Stop Guaranteed Contracts Now! (1 Viewer)

[Mr. Mojo]

I hope the NFL doesn't go further with guaranteed $$$ to the point where the entire contract is guaranteed. This is one of the main ruining factors for baseball. With guarantees, players lose the incentive to perform and teams are stuck with non-producing players that drain the payroll. I don't think anyone in occupation should have a guaranteed contract. If supply and demand says that a player should be paid $20 million per year, fine. But don't guarantee it so that the player has no incentive and gets paid even when they can no longer perform.

I hope the NFL limits guarantees in the future to just a portion of the contract.

Thoughts?

 

[Godsbrother]

Just wondering who received an offer where the entire contract was guaranteed?

 

[Sweet Love]

I've been surprised this has not happened as of yet. I would be very hesitant as a GM to guarantee contracts for the elite players (basically the big money contracts), but I think the risk is significantly lower of you guarantee the "average" guy a contract of a couple million a year. I wonder if there is an unspoken agreement among the owners not to do this as it could open pandora's box.

 

[BroadwayG]

I thought I read on here yesterday in some post that there is a certain ration that must be achieved with respect to bonus vs yearly salary $$$ figures.

 

[Darth Cheney]

I hate to break the news to you Snoop, but baseball is bigger than ever.

 

[igbomb]

Why do I always hear people talk about the ruination of baseball?

The sport is thriving despite of the fact that it's had a strike and steroids scandals in the last fifteen years.

Ignorance.

 

[Keys Myaths]

I hope the NFL doesn't go further with guaranteed $$$ to the point where the entire contract is guaranteed. This is one of the main ruining factors for baseball. With guarantees, players lose the incentive to perform and teams are stuck with non-producing players that drain the payroll. I don't think anyone in occupation should have a guaranteed contract. If supply and demand says that a player should be paid $20 million per year, fine. But don't guarantee it so that the player has no incentive and gets paid even when they can no longer perform.

I hope the NFL limits guarantees in the future to just a portion of the contract.

Thoughts?

correlation<>causation.Guaranteed contracts are not the reason the Yankees have an advantage over the Marlins.

 

[Road Warriors]

I hope the NFL doesn't go further with guaranteed $$$ to the point where the entire contract is guaranteed. This is one of the main ruining factors for baseball. With guarantees, players lose the incentive to perform and teams are stuck with non-producing players that drain the payroll. I don't think anyone in occupation should have a guaranteed contract. If supply and demand says that a player should be paid $20 million per year, fine. But don't guarantee it so that the player has no incentive and gets paid even when they can no longer perform.

I hope the NFL limits guarantees in the future to just a portion of the contract.

Thoughts?

correlation<>causation.Guaranteed contracts are not the reason the Yankees have an advantage over the Marlins.

It's not the reason, but it contributes. The Yankee's have an incredible revenue advantage, to be sure. What that affords them is the ability to eat those horrible guaranteed contracts ( Carl Pavano, for example ) and still get more talent, while a team like the Marlins or others can't make a mistake with a big contract and recover. The lower revenue teams will be burdened with bad guaranteed contracts with little chance to get out from under.

 

[Keys Myaths]

I hope the NFL doesn't go further with guaranteed $$$ to the point where the entire contract is guaranteed. This is one of the main ruining factors for baseball. With guarantees, players lose the incentive to perform and teams are stuck with non-producing players that drain the payroll. I don't think anyone in occupation should have a guaranteed contract. If supply and demand says that a player should be paid $20 million per year, fine. But don't guarantee it so that the player has no incentive and gets paid even when they can no longer perform.

I hope the NFL limits guarantees in the future to just a portion of the contract.

Thoughts?

correlation<>causation.Guaranteed contracts are not the reason the Yankees have an advantage over the Marlins.

It's not the reason, but it contributes.

No it doesn't.If the Yankees and Marlins had an equal amount of money to spend, guaranteed vs. non-guaranteed wouldn't be an issue at all. It would be about who makes smarter decisions, even with guaranteed money.

 

[Godsbrother]

[quote name='Road Warriors' No it doesn't.

If the Yankees and Marlins had an equal amount of money to spend, guaranteed vs. non-guaranteed wouldn't be an issue at all. It would be about who makes smarter decisions, even with guaranteed money.

The Yankees can afford to make stupid mistakes. Teams like the Marlins and Pirates can't. If they offer a player a huge contract and he flops or get injured they are screwed. The Yankees just go buy someone else.

 

[Darth Cheney]

I hope the NFL doesn't go further with guaranteed $$$ to the point where the entire contract is guaranteed. This is one of the main ruining factors for baseball. With guarantees, players lose the incentive to perform and teams are stuck with non-producing players that drain the payroll. I don't think anyone in occupation should have a guaranteed contract. If supply and demand says that a player should be paid $20 million per year, fine. But don't guarantee it so that the player has no incentive and gets paid even when they can no longer perform.

I hope the NFL limits guarantees in the future to just a portion of the contract.

Thoughts?

correlation<>causation.Guaranteed contracts are not the reason the Yankees have an advantage over the Marlins.

It's not the reason, but it contributes.

No it doesn't.If the Yankees and Marlins had an equal amount of money to spend, guaranteed vs. non-guaranteed wouldn't be an issue at all. It would be about who makes smarter decisions, even with guaranteed money.

So money would be put into other things, facilities,minor league teams, scouting, coaching, baseball academies, hell.....Steinbrenner might buy the entire country of The Dominican Republic just so he can make that talent Yankee exclusive. The size of MLB and the minors makes comparing its economic structure to the NFL dumb.

 

[Keys Myaths]

[quote name='Road Warriors' No it doesn't.

If the Yankees and Marlins had an equal amount of money to spend, guaranteed vs. non-guaranteed wouldn't be an issue at all. It would be about who makes smarter decisions, even with guaranteed money.

The Yankees can afford to make stupid mistakes. Teams like the Marlins and Pirates can't. If they offer a player a huge contract and he flops or get injured they are screwed. The Yankees just go buy someone else.

But my point is that they can afford to make more stupid mistakes regardless of whether a contract is guaranteed, or just 25% of it is.

No matter what, 20-25% of contracts are going to be guaranteed. You don't cut someone after one week of non-performance.

 

[Darth Cheney]

[quote name='Road Warriors' No it doesn't.

If the Yankees and Marlins had an equal amount of money to spend, guaranteed vs. non-guaranteed wouldn't be an issue at all. It would be about who makes smarter decisions, even with guaranteed money.

The Yankees can afford to make stupid mistakes. Teams like the Marlins and Pirates can't. If they offer a player a huge contract and he flops or get injured they are screwed. The Yankees just go buy someone else.

To a point that's true....but until baseball is not economically viable.....it's not going to matter.

 

[Godsbrother]

[quote name='Road Warriors' No it doesn't.

If the Yankees and Marlins had an equal amount of money to spend, guaranteed vs. non-guaranteed wouldn't be an issue at all. It would be about who makes smarter decisions, even with guaranteed money.

The Yankees can afford to make stupid mistakes. Teams like the Marlins and Pirates can't. If they offer a player a huge contract and he flops or get injured they are screwed. The Yankees just go buy someone else.

To a point that's true....but until baseball is not economically viable.....it's not going to matter.

It is 100% true but the only way to fix it is revenue sharing and a salary cap & minimum so teams are all spending roughly the same amount. At that point it becomes more about who is smarter/dumber than it is about who is richer/poorer. We'll never see it in MLB though...

 

[Road Warriors]

I hope the NFL doesn't go further with guaranteed $$$ to the point where the entire contract is guaranteed. This is one of the main ruining factors for baseball. With guarantees, players lose the incentive to perform and teams are stuck with non-producing players that drain the payroll. I don't think anyone in occupation should have a guaranteed contract. If supply and demand says that a player should be paid $20 million per year, fine. But don't guarantee it so that the player has no incentive and gets paid even when they can no longer perform.

I hope the NFL limits guarantees in the future to just a portion of the contract.

Thoughts?

correlation<>causation.Guaranteed contracts are not the reason the Yankees have an advantage over the Marlins.

It's not the reason, but it contributes.

No it doesn't.If the Yankees and Marlins had an equal amount of money to spend, guaranteed vs. non-guaranteed wouldn't be an issue at all. It would be about who makes smarter decisions, even with guaranteed money.

True, but we don't have a equal amount of money to spend in baseball. Let me restate... under the current system, guaranteed contracts contbribute to the talent inequity in the league.Lower revenue teams have a choice to make when it comes to higher dollar talent. If they go after big money players and they flop, they're out of contention until that contract is done. The other choice they can make is to not take that risk.

If the contracts were not guaranteed, even under the current system, it would reduce risk for the smaller market teams to go after bigger money talent. If it isn't working out, they can cut the player and not have dead money on the payroll. This doesn't fix the talent disparity in baseball, but it could close the gap some, IMO.

 

[Rorschach]

NFL players deserve guarenteed contracts. It's the most violent injury riddled game in sport. Explain to me why they don't deserve to have a little incentive given the punishment they take?

 

[thayman]

NFL players deserve guarenteed contracts. It's the most violent injury riddled game in sport. Explain to me why they don't deserve to have a little incentive given the punishment they take?

They do have guarenteed contracts, it's called a signing bonus. Take Randy Moss's recent deal, the earning potential is $27 million but he is getting $15 million guarenteed.

 

[midnightxxxx]

Funny the Yankees Marlins part of this post. David Glass (KC Royals) is worth more money than George Steinbrenner yet you do not see him sacrificing the economic principles that got him where he is financially. Guaranteed contracts are not the problem with sports in my opinion. Every circumstance is situational based on teams needs and desires for the big splash. How do you deal with complacency after the big signing or injuries if the players age is not a factor?

 

[Ice Cream Man]

True, but we don't have a equal amount of money to spend in baseball. Let me restate... under the current system, guaranteed contracts contbribute to the talent inequity in the league.

Lower revenue teams have a choice to make when it comes to higher dollar talent. If they go after big money players and they flop, they're out of contention until that contract is done. The other choice they can make is to not take that risk.

If the contracts were not guaranteed, even under the current system, it would reduce risk for the smaller market teams to go after bigger money talent. If it isn't working out, they can cut the player and not have dead money on the payroll. This doesn't fix the talent disparity in baseball, but it could close the gap some, IMO.

What makes the yankees better than small market teams? It seems their superiority comes from signing more big names to guaranteed contracts. But with more such contracts aren't they exposed to greater risk that one or more of them dont pan out? If every star has a 50% chance of sucking, then a team with 2 stars will have 1 mistake to swallow and a team with 10 will have 5 to swallow. As a % of total revenue, the damage will likely be comparable.

This whole idea of a small market team ruined by a single bad guaranteed contract is wholly missing the point that weathier teams will likely have far more big-time contracts go bad.

Whatever ineqaulity there is in baseball it has nothing to do with guaranteed contracts.

 

[Road Warriors]

True, but we don't have a equal amount of money to spend in baseball. Let me restate... under the current system, guaranteed contracts contbribute to the talent inequity in the league.

Lower revenue teams have a choice to make when it comes to higher dollar talent. If they go after big money players and they flop, they're out of contention until that contract is done. The other choice they can make is to not take that risk.

If the contracts were not guaranteed, even under the current system, it would reduce risk for the smaller market teams to go after bigger money talent. If it isn't working out, they can cut the player and not have dead money on the payroll. This doesn't fix the talent disparity in baseball, but it could close the gap some, IMO.

What makes the yankees better than small market teams? It seems their superiority comes from signing more big names to guaranteed contracts. But with more such contracts aren't they exposed to greater risk that one or more of them dont pan out? If every star has a 50% chance of sucking, then a team with 2 stars will have 1 mistake to swallow and a team with 10 will have 5 to swallow. As a % of total revenue, the damage will likely be comparable.

This whole idea of a small market team ruined by a single bad guaranteed contract is wholly missing the point that weathier teams will likely have far more big-time contracts go bad.

Whatever ineqaulity there is in baseball it has nothing to do with guaranteed contracts.

Here's the issue I have with your position.Small market team - 40 mill payroll, 1 big money signee flops, say at 15mill, leaves 25 million to build the rest of the roster.

Yankees - 200 mill payroll, 5 flops at 15mill per... leaves 125 million to build the rest of the roster. They can eat as many bad contracts as they can sign.

The biggest issue is the revenue disparity, no doubt. But if the small market team could get out from under the bad contract, they'd be better than if they're stuck with it.

 

[Joseph]

True, but we don't have a equal amount of money to spend in baseball. Let me restate... under the current system, guaranteed contracts contbribute to the talent inequity in the league.

Lower revenue teams have a choice to make when it comes to higher dollar talent. If they go after big money players and they flop, they're out of contention until that contract is done. The other choice they can make is to not take that risk.

If the contracts were not guaranteed, even under the current system, it would reduce risk for the smaller market teams to go after bigger money talent. If it isn't working out, they can cut the player and not have dead money on the payroll. This doesn't fix the talent disparity in baseball, but it could close the gap some, IMO.

What makes the yankees better than small market teams? It seems their superiority comes from signing more big names to guaranteed contracts. But with more such contracts aren't they exposed to greater risk that one or more of them dont pan out? If every star has a 50% chance of sucking, then a team with 2 stars will have 1 mistake to swallow and a team with 10 will have 5 to swallow. As a % of total revenue, the damage will likely be comparable.

This whole idea of a small market team ruined by a single bad guaranteed contract is wholly missing the point that weathier teams will likely have far more big-time contracts go bad.

Whatever ineqaulity there is in baseball it has nothing to do with guaranteed contracts.

Here's the issue I have with your position.Small market team - 40 mill payroll, 1 big money signee flops, say at 15mill, leaves 25 million to build the rest of the roster.

Yankees - 200 mill payroll, 5 flops at 15mill per... leaves 125 million to build the rest of the roster. They can eat as many bad contracts as they can sign.

The biggest issue is the revenue disparity, no doubt. But if the small market team could get out from under the bad contract, they'd be better than if they're stuck with it.

But if that money isn't guaranteed, the yankees are going to cut bait on the flops, and reload with 5 new stars. The marlins will cut their one star flop, and reload with one new star...

Regardless of how much each team is on the hook for in guaranteed money, the yankees can spend more because they make more.

 

[trader jake]

I hope guaranteed contracts don't become the norm in the NFL but the inequity of money used for the signing of players is the biggest issue with major league baseball. As long as the NFL maintains a system where all of the teams are (more or less) equal in terms of money spent on player contracts...they'll be okay.

 

[cstu]

I hope guaranteed contracts don't become the norm in the NFL but the inequity of money used for the signing of players is the biggest issue with major league baseball. As long as the NFL maintains a system where all of the teams are (more or less) equal in terms of money spent on player contracts...they'll be okay.

Guaranteed contracts in the NFL would not be as big of a problem because of revenue-sharing. Even the Redskins have to be careful who they sign because they don't have unlimited money. The Yankees on the other hand can sign 10 players in hopes that only 5 work out and eat the rest.

 

[Ice Cream Man]

Small market team - 40 mill payroll, 1 big money signee flops, say at 15mill, leaves 25 million to build the rest of the roster.

Yankees - 200 mill payroll, 5 flops at 15mill per... leaves 125 million to build the rest of the roster. They can eat as many bad contracts as they can sign.

The biggest issue is the revenue disparity, no doubt. But if the small market team could get out from under the bad contract, they'd be better than if they're stuck with it.

But that's just my point.. this ignores that they are less likely to need to do so than a big market team.The problem isn't guaranteed contracts, but merely the revenue disparity. As a percentage of total payroll, each team bears the same burden for a bad guaranteed contract when the team is taken as a whole:

25/40 = 125/200.

If there was not any guaranteed contracts, you'd still see the Yanks load up on stars and small market teams get one or two. The sort of contracts have nothing to do with parity.

 

[cstu]

Small market team - 40 mill payroll, 1 big money signee flops, say at 15mill, leaves 25 million to build the rest of the roster.

Yankees - 200 mill payroll, 5 flops at 15mill per... leaves 125 million to build the rest of the roster. They can eat as many bad contracts as they can sign.

The biggest issue is the revenue disparity, no doubt. But if the small market team could get out from under the bad contract, they'd be better than if they're stuck with it.

But that's just my point.. this ignores that they are less likely to need to do so than a big market team.The problem isn't guaranteed contracts, but merely the revenue disparity. As a percentage of total payroll, each team bears the same burden for a bad guaranteed contract when the team is taken as a whole:

25/40 = 125/200.

If there was not any guaranteed contracts, you'd still see the Yanks load up on stars and small market teams get one or two. The sort of contracts have nothing to do with parity.

I have to disagree. The guaranteed money is what prevents teams from matching offers from teams like the Yankees. A fully guaranteed contract is a huge risk to a small team.

 

[Mr. Mojo]

Now Fitzgerald signs for $40 million of which $30 million is guaranteed (75%).

This is what worries me and why I started this post.

Pretty soon they'll be 100% guaranteed like stupid MBL.