Posted by strikeout26 on 2/8/2019 2:44:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 2/8/2019 2:36:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 2/8/2019 2:29:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 2/8/2019 2:27:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 2/8/2019 2:25:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 2/8/2019 2:23:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 2/8/2019 2:20:00 PM (view original):
If you really want to push to your argument, why not talk about the minor league player that is making $20,000/year instead of the level where guys are averaging over $4M/year.

Oh don’t even get me started on the slave labor that is the minor leagues.

They have the option not to play. They aren't being forced to do anything. They sign into a consensual agreement where they know the terns prior to joining.

Can Major League Baseball exist in its current form without minor league players?

For sure. I've always thought there were too many levels and too many rounds in the draft. MiLB games are a bunch of guys that really have no prayer of making the big leagues.

It can’t. It needs the development. Almost all draft picks need seasoning in the minors before they can play at the major league level. The league needs those org guys that have no prayer to maintain its primary product.

If your question was referring to not having a MiLB system at all, then yeah it needs a minor league system. It doesn't need 5+ MiLB levels.

That is irrelevant to my original point. Each individual still has the option not to sign a deal. They enter a consensual agreement for the small amount they make. No one is forcing them to sign the deal.

It’s absolutely consensual but also there’s no alternative if you want to be an MLB player.

We’re kind of in the weeds with th MiLB stuff but I do think it’s interesting that you’re so pro-“freedom” and anti safety-net when it comes to the sick or the poor or otherwise vulnerable while at the same time being so anti-freedom when it comes to major league players and so interested in protecting the wallets of billionaires.

Posted by bad_luck on 2/8/2019 1:07:00 PM (view original):

Posted by wylie715 on 2/8/2019 12:55:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 2/7/2019 9:28:00 PM (view original):
I haven't ran any actual numbers, but I'm not sure any player is worth $35M/year. Saying that, I think he's worth more than Harper simply because he can play SS adequately if needed.

of course, if someone is willing to pay him $25 million a year, one could argue he is worth it, but I agree. $35 million a year to play a game does seem excessive.

It’s weird that people question whether or not players should make so much to “play a game” but no one ever questions whether the owners should make so much for hosting a game.

the owners invested a lot of money in their teams and continue to do so. why shouldn't they make money off of their investment? My boss certainly males more money then I do, but he started the business, he built up the business so he should make more off the business than I do.
Although I must admit it is annoying to constantly hear millionaires arguing with billionaires over money.

Posted by bad_luck on 2/8/2019 2:22:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 2/8/2019 2:17:00 PM (view original):
And Aaron Judge just made $600K to play a child's game for 9 months. I guarantee that everyone on this website would be okay making $600K to play a game for 3/4 of a year.

It’s not a child’s game. It’s big, big business. Multi-billions are made off of the direct labor of the players. They should get the majority of it.

sure, but is there anyone here who wouldn't take $600,000/year to play that "big, big business"?

Posted by bad_luck on 2/8/2019 3:20:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 2/8/2019 2:44:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 2/8/2019 2:36:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 2/8/2019 2:29:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 2/8/2019 2:27:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 2/8/2019 2:25:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 2/8/2019 2:23:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 2/8/2019 2:20:00 PM (view original):
If you really want to push to your argument, why not talk about the minor league player that is making $20,000/year instead of the level where guys are averaging over $4M/year.

Oh don’t even get me started on the slave labor that is the minor leagues.

They have the option not to play. They aren't being forced to do anything. They sign into a consensual agreement where they know the terns prior to joining.

Can Major League Baseball exist in its current form without minor league players?

For sure. I've always thought there were too many levels and too many rounds in the draft. MiLB games are a bunch of guys that really have no prayer of making the big leagues.

It can’t. It needs the development. Almost all draft picks need seasoning in the minors before they can play at the major league level. The league needs those org guys that have no prayer to maintain its primary product.

If your question was referring to not having a MiLB system at all, then yeah it needs a minor league system. It doesn't need 5+ MiLB levels.

That is irrelevant to my original point. Each individual still has the option not to sign a deal. They enter a consensual agreement for the small amount they make. No one is forcing them to sign the deal.

It’s absolutely consensual but also there’s no alternative if you want to be an MLB player.

We’re kind of in the weeds with th MiLB stuff but I do think it’s interesting that you’re so pro-“freedom” and anti safety-net when it comes to the sick or the poor or otherwise vulnerable while at the same time being so anti-freedom when it comes to major league players and so interested in protecting the wallets of billionaires.

I don't care who gets the money. I've already said that I think they should have more negotiating power early in their career. I think you read very selectively. I said they aren't entitled to a majority of the revenue. If they consensually negotiate a deal that gives them a large portion of revenues, good for them. But to say that they deserve the majority of the revenues is asinine. They deserve what they agree to contractually. That's what they deserve. I'm not protecting anyone's wallets I just don't have a disdain for the wealthy like some other people.

Posted by strikeout26 on 2/8/2019 3:52:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 2/8/2019 3:20:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 2/8/2019 2:44:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 2/8/2019 2:36:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 2/8/2019 2:29:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 2/8/2019 2:27:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 2/8/2019 2:25:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 2/8/2019 2:23:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 2/8/2019 2:20:00 PM (view original):
If you really want to push to your argument, why not talk about the minor league player that is making $20,000/year instead of the level where guys are averaging over $4M/year.

Oh don’t even get me started on the slave labor that is the minor leagues.

They have the option not to play. They aren't being forced to do anything. They sign into a consensual agreement where they know the terns prior to joining.

Can Major League Baseball exist in its current form without minor league players?

For sure. I've always thought there were too many levels and too many rounds in the draft. MiLB games are a bunch of guys that really have no prayer of making the big leagues.

It can’t. It needs the development. Almost all draft picks need seasoning in the minors before they can play at the major league level. The league needs those org guys that have no prayer to maintain its primary product.

If your question was referring to not having a MiLB system at all, then yeah it needs a minor league system. It doesn't need 5+ MiLB levels.

That is irrelevant to my original point. Each individual still has the option not to sign a deal. They enter a consensual agreement for the small amount they make. No one is forcing them to sign the deal.

It’s absolutely consensual but also there’s no alternative if you want to be an MLB player.

We’re kind of in the weeds with th MiLB stuff but I do think it’s interesting that you’re so pro-“freedom” and anti safety-net when it comes to the sick or the poor or otherwise vulnerable while at the same time being so anti-freedom when it comes to major league players and so interested in protecting the wallets of billionaires.

I don't care who gets the money. I've already said that I think they should have more negotiating power early in their career. I think you read very selectively. I said they aren't entitled to a majority of the revenue. If they consensually negotiate a deal that gives them a large portion of revenues, good for them. But to say that they deserve the majority of the revenues is asinine. They deserve what they agree to contractually. That's what they deserve. I'm not protecting anyone's wallets I just don't have a disdain for the wealthy like some other people.

Players also make money from endorsements and learn managerial and coaching and analytical skills. It’s not a one way street. There players are blessed to have hit the genetic lottery. David Price is set for life.

Posted by wylie715 on 2/8/2019 3:27:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 2/8/2019 2:22:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 2/8/2019 2:17:00 PM (view original):
And Aaron Judge just made $600K to play a child's game for 9 months. I guarantee that everyone on this website would be okay making $600K to play a game for 3/4 of a year.

It’s not a child’s game. It’s big, big business. Multi-billions are made off of the direct labor of the players. They should get the majority of it.

sure, but is there anyone here who wouldn't take $600,000/year to play that "big, big business"?

Typical b_l BS. I guess this means he thinks cooks at McDonalds should have the highest salaries in the Company, since the Company makes it's money off their direct labor.

Posted by all3 on 2/8/2019 4:23:00 PM (view original):

Posted by wylie715 on 2/8/2019 3:27:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 2/8/2019 2:22:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 2/8/2019 2:17:00 PM (view original):
And Aaron Judge just made $600K to play a child's game for 9 months. I guarantee that everyone on this website would be okay making $600K to play a game for 3/4 of a year.

It’s not a child’s game. It’s big, big business. Multi-billions are made off of the direct labor of the players. They should get the majority of it.

sure, but is there anyone here who wouldn't take $600,000/year to play that "big, big business"?

Typical b_l BS. I guess this means he thinks cooks at McDonalds should have the highest salaries in the Company, since the Company makes it's money off their direct labor.

LOL

Yeah, that’s dumb. No one goes to the McDonalds on main st instead of the one on 3rd ave because Darrell is the grill cook on main.

MLB players are the product. We watch games because of them.

Posted by bad_luck on 2/8/2019 6:05:00 PM (view original):
Yeah, that’s dumb. No one goes to the McDonalds on main st instead of the one on 3rd ave because Darrell is the grill cook on main.

MLB players are the product. We watch games because of them.

Ever hear the saying “I root for the laundry”? I agree that the players are the draw but they get a huge benefit of that with the comp and fame to claim otherwise is idiotic.

Posted by bad_luck on 2/8/2019 6:05:00 PM (view original):
Yeah, that’s dumb. No one goes to the McDonalds on main st instead of the one on 3rd ave because Darrell is the grill cook on main.

MLB players are the product. We watch games because of them.

wait...Darrell is at the Main St McDonalds now???

Posted by cccp1014 on 2/8/2019 6:22:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 2/8/2019 6:05:00 PM (view original):
Yeah, that’s dumb. No one goes to the McDonalds on main st instead of the one on 3rd ave because Darrell is the grill cook on main.

MLB players are the product. We watch games because of them.

Ever hear the saying “I root for the laundry”? I agree that the players are the draw but they get a huge benefit of that with the comp and fame to claim otherwise is idiotic.

also, they choose to attempt to play MLB. No one is forcing them to try to make a living that way.

This is becoming lunacy. The product is the game. People watch the game to see if their team wins or not. If the game is 15-3, no one is watching. The TV's are being turned off. People are leaving the stadium. The players are the means of production. The more competitive the game, the better the product. Uncompetitive teams don't have many spectators regardless of who is on the field. The only difference between sports and other businesses is that we get to see the product being made and there is entertainment in watching it being made.

The Rays have no fan base because they suck. They have (have had) good players, but nobody still went to the games because the product (the games) sucked. It is not complicated to understand. People want to know how individual players perform for the sole fact that it impacts the win/loss column.

Posted by cccp1014 on 2/8/2019 6:22:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 2/8/2019 6:05:00 PM (view original):
Yeah, that’s dumb. No one goes to the McDonalds on main st instead of the one on 3rd ave because Darrell is the grill cook on main.

MLB players are the product. We watch games because of them.

Ever hear the saying “I root for the laundry”? I agree that the players are the draw but they get a huge benefit of that with the comp and fame to claim otherwise is idiotic.

Who claimed otherwise?

Posted by strikeout26 on 2/8/2019 6:37:00 PM (view original):
This is becoming lunacy. The product is the game. People watch the game to see if their team wins or not. If the game is 15-3, no one is watching. The TV's are being turned off. People are leaving the stadium. The players are the means of production. The more competitive the game, the better the product. Uncompetitive teams don't have many spectators regardless of who is on the field. The only difference between sports and other businesses is that we get to see the product being made and there is entertainment in watching it being made.

The Rays have no fan base because they suck. They have (have had) good players, but nobody still went to the games because the product (the games) sucked. It is not complicated to understand. People want to know how individual players perform for the sole fact that it impacts the win/loss column.

Yeah, sorry, I disagree. I regularly watch entire Angel games even though I dont care about the Angels because of Trout. If I catch a Yankee game on TV, I’ll stick around through the commercials for the next half inning if Judge or Stanton are coming up to bat. I probably saw Scherzer and Verlander throw 70 or 80 innings each last season, and I give zero ***** about the Nationals and Astros.

The players are the product. If we replaced them all with non-prospect minor league players, the games would be just as competitive and almost no one would watch.

Posted by strikeout26 on 2/8/2019 11:54:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 2/8/2019 11:47:00 AM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 2/8/2019 11:41:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 2/8/2019 11:33:00 AM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 2/8/2019 11:30:00 AM (view original):
You don't care about freedoms because you have them and take them for granted. Talk to people who don't have the freedoms that we have and see what kind of response you get. We way too often take our freedoms for granted.

I am clearly not talking about bill of rights or an authoritarian regime.

I don't think microaggressions of freedom are that important.

On this issue, my logic is, 'Pile up the dead bodies that we could have kept alive, whichever plan has the least dead bodies wins.'

I'm not sure I know how to respond to this. It doesn't have much substance. I'll try. When a country becomes dictatorial, tyrannical, and authoritarian it doesn't happen overnight. The freedoms slowly erode until you end up with a very, very bad situation.

Healthcare for all is very important, but it's not as simple as "taking the plan with the fewest dead bodies." There are many factors that come into play.

Also, remember that no one is denied healthcare in our country with or without insurance. All to often, health insurance and health care are seen as one and the same when they're not.

You are making a slippery slope argument. I hate slippery slope arguments. I don't think that better healthcare means that we are more vulnerable to a dictatorship. If anything, it's the opposite. The US institutions are stronger than that. Also you were the same person who said that Trump wasn't destroying institutions, correct?

It's not a slippery slope argument at all. I'm saying that we need healthcare reform that takes care in preserving freedoms and liberty while still providing necessary treatments for the poor. Obamacare did not do this.

It definitely is a slippery slope argument. You are arguing that a small reduction in personal freedoms leads to authoritarianism.

Sure, ideally that would be achieved. I don't see any plan that does this.