It is currently Thu Jan 30, 2025 6:10 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 515 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 ... 18  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Future of MLB
PostPosted: Thu Mar 03, 2022 8:43 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 10:00 am
Posts: 80219
Location: Rogers Park, USA
pizza_Place: JB Alberto's
No one can blame Jerry for this one. Manfred was not his guy.

_________________
Ecclesiastes 5:8


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Future of MLB
PostPosted: Thu Mar 03, 2022 8:51 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2018 9:19 pm
Posts: 32562
pizza_Place: What??
This Ends in Antioch wrote:
They have expenses aside from salaries.

Sharing revenues is pre expenses.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Future of MLB
PostPosted: Thu Mar 03, 2022 9:00 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 93295
Location: To the left of my post
Nardi wrote:
Brick wrote:
Nardi wrote:
Brick wrote:
Nardi wrote:
Brick wrote:
Are you saying they are lying about talking to a MLBPA spokesman? This was done in 2018 in a major news source. I don't think MLBPA has called them out for making it up.

MLB Advanced Media is included in the data in the chart. Based on the date of the Disney purchase, it probably would be in the 2018 numbers but the chart only goes up to 2017 since the article was written in 2018.

How do we look at the Braves $104 million profit after the 2021 revenues have been dispersed?

What do you mean?

The Braves made $104 million profit after $457 million spent. That seems to be a justifiable profit for the World Series champions.

Can we call that $561M in revenue?

The math checks out.

The reason I focus on the Braves is they are the only franchise with open books. 54% of 561 is $302M. They averaged 29,000 fans and were 8th in local TV revenue. MLB offer is $214M ceiling. With higher penalties than the last CBA.
I changed my mind. Players should offer revenue sharing.

The Braves did by far their best year ever. In 2019, they only did $467 million in total revenue. 2020 doesn't count since they got crushed and only got $178 million.

It also should be pointed out that $42 million in revenue was real estate development so it's really $509M. However, yes, the Braves almost certainly paid far less than 54% of baseball revenue on player salaries but that is also the World Series champs who saw revenue jump by more than $90 million because of it.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Future of MLB
PostPosted: Thu Mar 03, 2022 9:09 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 11:36 pm
Posts: 19562
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
No one can blame Jerry for this one. Manfred was not his guy.


There are people who really think Manfred is going against what the owners want to happen right now?

_________________
Frank Coztansa wrote:
conns7901 wrote:
Not over yet.
Yes it is.


CDOM wrote:
When this is all over, which is not going to be for a while, Trump will be re-elected President.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Future of MLB
PostPosted: Thu Mar 03, 2022 9:10 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2018 9:19 pm
Posts: 32562
pizza_Place: What??
Brick wrote:
The Braves did by far their best year ever. In 2019, they only did $467 million in total revenue. 2020 doesn't count since they got crushed and only got $178 million.

It also should be pointed out that $42 million in revenue was real estate development so it's really $509M. However, yes, the Braves almost certainly paid far less than 54% of baseball revenue on player salaries but that is also the World Series champs who saw revenue jump by more than $90 million because of it.

Non-Covid year would have made it better. 29,000 fans per game. IIRC, there were restrictions until like June in most cities.

Where does the $90 mildough estimate come from?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Future of MLB
PostPosted: Thu Mar 03, 2022 9:13 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 3:40 pm
Posts: 16689
pizza_Place: Boni Vino
conns7901 wrote:
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
No one can blame Jerry for this one. Manfred was not his guy.


There are people who really think Manfred is going against what the owners want to happen right now?


I don't know if the owners are all on the same page, so it's hard to know what Manfred is being told.

_________________
To IkeSouth, bigfan wrote:
Are you stoned or pissed off, or both, when you create these postings?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Future of MLB
PostPosted: Thu Mar 03, 2022 9:13 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2018 9:19 pm
Posts: 32562
pizza_Place: What??
conns7901 wrote:
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
No one can blame Jerry for this one. Manfred was not his guy.


There are people who really think Manfred is going against what the owners want to happen right now?

People need to realize owners need 23 votes to approve a CBA. There's 18 owners who will make money no matter the terms.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Future of MLB
PostPosted: Thu Mar 03, 2022 9:18 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2015 9:46 pm
Posts: 10248
pizza_Place: Q's Hillside
conns7901 wrote:
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
No one can blame Jerry for this one. Manfred was not his guy.


There are people who really think Manfred is going against what the owners want to happen right now?

I'm not sure the owners are united, just as I don't think the players really unanimously rejected the last offer. But the owners are under a gag order with heavy fines if they speak out publicly on the topic.

The timing of the Jeter resignation is odd, and I won't be surprised if the Marlins' owner was one pushing a hard line position. It only takes eight owners to veto any proposal.

Florida, Pittsburgh, Tampa, Arizona, Baltimore (now that old man Angelos is out of the day to day), Cleveland, and of course Colorado. That's seven right there. Throw in a Houston or a Chicago team, and you have a blockade of anything.

_________________
"When people want their version of the truth, they go find it, no matter how baseless their beliefs." -- Ken Rosenthal


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Future of MLB
PostPosted: Thu Mar 03, 2022 9:27 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 93295
Location: To the left of my post
Nardi wrote:
Non-Covid year would have made it better. 29,000 fans per game. IIRC, there were restrictions until like June in most cities.
They were restricted in April and full by the start of May. They did sell 300,000 less tickets than their all time high in 2019 in the regular season but made a huge amount of money in the playoffs.

Nardi wrote:
Where does the $90 mildough estimate come from?
Revenue in 2021 was up $90 million from 2019.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Future of MLB
PostPosted: Thu Mar 03, 2022 9:29 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri May 25, 2018 8:58 am
Posts: 6382
pizza_Place: Frozen
On 5@5 one topic was "The J-Hey Kid" going off on Instagram about the MLB lockout tactics, and their cost saving foot dragging in "20.

Haugh generically said JHK did " a terrific job of articulating". Dustin Rhodes was "impressed". Mully chose his words wisely (aware of who he was critiquing) and said "he didn't know if he (bad money) was the guy who should be yellin' at the owners" from his yacht.

Then Haugh seeing Mully had opened the door to critique JHK stepping-on-eggshells agreed Mully made a good point that slipped his mind when he first spoke.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Future of MLB
PostPosted: Thu Mar 03, 2022 9:55 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2020 8:05 pm
Posts: 25208
pizza_Place: Pizanos
Nardi wrote:
This Ends in Antioch wrote:
They have expenses aside from salaries.

Sharing revenues is pre expenses.

In the hypothetical MLB revenue sharing agreement?

_________________
Peter Clavin wrote:
Because you are stupid, maybe read some books educate yourself.
Nardi wrote:
We walk, talk, and won't shit our pants


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Future of MLB
PostPosted: Thu Mar 03, 2022 9:59 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 3:40 pm
Posts: 16689
pizza_Place: Boni Vino
vitoscotti wrote:
On 5@5 one topic was "The J-Hey Kid" going off on Instagram about the MLB lockout tactics, and their cost saving foot dragging in "20.

Haugh generically said JHK did " a terrific job of articulating". Dustin Rhodes was "impressed". Mully chose his words wisely (aware of who he was critiquing) and said "he didn't know if he (bad money) was the guy who should be yellin' at the owners" from his yacht.

Then Haugh seeing Mully had opened the door to critique JHK stepping-on-eggshells agreed Mully made a good point that slipped his mind when he first spoke.


Yeah, I think they were wrong to lump Heyward in with Scherzer...yes, they both make a ton so neither will be truly hurt by the lockout, but at least Scherzer produces. They mentioned that Heyward will make $24m, or $148k per game, whereas someone like Patrick Wisdom is going to make $500k for the whole year.

_________________
To IkeSouth, bigfan wrote:
Are you stoned or pissed off, or both, when you create these postings?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Future of MLB
PostPosted: Thu Mar 03, 2022 10:02 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2020 8:05 pm
Posts: 25208
pizza_Place: Pizanos
If you were an everyday player - the type of guy who makes the minimum or slightly above for 4-5 years then is out of work - would you want guys with mid-9 figures in career earnings representing your interests in what could be a protracted lockout?

_________________
Peter Clavin wrote:
Because you are stupid, maybe read some books educate yourself.
Nardi wrote:
We walk, talk, and won't shit our pants


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Future of MLB
PostPosted: Thu Mar 03, 2022 10:23 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2018 9:19 pm
Posts: 32562
pizza_Place: What??
This Ends in Antioch wrote:
Nardi wrote:
This Ends in Antioch wrote:
They have expenses aside from salaries.

Sharing revenues is pre expenses.

In the hypothetical MLB revenue sharing agreement?

I rethought Purdue Ricks hypothesis that players would make more money with revenue sharing.

I have a feeling that the owner's claim that the players are getting 54% of all revenue should be put to the test. Call that bluff


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Future of MLB
PostPosted: Thu Mar 03, 2022 10:26 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 93295
Location: To the left of my post
Nardi wrote:
This Ends in Antioch wrote:
Nardi wrote:
This Ends in Antioch wrote:
They have expenses aside from salaries.

Sharing revenues is pre expenses.

In the hypothetical MLB revenue sharing agreement?

I rethought Purdue Ricks hypothesis that players would make more money with revenue sharing.

I have a feeling that the owner's claim that the players are getting 54% of all revenue should be put to the test. Call that bluff

It's 54% of baseball revenue. As you pointed out, the Braves have like $41 million in real estate revenue. The players aren't getting 54% of that real estate revenue.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Future of MLB
PostPosted: Thu Mar 03, 2022 10:29 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 10:00 am
Posts: 80219
Location: Rogers Park, USA
pizza_Place: JB Alberto's
conns7901 wrote:
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
No one can blame Jerry for this one. Manfred was not his guy.


There are people who really think Manfred is going against what the owners want to happen right now?



I'm not sure, but I don't know if all the owners are on the same page. What I do know is that the power controlling MLB had been Reinsdorf/Selig for a long, long time. It was that faction that forced the strike in '94. When Selig decided to step down Reinsdorf wanted Tom Werner to be the next commissioner. Jerry was hard against Manfred but he couldn't find the votes to stop it and lost the power struggle and now Dewitt is probably the most powerful owner.

_________________
Ecclesiastes 5:8


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Future of MLB
PostPosted: Thu Mar 03, 2022 10:35 am 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2006 6:17 pm
Posts: 102662
pizza_Place: Vito & Nick's
blackhawksfan wrote:
:lol:


"Frank 4 Commish"

Hell yea!

_________________
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
It's more fun to be a victim
Caller Bob wrote:
There will never be an effective vaccine. I'll never get one anyway.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Future of MLB
PostPosted: Thu Mar 03, 2022 10:46 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2018 9:19 pm
Posts: 32562
pizza_Place: What??
Frank Coztansa wrote:
blackhawksfan wrote:
:lol:


"Frank 4 Commish"

Hell yea!

1st question, Commissioner Constanza. What's your view on The Shift?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Future of MLB
PostPosted: Thu Mar 03, 2022 10:47 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2018 9:19 pm
Posts: 32562
pizza_Place: What??
Nardi wrote:
Frank Coztansa wrote:
blackhawksfan wrote:
:lol:


"Frank 4 Commish"

Hell yea!

1st question, Commissioner Coztansa. What's your view on The Shift?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Future of MLB
PostPosted: Thu Mar 03, 2022 10:49 am 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2006 6:17 pm
Posts: 102662
pizza_Place: Vito & Nick's
My view on the shift is that there wouldn't be any shifts if the batter was smart enough to drop a bunt down once in a while and take the base that is basically being given to him.

We'll call that "The Richard Pryor." You know...a free base.

_________________
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
It's more fun to be a victim
Caller Bob wrote:
There will never be an effective vaccine. I'll never get one anyway.


Last edited by Frank Coztansa on Thu Mar 03, 2022 10:50 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Future of MLB
PostPosted: Thu Mar 03, 2022 10:50 am 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2006 6:17 pm
Posts: 102662
pizza_Place: Vito & Nick's
I also like neon vest on the right there who clearly needs a 2x4 to hold up his 16" sign :lol:

_________________
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
It's more fun to be a victim
Caller Bob wrote:
There will never be an effective vaccine. I'll never get one anyway.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Future of MLB
PostPosted: Thu Mar 03, 2022 10:57 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2018 9:19 pm
Posts: 32562
pizza_Place: What??
Frank Coztansa wrote:
My view on the shift is that there wouldn't be any shifts if the batter was smart enough to drop a bunt down once in a while and take the base that is basically being given to him.

We'll call that "The Richard Pryor." You know...a free base.

you're hired.

I'm out if Manfred bans it. I've got basketball and I'll learn to like football. That leaves 2 months in the height of summer. Pretty sure I can find something to do.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Future of MLB
PostPosted: Thu Mar 03, 2022 11:01 am 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2006 6:17 pm
Posts: 102662
pizza_Place: Vito & Nick's
Seriously. If a guy like Grandal dropped down a bunt once every 10 games, and faked a bunt or squared around another 2 or 3 times during that stretch, you think the defenders would adjust accordingly? Probably. And for a guy who seems to care so much about his OB% and OPS, bunting like that would play right into his hands.

The shift should take care of itself. No need to have rules for it.

_________________
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
It's more fun to be a victim
Caller Bob wrote:
There will never be an effective vaccine. I'll never get one anyway.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Future of MLB
PostPosted: Thu Mar 03, 2022 11:06 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri May 25, 2018 8:58 am
Posts: 6382
pizza_Place: Frozen
A W & S caller suggested limiting shifts to 6 a game. Interesting.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Future of MLB
PostPosted: Thu Mar 03, 2022 11:15 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2008 8:22 am
Posts: 15191
pizza_Place: Wha Happen?
I'll say two things...bunting is not nearly as easy as it looks. Even in the heyday of bunting, not that many guys did it succesfully.

And Cub-wise, every month they don't play gets us closer to Heyward's free agency/Cubs eating the last year of the contract/trading him for MadBum or Hosmer.

_________________
Ба́бушка гада́ла, да на́двое сказа́ла—то ли до́ждик, то ли снег, то ли бу́дет, то ли нет.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Future of MLB
PostPosted: Thu Mar 03, 2022 11:16 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 3:55 pm
Posts: 33214
Location: Wrigley
pizza_Place: Warren Buffet of Cock
vitoscotti wrote:
A W & S caller suggested limiting shifts to 6 a game. Interesting.


It is not interesting. Why can’t Rizzo learn to go the other way?

_________________
Hawaii (fuck) You


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Future of MLB
PostPosted: Thu Mar 03, 2022 11:21 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2018 9:19 pm
Posts: 32562
pizza_Place: What??
Frank Coztansa wrote:
Seriously. If a guy like Grandal dropped down a bunt once every 10 games, and faked a bunt or squared around another 2 or 3 times during that stretch, you think the defenders would adjust accordingly? Probably. And for a guy who seems to care so much about his OB% and OPS, bunting like that would play right into his hands.

The shift should take care of itself. No need to have rules for it.

They say bunting is hard. NO. Sacrifice bunting is hard. It's easy when the 3rd baseman is playing SS. And let's say some big bopper is uncomfortable doing it. Humiliated by the failure. Listen pal, you're hitting .230. If I guarantee you going 2 for 4 bunting, would you do it?

yeah, I know, you'd rather look for a walk, you fuckin' bum.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Future of MLB
PostPosted: Thu Mar 03, 2022 11:22 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2008 8:22 am
Posts: 15191
pizza_Place: Wha Happen?
denisdman wrote:
vitoscotti wrote:
A W & S caller suggested limiting shifts to 6 a game. Interesting.


It is not interesting. Why can’t Rizzo learn to go the other way?

pretty sure he tried a few times. I'm not against the shift. It's just not as simple as bunting to get around it.

_________________
Ба́бушка гада́ла, да на́двое сказа́ла—то ли до́ждик, то ли снег, то ли бу́дет, то ли нет.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Future of MLB
PostPosted: Thu Mar 03, 2022 11:23 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2008 8:22 am
Posts: 15191
pizza_Place: Wha Happen?
Nardi wrote:
Frank Coztansa wrote:
Seriously. If a guy like Grandal dropped down a bunt once every 10 games, and faked a bunt or squared around another 2 or 3 times during that stretch, you think the defenders would adjust accordingly? Probably. And for a guy who seems to care so much about his OB% and OPS, bunting like that would play right into his hands.

The shift should take care of itself. No need to have rules for it.

They say bunting is hard. NO. Sacrifice bunting is hard. It's easy when the 3rd baseman is playing SS. And let's say some big bopper is uncomfortable doing it. Humiliated by the failure. Listen pal, you're hitting .230. If I guarantee you going 2 for 4 bunting, would you do it?

yeah, I know, you'd rather look for a walk, you fuckin' bum.

sounds simple. If guys started bunting on the regular to beat the shift, the teams will simply pitch them differently.

_________________
Ба́бушка гада́ла, да на́двое сказа́ла—то ли до́ждик, то ли снег, то ли бу́дет, то ли нет.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Future of MLB
PostPosted: Thu Mar 03, 2022 11:24 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2018 9:19 pm
Posts: 32562
pizza_Place: What??
City of Fools wrote:
denisdman wrote:
vitoscotti wrote:
A W & S caller suggested limiting shifts to 6 a game. Interesting.


It is not interesting. Why can’t Rizzo learn to go the other way?

pretty sure he tried a few times. I'm not against the shift. It's just not as simple as bunting to get around it.

It's only complicated by walks and the HR. Because anybody can do it. They just won't.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 515 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 ... 18  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group