Average Opening Day Salary Drops 17%

[Kid]

I foresee only good things for this thread.

[kbwsb]

<!--quoteo(post=86622:date=Apr 7 2010, 03:36 AM:name=mindbodyspirit)-->QUOTE (mindbodyspirit @ Apr 7 2010, 03:36 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=86600:date=Apr 6 2010, 06:31 PM:name=jstraw)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (jstraw @ Apr 6 2010, 06:31 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=86597:date=Apr 6 2010, 06:30 PM:name=Lance)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Lance @ Apr 6 2010, 06:30 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=86533:date=Apr 6 2010, 02:59 PM:name=BackyardLegend)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BackyardLegend @ Apr 6 2010, 02:59 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd--><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--sizeo:1--><!--/sizeo-->[size1]While I am not a fan of players making ridiculous money as role players or as bullpen filler, I think a quite valid argument can be made for collusion, should the Players' Association chose to go that route. I can't remember in my lifetime players like Jermaine Dye (25+ HR) or Hank Blalock (20+ HR), for 2 examples, not finding a roster spot SOMEWHERE. I can't remember an off-season where a relatively small group of players got FA pay increases, while the majority either took decreases or had to sign minor league deals. I'm not going to argue supply-side economics, just saying that I find it peculiar that 30 teams, without a notable exception, all followed this pattern. Even Boston, who did sign Lackey, Beltre, Cameron, and Scutaro, still did so below the cost of their combined 2009 salaries. If it happens again after this season, I think we'll be seeing a major suit brought up by the Players' Association, and there is clearly grounds for legal investigation (recession or no). The "market corrections" argument may be valid to a point, but if one looks at the Yankees (coming off of a profitable WS title season) replacing Damon with Winn/Gardner and Matsui with Johnson, clearly there is more going on than just market corrections there.<!--sizec--><!--/sizec-->[/size]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I don't trust the owners as far as I can throw a piano, but on this topic, there seems to be some obvious reasons for the cutback. Below, Tango gives another very good reason: teams are realizing that old guys like Dye suck so badly on defense that they simply aren't worth multi-millions. From the Playing the Percentages website :

<!--quoteo-->QUOTE <!--quotec-->MLBPA: looking for evidence of wrongdoing

By Tangotiger
I’m almost always on the side of the players. But this is silly:

Agents for players, without going into specifics, have claimed they received multiple similar offers for free-agent clients and have pushed the union to contest the practice.

Ok, suppose that there’s a measure that everyone likes. I dunno, let’s call it… WAR. And let’s say that it’s constructed by researchers that both sides respect, say Tango, Rally, and Fangraphs. And say that there’s a site that lists the dollar values, like a Beckett’s price guide or NYSE. Then, teams give out offers that are consistent to what they read. Well, this is a GOOD thing isn’t it? There’s no collusion, there’s no acting in concert. There’s an understanding that, hey, maybe Tango and Rally and Fangraphs know their sh!t.

I mean, Longoria, JJ Hardy, etc, those are much more believable than teams realizing that Jermaine Dye’s poor fielding is actually very costly. But, this is the MLBPA… they care about the veterans almost to the exclusion of the young players.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

[1060Ivy]

The MLBPA is still deciding if they will file a grievance for the 2008 season but they may do so for 2009.

If players union had proof or a compelling argument, this would be in court. The owners have done colluded before and lost in court but it appears to be different this time.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=5061414

[Anna2010]

<!--quoteo(post=86533:date=Apr 6 2010, 02:59 PM:name=BackyardLegend)-->QUOTE (BackyardLegend @ Apr 6 2010, 02:59 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I'm still trying to figure out how baseball salaries have anything to do with the liberal/conservative argument.

Athletes get paid based on the economy of their business. It's a free market—for the most part—where wages are dictated by one's value to the organization.

If you are such a bleeding heart conservative Anna, then you should embrace this idea. And likewise, you should take issue with minimum wage laws that force places like Jewel to pay a 16 year old grocery bagger more than 8.00/hr.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->


Hi BackyardLegend,

I wish that I was able to respond to your post earlier, since I feel that a prompt response would have been beneficial.

Yes, it's true that athletes pay is based on the economy of their business. And as long as the owners are willing to pay those salaries and the fans are willing to pay the ticket prices then they have the right to request their million dollar contracts. But as the economy gets tougher for everyone, you may find that many fans may not be so willing to pay the ticket prices that the owners are asking for us to pay. Then when the owners revenue decreases, then the owners are less likely to pay athletes the higher salaries that they are requesting. When contract renewals come around, they may be given the choice of taking a pay cut, finding a new team to play for, or finding a different line of employment.

Like I mentioned on a previous post, in my personal opinion, athletes are also entertainers. We are seeing many people in radio & TV losing their jobs because their owners are looking for ways to cut cost. Jonathon Brandmeier, most recently of The LOOP-WLUP, lost his job in a labor dispute a few months before is contract was due to end. He was one of Chicago's last high paid celebrities. Many other high paid radio personalities had renegotiated their contracts reducing their wages in exchange for longer contracts (Job security). Soon, we will see the same thing most likely happen to athletes if the economy running a sports team so continues to see a decline in revenue.

Now in case some people may have misunderstood my previous post, I recognize that our economy if changing:

Many people, especially in their 40's and 50's who were expecting to be having their highest standard of living are finding themselves out of work. They are having to settle for part time work. This includes people with college educations and people who are highly stilled in manufacturing jobs now having to settle for jobs that only pay $12.00 per hour. Many of them have house, car, & credit card payments that they don't know how they are going to pay off. Many of those same people most likely over extended themeselves.

Then we have my generation who still thinks that life is one big party. Just in today's Chicago Tribunes online, there is a story about teens retail spending (Which I need to completely read) helping retail stores recover. College kids are spending more money on parties & trips to the Bahamas then they are on their college tuition. My generation has no idea of the value of the dollar or how to manage money. They expect to graduate from college and think that they are owed top dollar when they get their job. Well it takes time to climb that corporate ladder. Well personally, I believe that my generation is going to get a big culture shock when they not only realize that their not going to get paid top dollar, but their going to have to get their hands, clothes,ect. dirty possibly 15 years after they graduate from college and still not achieve the same standard of living that our parents & grandparents had achieved. And those in my generation who don't realize the "new norm" will end up in debt and angry unless they learn the value of a dollar. The same also applies to you grown up if you decide to keep over extending yourselves.


"Bleeding Heart Conservative???" Now last summer when I first joined SOI, I don't remember interacting with you. I wasn't out here long enough for the people who I did interact with to get to know me. I joined SOI last summer for two reasons.
1: I am unable to watch or listen to Cub games and I was hoping to keep up with the Cubs through this forum.
2: I wanted to interact with other Cub Fans.
I also like to talk about other topics as well as have fun while I am on forums that I belong to.

Now you mentioned,BackyardLegend about places like Jewel being forced to pay baggers $8.00 per hour. Well I'm only making $7.40 per hour for taking tickets at a movie theater. This is my 1st payroll job, and I was babysitting last summer.
Now as far as the minimum wage is concerned, yes I do believe that we should have a minimum wage, but it shouldn't be artificially set. If employers are offering only $6.00 per hour and no one is applying for those jobs, then they find that they may have to offer a wage of $7.00 or $8.00 per hour to get people to apply for those jobs.

Now I have another thing to say about minimum wage jobs,BackyardLegend........
Are you listening???
Minimum wage jobs are not meant to be jobs to raise a family on, despite what some liberal politicians may try to claim. They were intended to be entry level jobs for high school & college age kids to develop job stills or for people to work as secondary jobs. As we develop our employment still then we "graduate" to the next level in our working careers and we begin to earn more money.
But if a minimum wage is artificially set, then there is a resentment when a 16 year old bagger at Jewel is making $8.00 per hour and a 40 year old assembly worker is only making $9.00 per hour.

Oh,BTW, BackyardLegend, since I don't remember interacting with you last summer, for your information, I do happen to be 17 years old. Yes, I am a conservative, which would make me a minority among people of my generation. Yes, I do read the newspaper (yes, in print) since I was 11 years old. And yes, I can make up my own mind on my own beliefs.

Now, on another note, BackyardLegend....
Pleased to meet you out here on SOI
I love the Cubs
I do like to talk about baseball while I am out here on SOI, but even on sports radio, other topics of discussion do come up.

Now, LETS GO [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/cubsflag.gif[/img]


Anna [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif[/img]

[Ace]

Hmm...

[Kid]

Yeah. I'm gonna go ahead and call shenanigans.

[rok]

I refuse to read that post out of principle.

[veryzer]

I started to read it, but it was just too long. Can we get kb to highlight the good stuff?

[jstraw]

<!--quoteo(post=87262:date=Apr 8 2010, 08:48 PM:name=Anna2010)-->QUOTE (Anna2010 @ Apr 8 2010, 08:48 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Minimum wage jobs are not meant to be jobs to raise a family on, despite what some liberal politicians may try to claim. They were intended to be entry level jobs for high school & college age kids to develop job stills or for people to work as secondary jobs. As we develop our employment still then we "graduate" to the next level in our working careers and we begin to earn more money.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Your views on minimum wage employment are a Republican fantasy.

As our manufacturing sector continues to contract and we become ever more a service economy, the ratio of grownups with families to up-the-ladder jobs becomes increasingly out of wack.

Service jobs cannot be outsourced. Tasks that must be performed in our homes, our retail stores, our hospitals, our office buildings and our restaurants...must be performed on premises. Since demand for this labor is not going to be diminishing any time soon, it's a free-market wet dream to eliminate as many better paying jobs as possible.

Moving manufacturing and tech jobs offshore accomplishes two things. It reduces these costs of doing business and puts more people in competition for the remaining, menial jobs, thereby putting downward pressure on the value of that labor. This results in real, adjusted earning power by people in the service sector falling off a cliff relative to what it costs to support a family above the poverty line.

I'll skip the part of my response that describes the importance of undocumented workers to this G.O.P. utopia, and how hypocritical conservatives rail against them out of one side of their mouth to score political points with xenophobes while at the same time refusing to do anything that would undermine the benefits they harvest from having a cheap, fearful source of labor ever present.

The idea that grocery baggers, bus boys, groundskeepers, etc. are primarily young people entering the workforce, hasn't been true for decades. Our economy needs a lot of people doing this work and frankly, <i>making more people</i> to do the work. Allowing them (us) to live and raise their families in dignity and security is the right thing to do.

Further, the standard conservative arguments and criticisms regarding low-wage earners are dishonest. Examples of individuals who have educated or entrepreneured themselves out of poverty are a canard and irrelevant. Individuals can do this, for sure. But there is not room in our economy for tens of millions of additional people to do this. Unskilled labor must still be done by many millions of people.

There is no America possible where 300 million people reside in the middle class. It is possible to decrease the rate at which the gap between the rich and poor grows. Our tax system needs to reward reinvestment in hiring, research and development, infrastructure, the provision of healthcare, etc., so that the oligarchs running things have incentive to do the sort of things that diminish that gap, rather than just stuff another billion into their golden mattresses.

Nothing that smells any good trickles down. The free market is frankly a myth. It's a game rigged by the interests that have the leverage to rig it.

If it's not managed better the number of people that can afford to buy all the crap shrinks. We have a consumerist culture that has done a really good job of keeping people lusting after things they can do without. But there are limits. Ask anyone that owns a restaurant or a clothing store what the recession has done to consumer behavior. And remember when gas was pushing $4 in '08? Pushed, people will begin to exercise discretion.

Pushed, people can get real ugly too. Where do you think all this circle the wagons tea bagger crap comes from?

Economies managed for the benefit of the few lead to revolutions. A decent minimum wage is a part of having a society where the people that we rely on to do the least pleasant tasks can do so in dignity and security.

[jstraw]

Now THAT was too long.

[Butcher]

<!--quoteo(post=87350:date=Apr 9 2010, 08:35 AM:name=jstraw)-->QUOTE (jstraw @ Apr 9 2010, 08:35 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Now THAT was too long.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I read the whole thing, though. Good stuff.

[Coldneck]

<!--quoteo(post=87360:date=Apr 9 2010, 10:39 AM:name=Butcher)-->QUOTE (Butcher @ Apr 9 2010, 10:39 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=87350:date=Apr 9 2010, 08:35 AM:name=jstraw)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (jstraw @ Apr 9 2010, 08:35 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Now THAT was too long.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I read the whole thing, though. Good stuff.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Or a bunch of bullshit, depending on your point of view.

[Butcher]

<!--quoteo(post=87364:date=Apr 9 2010, 09:42 AM:name=Coldneck)-->QUOTE (Coldneck @ Apr 9 2010, 09:42 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=87360:date=Apr 9 2010, 10:39 AM:name=Butcher)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Apr 9 2010, 10:39 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=87350:date=Apr 9 2010, 08:35 AM:name=jstraw)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (jstraw @ Apr 9 2010, 08:35 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Now THAT was too long.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I read the whole thing, though. Good stuff.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Or a bunch of bullshit, depending on your point of view.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'd go with the former.

[ruby23]

Remember when "anna" said "she" flunked a grade?





This creature is a 35 year old dude.

[jstraw]

<!--quoteo(post=87372:date=Apr 9 2010, 09:57 AM:name=ruby23)-->QUOTE (ruby23 @ Apr 9 2010, 09:57 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Remember when "anna" said "she" flunked a grade?





This creature is a 35 year old dude.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Oh, I know. I still felt like ranting.

I don't see thoughts expressed that well by college students....and I know I'm not telling you anything there.