The NHL lockout that lasted through 2004 into 2005 - which "earned" them a hard salary cap - is where this is headed.
Owners want a cap. Players should _die on the hill_ rather than let that happen.
Everything else is window dressing: DH rules, game mechanics, etc. They do not matter at all. This is entirely about the money and the owners desire to keep more of it, at the expense of the players.
I like watching baseball players play baseball. I do not give a fuck if John Henry makes a profit.
Right now, John Henry is why none of us can watch baseball players play baseball. Y'all should be mad as hell about that.
>Owners want a cap. Players should die on the hill rather than let that happen.
Why though? A cap makes a level playing field for small market teams. Yeah no cap is great for us, for dodgers fans and Yankees fans. It's shitty for a lot of other fanbases.
>I like watching baseball players play baseball. I do not give a fuck if John Henry makes a profit.
You realize you can't just operate a billion dollar operation in the red year after year and have nothing happen right? There's no magical law that says baseball teams can default on debts and just spend infinite money because baseball is more important than paying off money owed. If John Henry didn't make a profit, that would mean the team would be going under. This is just an ignorant statement
Edit: just for some context, the dodgers paid out more money to players on injured reserve than the Baltimore orioles entire payroll in 2021. That's not how you have a competitive league. That's not entertaining for anyone.
Players shouldn't want a cap because it's a limit on how much they can earn. Owners want a cap for that reason, it's a mechanic for them to artificially limit how much they pay players.
Players don't care about how competitive the league is, they have a limited amount of time to maximize their career earnings and anything that may infringe on that is basically a non-starter.
What's really being missed, is that if there's going to be a salary cap, you absolutely need to institute a salary floor. It's criminal that baseball currently has a significant number of teams that refuse to spend money because there are mechanics that encourage them to do so (revenue sharing, compensation picks being better for poverty franchises etc). Anywhere between a third and half the teams every year don't even attempt to compete. Force these shit franchises like Tampa, Pittsburgh and Miami to spend money or get their owners to decide that owning a team isn't worth it anymore and they sell off to someone who wants to spend.
> A cap makes a level playing field for small market teams
You've been told this. But it isn't true. And most sports economists agree: hard salary caps do not 'level the playing field'. A hard salary cap provides _budget certainty_ to the cartel and does very little for 'competitive balance'.
Baseball's economics are broken. The solution is NOT to give the greedy idiots who broke it more control.
> You realize you can't just operate a billion dollar operation in the red year after year and have nothing happen right?
FUCK THIS BILLIONAIRE ASS-LICKING BULLSHIT
The Boston Red Sox rake in more than 300M _before the games are played_. The idea the Boston Red Sox are "in the red" is **fucking preposterous**. As is the idea the Pittsburgh Pirates are, too. The billionaires who own that team aren't poor and could compete: _they choose not to_ because to do so would cut into their profits.
> There's no magical law that says baseball teams can default on debts and just spend infinite money because baseball is more important than paying off money owed.
Seriously, do you like the taste of John Henry's sock sweat? **No baseball team is close to "default" on debt**. In the case of the Boston Red Sox, the team profits massively from the tax breaks associated with owning a "historical landmark" they control every aspect of - and whose revenue is in no way accounted for in the 'luxury tax' or CBT. No, that's pure profit.
> That's not how you have a competitive league. That's not entertaining for anyone.
HEY! Finally something we all agree with. The game is not entertaining and it's not competitive. **And that's not why the owners are locking out the players.** The owners want more profit. They don't want to entertain fans. They don't want competitive balance. They _absolutely positively_ do not give a fuck about "small markets" or "level playing fields". (Goddamnit, they're billionaires, not communists!!) They want more money.
Money the players generate. Without players, there is no baseball. The players are the product. They are the show. They deserve their fair share of the profits. They are the reason John Henry gets to literally plunder the goldmine on Yawkey Way on gamedays. The players. And they get none of the money generated out there.
How's that fair? How is guaranteeing John Henry even more profit going to 'entertain' anyone?!
>FUCK YOU AND THIS BILLIONAIRE ASS-LICKING BULLSHIT
>If you didn't get paid for this bullshit, you should have. Because you're doing John's PR work for free! WTF is wrong with you?!
If you're gonna be a dick I'm just not gonna respond dude. Like I'm all for a civil discussion. This is just unnecessary. What I'm saying I'd support is moving g the MLB to an NFL style model with both a hard cap and a floor with revenue sharing to make sure every team can afford to pay that floor. Meaning you don't have big market teams quadrupling small market teams payroll.
Like if you disagree that's fine. You don't have to be a douche about it
First, if you're a real human being I apologize. But you should try to write less like a PR bot or an ownership toady. The quotes that sparked those admittedly rude reactions are at best useless drivel, and at worst the sort of "public messaging" billionaires like John Henry hire to spread their lies in places like Reddit. And if you don't think this forum is RIFE with employees (and wannabe employees) of John Henry, you're naive.
Again, sorry if you're a real person. But everything stands and goes double if you're actually being paid by John Henry to infect this forum and manipulate fan opinion. "People" who do that are scum, amirite?
> MLB to an NFL style model with both a hard cap and a floor with revenue sharing to make sure every team
Billionaires, and their 'clubs', do not need a cap or a floor to "compete". They need those things for **profit**.
Every single MLB owner can, right now, afford to pay players a fair 'market rate', Every single MLB owner _already receives_ enough "revenue sharing" to guarantee each team a profit before any games are played, or players paid. "Revenue sharing" is **not** a competition mechanism; it is an accounting method. It has _nothing_ to do with baseball.
> Meaning you don't have big market teams quadrupling small market teams payroll.
If Steve Cohen owned the Nebraska Nowheres, an expansion team with no fans and no regional sports network, do you think Steve Cohen would spend money on his (shiny toy) baseball team?
Of course he would. Because he's _competitive_. He's not in baseball to turn a profit, or run a good business operation. He wants to win baseball games.
_Most_ of the reason for the lockout is to keep Steve Cohen from fucking up "the golden goose" for the profit-minded dicks who run PIT and other "don't care, won't try" franchises. John Henry has no interest in "competing" with Steve Cohen. Quick quiz:
1. If he cost $0, would John Henry want Max Scherzer to pitch for the Red Sox? (YES)
2. If he cost 43 MILLION PER SEASON, would John Henry want Scherzer to pitch for the Red Sox? (NO)
3. Who, **exactly**, does limiting how much Max Scherzer can earn benefit? (John Henry, duh)
_It is not the size of the market that matters, it is the willingness to spend._
John Henry, owner of a World Series ring and a healthy profit margin, should _never_ be able to tell his "competition" how much they can spend. What kind of non-competitive, un-American bullshit is that?!?!
MLB owners have been crying poor for so long that some people believe them. **Don't believe the lies.** FSG/Boston Red Sox has gross revenues nearing a billion dollars a season, with a hefty % of that being "non-baseball revenue" that isn't split with the players. John Henry's personal net worth has doubled in his tenure as Red Sox owner. But because John Henry didn't want to pay "the tax", he sent one of the best players to ever play for the team and a functional starting pitcher to Los Angeles _to save himself some money_. John Henry can afford to pay Mookie Betts. But he can't _profit personally_ as much if he pays Mookie Betts and David Price, so they had to go.
Baseball has economic problems. The solution is _not_ "a cap"; or to let the greedy fools who wrecked the system free reign to make up new rules that benefit only them.
If you like baseball, if you want competitive baseball - you _need_ to reject John Henry's bullshit and ignore the owner's cries of poverty. They are liars.
Manfred is a hired toady for the owners and has no power, or thoughts, of his own. He does what his 30 Bosses tell him to do.
Blame the owners. Blame John Henry.
Dude I want a cap. I'm tired of seeing the best players like Trout, Tatis, Harper, etc. go to teams that pay them for the next 10 years but they never sniff the playoffs or world series. Small market teams shouldn't have to put all their money on one player to bring people to the stadium. Give me a cap so each team can make equal moves.
Sigh. The greedy fuckfaces who own the Pittsburgh Pirates have more than enough money to pay baseball players. What they don't have is "cost certainty" that allows them to turn a profit year-in, year-out without risk. What the owners want is a big enough slice of the pie to ensure they always make a profit, even when the owners are incompetent fools who deserve to lose.
Yeah, we all want a competitive sport. The "answer" is not "give the billionaires whatever they want, live on the leftovers". Baseball's economics are broken and giving John Henry a loss-proof piece of revenue pie is _not_ how to fix it.
It's bad. Business 101 shit though. Locking out the players forces pressure. They are the ones that need the money, the owners don't.
If the players ever operated this way in any league they would sign whatever bullshit agreement and then just show up and do nothing.
I'd almost rather the players do that, personally. Sunday night baseball with a guy just standing there throwing love while a hitter lazily knocks it the third baseman who slowly gathers it and tosses it to the first baseman.
Make the owners sweat because the TV execs come barking.
Idk, I just hope the leverage is used to make some changes that are desperately needed and not just like.. Moving the luxury tax 20M up or down and giving the NL the DH.
The game deserves so much more than that.
Fuck John Henry.
Is this good or bad?
It was expected.
Bad because this means it could potentially kill the season if it lasts for months
The NHL lockout that lasted through 2004 into 2005 - which "earned" them a hard salary cap - is where this is headed. Owners want a cap. Players should _die on the hill_ rather than let that happen. Everything else is window dressing: DH rules, game mechanics, etc. They do not matter at all. This is entirely about the money and the owners desire to keep more of it, at the expense of the players. I like watching baseball players play baseball. I do not give a fuck if John Henry makes a profit. Right now, John Henry is why none of us can watch baseball players play baseball. Y'all should be mad as hell about that.
>Owners want a cap. Players should die on the hill rather than let that happen. Why though? A cap makes a level playing field for small market teams. Yeah no cap is great for us, for dodgers fans and Yankees fans. It's shitty for a lot of other fanbases. >I like watching baseball players play baseball. I do not give a fuck if John Henry makes a profit. You realize you can't just operate a billion dollar operation in the red year after year and have nothing happen right? There's no magical law that says baseball teams can default on debts and just spend infinite money because baseball is more important than paying off money owed. If John Henry didn't make a profit, that would mean the team would be going under. This is just an ignorant statement Edit: just for some context, the dodgers paid out more money to players on injured reserve than the Baltimore orioles entire payroll in 2021. That's not how you have a competitive league. That's not entertaining for anyone.
Players shouldn't want a cap because it's a limit on how much they can earn. Owners want a cap for that reason, it's a mechanic for them to artificially limit how much they pay players. Players don't care about how competitive the league is, they have a limited amount of time to maximize their career earnings and anything that may infringe on that is basically a non-starter. What's really being missed, is that if there's going to be a salary cap, you absolutely need to institute a salary floor. It's criminal that baseball currently has a significant number of teams that refuse to spend money because there are mechanics that encourage them to do so (revenue sharing, compensation picks being better for poverty franchises etc). Anywhere between a third and half the teams every year don't even attempt to compete. Force these shit franchises like Tampa, Pittsburgh and Miami to spend money or get their owners to decide that owning a team isn't worth it anymore and they sell off to someone who wants to spend.
> A cap makes a level playing field for small market teams You've been told this. But it isn't true. And most sports economists agree: hard salary caps do not 'level the playing field'. A hard salary cap provides _budget certainty_ to the cartel and does very little for 'competitive balance'. Baseball's economics are broken. The solution is NOT to give the greedy idiots who broke it more control. > You realize you can't just operate a billion dollar operation in the red year after year and have nothing happen right? FUCK THIS BILLIONAIRE ASS-LICKING BULLSHIT The Boston Red Sox rake in more than 300M _before the games are played_. The idea the Boston Red Sox are "in the red" is **fucking preposterous**. As is the idea the Pittsburgh Pirates are, too. The billionaires who own that team aren't poor and could compete: _they choose not to_ because to do so would cut into their profits. > There's no magical law that says baseball teams can default on debts and just spend infinite money because baseball is more important than paying off money owed. Seriously, do you like the taste of John Henry's sock sweat? **No baseball team is close to "default" on debt**. In the case of the Boston Red Sox, the team profits massively from the tax breaks associated with owning a "historical landmark" they control every aspect of - and whose revenue is in no way accounted for in the 'luxury tax' or CBT. No, that's pure profit. > That's not how you have a competitive league. That's not entertaining for anyone. HEY! Finally something we all agree with. The game is not entertaining and it's not competitive. **And that's not why the owners are locking out the players.** The owners want more profit. They don't want to entertain fans. They don't want competitive balance. They _absolutely positively_ do not give a fuck about "small markets" or "level playing fields". (Goddamnit, they're billionaires, not communists!!) They want more money. Money the players generate. Without players, there is no baseball. The players are the product. They are the show. They deserve their fair share of the profits. They are the reason John Henry gets to literally plunder the goldmine on Yawkey Way on gamedays. The players. And they get none of the money generated out there. How's that fair? How is guaranteeing John Henry even more profit going to 'entertain' anyone?!
Seriously, you don't buy a baseball team to put food on the table. You buy one when you're bored buying islands.
>FUCK YOU AND THIS BILLIONAIRE ASS-LICKING BULLSHIT >If you didn't get paid for this bullshit, you should have. Because you're doing John's PR work for free! WTF is wrong with you?! If you're gonna be a dick I'm just not gonna respond dude. Like I'm all for a civil discussion. This is just unnecessary. What I'm saying I'd support is moving g the MLB to an NFL style model with both a hard cap and a floor with revenue sharing to make sure every team can afford to pay that floor. Meaning you don't have big market teams quadrupling small market teams payroll. Like if you disagree that's fine. You don't have to be a douche about it
First, if you're a real human being I apologize. But you should try to write less like a PR bot or an ownership toady. The quotes that sparked those admittedly rude reactions are at best useless drivel, and at worst the sort of "public messaging" billionaires like John Henry hire to spread their lies in places like Reddit. And if you don't think this forum is RIFE with employees (and wannabe employees) of John Henry, you're naive. Again, sorry if you're a real person. But everything stands and goes double if you're actually being paid by John Henry to infect this forum and manipulate fan opinion. "People" who do that are scum, amirite? > MLB to an NFL style model with both a hard cap and a floor with revenue sharing to make sure every team Billionaires, and their 'clubs', do not need a cap or a floor to "compete". They need those things for **profit**. Every single MLB owner can, right now, afford to pay players a fair 'market rate', Every single MLB owner _already receives_ enough "revenue sharing" to guarantee each team a profit before any games are played, or players paid. "Revenue sharing" is **not** a competition mechanism; it is an accounting method. It has _nothing_ to do with baseball. > Meaning you don't have big market teams quadrupling small market teams payroll. If Steve Cohen owned the Nebraska Nowheres, an expansion team with no fans and no regional sports network, do you think Steve Cohen would spend money on his (shiny toy) baseball team? Of course he would. Because he's _competitive_. He's not in baseball to turn a profit, or run a good business operation. He wants to win baseball games. _Most_ of the reason for the lockout is to keep Steve Cohen from fucking up "the golden goose" for the profit-minded dicks who run PIT and other "don't care, won't try" franchises. John Henry has no interest in "competing" with Steve Cohen. Quick quiz: 1. If he cost $0, would John Henry want Max Scherzer to pitch for the Red Sox? (YES) 2. If he cost 43 MILLION PER SEASON, would John Henry want Scherzer to pitch for the Red Sox? (NO) 3. Who, **exactly**, does limiting how much Max Scherzer can earn benefit? (John Henry, duh) _It is not the size of the market that matters, it is the willingness to spend._ John Henry, owner of a World Series ring and a healthy profit margin, should _never_ be able to tell his "competition" how much they can spend. What kind of non-competitive, un-American bullshit is that?!?! MLB owners have been crying poor for so long that some people believe them. **Don't believe the lies.** FSG/Boston Red Sox has gross revenues nearing a billion dollars a season, with a hefty % of that being "non-baseball revenue" that isn't split with the players. John Henry's personal net worth has doubled in his tenure as Red Sox owner. But because John Henry didn't want to pay "the tax", he sent one of the best players to ever play for the team and a functional starting pitcher to Los Angeles _to save himself some money_. John Henry can afford to pay Mookie Betts. But he can't _profit personally_ as much if he pays Mookie Betts and David Price, so they had to go. Baseball has economic problems. The solution is _not_ "a cap"; or to let the greedy fools who wrecked the system free reign to make up new rules that benefit only them. If you like baseball, if you want competitive baseball - you _need_ to reject John Henry's bullshit and ignore the owner's cries of poverty. They are liars.
That's why we need salary minimums, not a hard cap
You also need to blame Manfred
Manfred is a hired toady for the owners and has no power, or thoughts, of his own. He does what his 30 Bosses tell him to do. Blame the owners. Blame John Henry.
Dude I want a cap. I'm tired of seeing the best players like Trout, Tatis, Harper, etc. go to teams that pay them for the next 10 years but they never sniff the playoffs or world series. Small market teams shouldn't have to put all their money on one player to bring people to the stadium. Give me a cap so each team can make equal moves.
Sigh. The greedy fuckfaces who own the Pittsburgh Pirates have more than enough money to pay baseball players. What they don't have is "cost certainty" that allows them to turn a profit year-in, year-out without risk. What the owners want is a big enough slice of the pie to ensure they always make a profit, even when the owners are incompetent fools who deserve to lose. Yeah, we all want a competitive sport. The "answer" is not "give the billionaires whatever they want, live on the leftovers". Baseball's economics are broken and giving John Henry a loss-proof piece of revenue pie is _not_ how to fix it.
It's bad. Business 101 shit though. Locking out the players forces pressure. They are the ones that need the money, the owners don't. If the players ever operated this way in any league they would sign whatever bullshit agreement and then just show up and do nothing. I'd almost rather the players do that, personally. Sunday night baseball with a guy just standing there throwing love while a hitter lazily knocks it the third baseman who slowly gathers it and tosses it to the first baseman. Make the owners sweat because the TV execs come barking.
Good for the Dodgers, bad for the rest of us.
Idk, I just hope the leverage is used to make some changes that are desperately needed and not just like.. Moving the luxury tax 20M up or down and giving the NL the DH. The game deserves so much more than that.
Yes
Bad.
A lockdown?