.

Rick Porcello is one of the most recent examoples, and the Wall Street Journal had a fantastic article on him and how the draft is broken (very good read):

WSJ Article

The article briefly talks about the slotting salary in the NFL draft as if it were a solution. Is there a rule in the NFL that dictates this...or is it an argeement amongst the owners to not pay out of turn?

There is a subsection of the total cap for rookies, and the amount of the rookie cap is adjusted for each team based upon their number of draft picks and their positions. Within that cap, teams are able to make deals as they see fit.

 

[Jefferson the Caregiver]

Dude, are you the biggest fraud on here? For the entire lifetime that you have been on this board, you have gone on and on about power, world of warcraft domination, dropping bombs not food, Tyrannasaurus Rex (extinct), and how the weak should be cast aside to starve to death.

This one thread goes against everything you spew. At least when you are bat crazy you are consistent, but now this, you are really just a BS artist? I don't know what to believe now.

 

[Capella]

Dude, are you the biggest fraud on here? For the entire lifetime that you have been on this board, you have gone on and on about power, world of warcraft domination, dropping bombs not food, Tyrannasaurus Rex (extinct), and how the weak should be cast aside to starve to death.This one thread goes against everything you spew. At least when you are bat crazy you are consistent, but now this, you are really just a BS artist? I don't know what to believe now.

Can't argue that. Guess he turns into a fraud when it gets personal for him.As to the thread, obviously baseball is set up for the 'power' teams to succeed. Unfortunately, the Red Sox figured out years ago how to play that system and the Yankees finally had the light go on as well. But, that's also what made the Rays winning the AL East and AL so sweet last year. I told friends of mine that the Rays winning the ALE was a bigger accomplishment then the Bucs winning the Super Bowl. To beat both of those teams over a 162 games with a quarter of the payroll was/is amazing.

 

[Sammy3469]

Dude, are you the biggest fraud on here? For the entire lifetime that you have been on this board, you have gone on and on about power, world of warcraft domination, dropping bombs not food, Tyrannasaurus Rex (extinct), and how the weak should be cast aside to starve to death.

This one thread goes against everything you spew. At least when you are bat crazy you are consistent, but now this, you are really just a BS artist? I don't know what to believe now.

Can't argue that. Guess he turns into a fraud when it gets personal for him.As to the thread, obviously baseball is set up for the 'power' teams to succeed. Unfortunately, the Red Sox figured out years ago how to play that system and the Yankees finally had the light go on as well.

But, that's also what made the Rays winning the AL East and AL so sweet last year. I told friends of mine that the Rays winning the ALE was a bigger accomplishment then the Bucs winning the Super Bowl. To beat both of those teams over a 162 games with a quarter of the payroll was/is amazing.

Funny...I still don't think they've figured it out past just signing the best FAs available. Their farm system outside of Montero, Brackman, and Jackson at the top just isn't as good as it should be for the money they spend. Hell they didn't sign two of their top picks in 2008 which just wouldn't happen to the Red Sox much less the Rays. I'd argue the Sox (and maybe the Dodgers) are the only two big $$$ teams that have truly figured it out. Oh and there's groing evidence that a pitchers prime physically is actually earlier than first thought which is why clubs are rushing them to the majors these days.