Posts: 14,143
Threads: 90
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
0
Posts: 6,498
Threads: 24
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
So Hawk is singing the praises of a plan where is alienating an entire team and making the organization look bad? Sounds about right.
Posts: 9
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2015
Reputation:
0
Quote:Looks like LaRoche finally issued a statement, basically telling his side of the story. As I thought, there was (a little) more to the story...but not nearly enough in my opinion to make the situation seem less crazy.
Turns out that he and the White Sox had an "agreement" that he could bring his son to games, practices, clubhouse, etc when he first signed. However, entering this season KW told him to scale back Drake's clubhouse visits, then later was told not to bring him to that ballpark at all. This ultimately led to his decision to hang it up. It doesn't sound like this agreement was something that was written in his contract, but rather just a verbal understanding before he signed with the Sox. He said he was forced to chose his family over his job.
I can understand the love towards his child - in fact he seems to be an outstanding father - but not being able to be with your kid 4-5 hours a day while you work is a deal breaker for your career? That's a little excessive I think. I only spend 3 hours a day during the week with my daughter (get home from work at 5 then she's in bed by 8). Does that make me a bad father because I have to work without her being around? To each his own I guess.
Yeah, this makes no sense to me unless he signs on somewhere else. I could understand if he thought being in/around the clubhouse was really important to his son and his baseball development, but now his son won't be around a clubhouse and the father's out of a job. I think the simplest answer is that he has plenty of FU money at this point and doesn't have to accept any shitty situations he doesn't like. Plus the fact that he's horrible makes it a little easier.
Posts: 1,720
Threads: 41
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
I'm fairly certain he can't just retire and then sign with a new team. The Sox would have to release him from his contract. If he wants to come back, it's gonna be with the White Sox.
Now, if he sits out this whole year and comes back next year he will be able to sign with anyone because his contract is expired after this season any way.
At least I think that is how it works.
Posts: 5,185
Threads: 174
Joined: Oct 2008
Reputation:
0
I may be wrong, but I don't think a player can get out of being contractually bound to a team by electing to sit out for the balance of the contract rather than playing for the team. I think he would still be bound to the Sox if he tried to come back next year. I'm not sure what it would mean in terms of contract (i.e., I don't know but I would be surprised that if a player retires and comes back, the team's options would be to pay him at his old rate of pay or release him, but it's possible).
This is not some silly theory that's unsupported and deserves being mocked by photos of Xena. ![[Image: ITgoyeg.png]](http://i.imgur.com/ITgoyeg.png)
Posts: 14,143
Threads: 90
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
0
Quote:Mar 21, 2:23 AM EDT
ONLY ON AP: MLB UPS PROSPECT SPENDING, OVERALL PCT STEADY
BY RONALD BLUM
AP BASEBALL WRITER
Major league teams steeply increased the money spent on young players last year, when several Cuban prospects got big-money deals. Still, the overall percentage of revenue devoted to players has remained relatively stable for a decade.
Financial data released by Major League Baseball to The Associated Press showed the big leaguers' share of net revenue was between 48.5 percent and 51.7 percent each year since 2006.
Dollars spent on amateur players and minor leaguers rose by 29 percent last year - four times the increase in big league compensation. Counting signing bonuses for amateurs and minor league salaries, revenue devoted to players has ranged from 53.7 percent in 2012 to 57.5 percent last year.
"The data shows that the percentage of our revenue that has been paid to players has been fairly consistent," said Dan Halem, MLB's chief legal officer. "Obviously, it's a free market and clubs can spend however much they choose. We've seen an uptick in spending on the amateur side, and on the major league side it fluctuates slightly up and down but it has stayed within a range."
Scott Boras, the most prominent player agent, said at the general managers' meetings in November that the players' share of revenue had dropped to 43 percent. Boras is including gross revenue from Major League Baseball Advanced Media, which formed in 2000, and the MLB Network, which launched in 2009 and is two-thirds owned by MLB. The expenses of running those companies are deducted to determine their net revenue.
During his final season as baseball commissioner, Bud Selig said revenue would exceed $9 billion in 2014, but that was the gross figure.
"We believe that using net income for MLBAM and the network is appropriate for assessing the percentage of revenue that owners pay to players," Halem said. "Owners only can spend the net profits of those businesses, not gross revenues which they never receive."
MLB said net revenue rose from $7.16 billion in 2013 to $7.79 billion in 2014 to $8.15 billion last year.
Dollars devoted to big leaguers climbed from $3.59 billion in 2013 to $3.87 billion in 2014 to $4.15 million last year; the amount on amateurs and minor leaguers was $420 million annually in 2013 and '14, then jumped to $540 million last year, when several Cuban defectors and young Dominicans received large signing bonuses.
Boston agreed to pay $31.5 million alone to Yoan Moncada, a 19-year-old Cuban second baseman. Three other Cuban prospects agreed to bonuses of $8 million or more: Arizona pitcher Yoan Lopez, Los Angeles Angels shortstop Roberto Baldoquin and Los Angeles Dodgers pitcher Pablo Fernandez.
The Major League Baseball Players Association has access to MLB's figures, and union head Tony Clark described the percentage devoted to players as "fairly constant."
"Two or three percentage points one way or the other is always room for improvement," he said of the fluctuations.
Boras did not want to comment on MLB's figures, but did say he thought gross revenue should be used to determine increases in teams' signing bonus pools for amateur players. The draft figures to be a key discussion matter in talks for a collective bargaining agreement to succeed the labor deal that expires Dec. 1. Under the 2012-16 agreement, the pools increase annually at the rate of the rise in total industry revenue - defined as MLB did in these figures.
"I trust in negotiations of the draft itself, and this is a union matter, that attention is paid to outside sources and expenses affecting the amount of money that teams can spend on drafted players pursuant to a calculation of net versus gross revenues," Boras said.
In other sports, the players' percentage is defined as part of salary caps. NFL players are guaranteed 47 percent of defined revenue, while NBA players receive 49 to 51 percent of basketball related income and NHL players get 50 percent of hockey related revenues.
Despite the lack of a cap, MLB teams appear to be able to successfully match their player spending with predicted revenue.
"They have a pretty good sense depending on team performance of what their revenue streams are going to be over the next three to four years," Halem said, "and they budget accordingly."
Posts: 3,765
Threads: 121
Joined: Jun 2009
Reputation:
0
Dodger's Ethier out 10-14 weeks with broken tibia.
Posts: 14,143
Threads: 90
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
0
Hopefully this isn't a bad omen of the cable bubble bursting before 2019.
Quote:The Dodgers and Time Warner slash the price of their channel for other cable companies
By Craig Calcaterra | Mar 23, 2016, 9:46 AM EDT
Its Dodgers Day here, I guess. Next up: their perpetually messed up TV situation.
As weve talked about many, many times in the past, the Dodgers own their own cable network, SportsNet LA, along with Time Warner. Obviously the channel appears on Time Warner cable in southern California. Most homes in Los Angeles do not get Time Warner Cable, however. They get DirecTV or AT&T or Verizon or Cox or someone. As a result, right out of the box, the Dodgers and Time Warner had to get carriage deals for their channel on those other cable networks in order for the Dodgers to be seen in L.A.
Except they havent been able to. Since 2014, the majority at first the vast, vast majority of Dodgers fans in L.A. could not see their team. Why? Because the other cable carriers balked at the steep asking price for the Dodgers channel. Those fees are charged per-subscriber. Verizon, for example, would have to pay the Dodgers and Time Warner, say, $5 per subscriber, to carry it. That cost is passed along to the subscribers, of course. Including those who dont watch any sports at all or who dont like the Dodgers. Everyones cable bills go up-and-up and, eventually, many people just say forget it, I dont want cable anymore. So-called cord-cutters have cut into the bottom line both broadcasters and carriers in recent years.
In the past year or so there has been a touch of progress. Charter and Bright House cable have taken on the Dodgers. But most people still cant see them on their cable systems. So now the Dodgers and Time Warner have lowered the price. From the L.A. Times:
As part of the new proposal, Time Warner Cable has offered the channel to other providers at a cost of about $3.50 per month per subscriber home, according to two people familiar with the proposal who were not authorized to discuss deal terms.
The proposal fashioned by Time Warner Cable would be a one-year deal covering the upcoming season.
So far, none of the other pay-TV providers have agreed to play ball, although talks with at least two providers are in the early stages and are expected to accelerate in the next week as the new season approaches, said two knowledgeable people who asked not to be identified.
Maybe this new, lower price gets the Dodgers on cable systems that serve more people in Los Angeles. Maybe it doesnt. One wonders, however, if a lot of people have simply gotten used to the idea of never watching the Dodgers on TV and even at this reduced price it doesnt work out great for the carriers.
Also: maybe that lower price $3.50 instead of $5 or whatever means that the Dodgers multi-billon cable deal will cause Time Warner to take a bath and will make giving teams such large deals seem like a less appealing idea in the future.
Major League Baseball is fueled by cable TV dollars. There are signs that this fuel is the result of an unsustainable bubble. I feel like, a few years from now, the broadcast and financial landscape of MLB and sports in general is gonna look very, very different than it does now.
Posts: 2,831
Threads: 279
Joined: Oct 2008
Reputation:
0
Generally speaking ST stats are meaningless, but I honestly hope this means something --
Giants starting pitchers this spring:
Bumgarner - 3 starts, 7.2IP, 13H, 9ER, 3HR, 10.57ERA
Cueto - 2 starts, 4.1IP, 9H, 8ER, 2HR, 16.62ERA
Samardzija - 5 starts, 19.0IP, 27H, 18ER, 5HR, 8.53ERA
Cain - 1 start, 2.2IP, 7H, 3ER, 1HR, 10.12ERA
Peavy - 5 starts, 17.1IP, 32H, 16ER, 5HR, 8.31ERA
It would be glorious to see SF self destruct.
I got nothin'.
Andy
Posts: 743
Threads: 0
Joined: Mar 2011
Reputation:
0
Fuck, that rotation is ridiculous
I just want to drink beer and play atari
Posts: 3,167
Threads: 12
Joined: Feb 2009
Reputation:
0
I would be surprised if Heston isn't one of the Giants starters out of Spring Training (instead of Cain or Peavy).
One dick can poke an eye out. A hundred dicks can move mountains.
--Veryzer
Posts: 11,866
Threads: 392
Joined: Oct 2008
Reputation:
0
Quote:Generally speaking ST stats are meaningless, but I honestly hope this means something --
Giants starting pitchers this spring:
Bumgarner - 3 starts, 7.2IP, 13H, 9ER, 3HR, 10.57ERA
Cueto - 2 starts, 4.1IP, 9H, 8ER, 2HR, 16.62ERA
Samardzija - 5 starts, 19.0IP, 27H, 18ER, 5HR, 8.53ERA
Cain - 1 start, 2.2IP, 7H, 3ER, 1HR, 10.12ERA
Peavy - 5 starts, 17.1IP, 32H, 16ER, 5HR, 8.31ERA
It would be glorious to see SF self destruct.
They should be legitimately concerned about Shark. And Cain has sucked for a while, too. And Peavy is old and shitty.
In fact, Bumgarner is the only one where I think you can pretty much dismiss his numbers and not worry about at all. And Cueto has only pitched 4 innings. Probably nothing to worry about there, either.
Posts: 599
Threads: 1
Joined: May 2014
Reputation:
0
So Will Smith of the Brewers tore his LCL trying to take his shoe off.
Signature.
Posts: 8,046
Threads: 101
Joined: Jun 2009
Reputation:
0
Untie...then pull. Write it down.
Posts: 14,143
Threads: 90
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
0
|
