Kansas Crimson

pdub wrote: ↑Wed Dec 06, 2023 11:33 am

jfish26 wrote: ↑Wed Dec 06, 2023 9:50 am
A salary floor (calculated, perhaps, with reference to the absolute minimum amount all teams get through national TV and advertising deals?), would be useful, but there is no world in which the owners agree to a floor without a cap. In my opinion - and I know you and I disagree on this, which is fine - this is a non-starter, in that all a cap really does is ensure that a greater portion of revenue ends up with the owners.

Baseball already sucks but it might be better if teams salaries were more equal and not, I dunno, 150 million more per year from one team to the next.

I agree. I would just get there, I think, a different way than you would.

jfish26 wrote: ↑Wed Dec 06, 2023 11:37 am

pdub wrote: ↑Wed Dec 06, 2023 11:33 am

jfish26 wrote: ↑Wed Dec 06, 2023 9:50 am
A salary floor (calculated, perhaps, with reference to the absolute minimum amount all teams get through national TV and advertising deals?), would be useful, but there is no world in which the owners agree to a floor without a cap. In my opinion - and I know you and I disagree on this, which is fine - this is a non-starter, in that all a cap really does is ensure that a greater portion of revenue ends up with the owners.

Baseball already sucks but it might be better if teams salaries were more equal and not, I dunno, 150 million more per year from one team to the next.

I agree. I would just get there, I think, a different way than you would.

I disagree here. The Padres and several other teams are basically insolvent. San Diego had to take a huge loan to meet payroll. The TV money isn't there for long. The sport could well be a few millionaires sponsoring a nostalgia match if things don't change. Flyover country teams "randomly" losing lottery picks sounds par for the course.

Sparko wrote: ↑Fri Dec 08, 2023 6:05 pm

jfish26 wrote: ↑Wed Dec 06, 2023 11:37 am

pdub wrote: ↑Wed Dec 06, 2023 11:33 am

Baseball already sucks but it might be better if teams salaries were more equal and not, I dunno, 150 million more per year from one team to the next.

I agree. I would just get there, I think, a different way than you would.

I disagree here. The Padres and several other teams are basically insolvent. San Diego had to take a huge loan to meet payroll. The TV money isn't there for long. The sport could well be a few millionaires sponsoring a nostalgia match if things don't change. Flyover country teams "randomly" losing lottery picks sounds par for the course.

I’m not sure what this last part is about - the draft lottery results?

In any case, my opinion is that an owner who doesn’t want to pay the freight should get out of the game. The TV money bubble bursting was visible on the horizon from half-an-ocean away. They all knew.

I don’t think the appropriate response to the owners’ imprudence is to bail out their cash flow by funneling more money upstairs.

I also think - informed by the NBA in particular - that caps and other limiting mechanisms can absolutely have the unintended consequence of exacerbating flyover country’s disadvantage; look at the NBA where the stars tend to congregate in the same 4-8 cities.

Money is the single BEST tool a flyover country team has to level the playing field. And it is simply not the case that we’re dealing with mom-and-pop versus Goliath.

Minnesota has been mildly competitive and so has Cleveland, but the coastal teams have most of the elite talent.

Sparko wrote: ↑Sat Dec 09, 2023 2:50 pm Minnesota has been mildly competitive and so has Cleveland, but the coastal teams have most of the elite talent.

Yes. But add St. Louis, Detroit, Milwaukee, Tampa obviously. Rockies have had very good teams. Royals won one and lost one within the last decade. San Diego is not a big market at all.

I am looking mostly at recent history. Tampa is a successful dumpster fire. Just looking for more equality in rosters.

Sparko wrote: ↑Mon Dec 11, 2023 10:49 am I am looking mostly at recent history. Tampa is a successful dumpster fire. Just looking for more equality in rosters.

Agree with you. I just, personally, would try to achieve this through incentivizing investment and competitiveness. In my opinion, a cap sounds a lot better than it would actually be, in terms of achieving balance.

Perhaps, but wouldn’t a cap at least show an attempt at good faith?

You know what. Fuck baseball.

Back2Lawrence wrote: ↑Mon Dec 11, 2023 8:23 pm Perhaps, but wouldn’t a cap at least show an attempt at good faith?

Good faith at what exactly?

The argument in favor of a cap is that it would in theory spread talent out. But I think, what you'll find in non-NFL* capped leagues, is that once flyover-type teams lose the ability to compete for talent by paying for it, the talent will...accumulate in non-flyover markets. Markets that have inherent advantages that only become MORE important once the money is the same.

I also believe that the ultimate financial effect of a cap is to limit spend on players generally...which results in a windfall for management (and a loss for labor).

You know me - you know that baseball is my first love. You also know that the Royals are my squad now (hasn't always been that way). I love baseball to death, and I want the Royals to be competitive at it. I just do not believe a cap is the right way there.

* The NFL is a bit of a cheat code on this stuff, in that (1) its players' union is extraordinarily weak, and (2) it truly IS a national game (in contrast with all other American professional sports, which are regional/local). It's just not a good comparison, in my opinion.

Like I said. Fuck baseball.

Some signs of life with pitching signings. . .

Yow! Wacha and Renfroe today

I hope these moves are more in the Shields/Davis mold, than the Meche/Guillen one.

These moves are designed to win back fans. And move downtown.

https://youtu.be/JuCjUZk9k9U?si=i1a7Wc4YydLhKvbQ

He has no idea about the demographics of Royals fans or how hard it is to get around downtown. When the team is good, fans from hundreds of miles away go to the K. That is why it is an interstate ballpark. It is like they want to build it in a place that might draw a few people as walk-ups when they lose 100-games a season. My bet is attendance would drop as prices skyrocketed.

Oh yeah. That train you can take to the park from the art galleries. Sigh

I don't play fantasy baseball and only barely follow the Royals but can anyone confirm that Bobby Witt Jr seems to be a lock as a 1st round player, and possibly considered for 1st overall, in fantasy drafts?

pdub wrote: ↑Fri Feb 02, 2024 8:00 am I don't play fantasy baseball and only barely follow the Royals but can anyone confirm that Bobby Witt Jr seems to be a lock as a 1st round player, and possibly considered for 1st overall, in fantasy drafts?

Traditional 5x5 format? I can see it. Anything bringing walks into the picture would complicate the analysis. And because he will most likely lead off (and the bottom of the Royals' lineup will still be pretty meh), you'd want to spend soon for RBIs.

Some exciting moves, but not enough invested in keeping guys with real upside. I would trade a new stadium to build around Witt

Bobby Witt hits big.

https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/394 ... eal-royals