Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Thursday, December 05, 2013

NY Times: How Yanks May Proceed, Cano or No Cano

Major League Baseball has been negotiating a new posting system with its counterparts in Japan, and it sent over its latest proposal Wednesday. Under the proposed system, teams would be allowed to make a maximum bid of $20 million, according to two people who have been briefed on the negotiations. If more than one team bids the maximum, the player will be free to negotiate with all of them.

A team making the highest bid would have exclusive rights to negotiate with the player. [...]

Under both the old system and the proposed one, the posting fee does not count against a team’s luxury-tax figure. But Tanaka’s salary would, and the lower posting fee means that M.L.B. teams are more likely to give Japanese players higher contracts, which could have an impact on teams that are close to the luxury-tax threshold — like the Yankees.

bobm Posted: December 05, 2013 at 12:27 AM | 70 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: posting rules, robinson cano

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

   1. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: December 05, 2013 at 07:48 AM (#4610961)
Boy you gotta hand it to baseball, when it quickly became apparant the Yankees coveted Tanaka they moved with great haste to completed overhaul the economics of signing Japanese ballplayers to make sure it would hurt the team more.
   2. villageidiom Posted: December 05, 2013 at 08:30 AM (#4610964)
Boy you gotta hand it to baseball, when it quickly became apparant the Yankees coveted Tanaka they moved with great haste to completed overhaul the economics of signing Japanese ballplayers to make sure it would hurt the team more.
Part of the proposed posting system would allow multiple teams to negotiate. This helps the Yankees far more than the posting fee cap hurts the Yankees.

But hey, you seem to think Teddy Roosevelt said to carry a big schtick, so carry on.
   3. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: December 05, 2013 at 08:35 AM (#4610967)
Part of the proposed posting system would allow multiple teams to negotiate. This helps the Yankees far more than the posting fee cap hurts the Yankees.


Lower posting fees justifies higher player contracts, which hurts only one team - the team for whom the Yankee Tax was designed. It's right there in the excerpt. Normally Bud is all sorts of gung-ho for anything that artificially depresses player salaries but once word got out the Yankees wanted to take advantage of the posting process to sign a player to a below-market contract this offseason Bud and his stooges had to move fast. And to their credit, they did. Bud wants those free Yankee dollars courtesy of his Yankee tax, or he wants the Yankees to miss out on talent. One or the other.
   4. jmurph Posted: December 05, 2013 at 09:08 AM (#4610974)
I wish MLB would just do whatever YR wants so he'll stop posting. It would be worth it.
   5. Paul D(uda) Posted: December 05, 2013 at 09:13 AM (#4610976)
This is a huge win for the Yankees long term. Huge.
   6. Bitter Mouse Posted: December 05, 2013 at 09:27 AM (#4610980)
I wish MLB would just do whatever YR wants so he'll stop posting. It would be worth it.


I used to feel that way, but come on it is performance art. It is part of the site like Satanic Chris Truby, It's a Trap!, and Centaur Jokes. And Mike Crudale.
   7. villageidiom Posted: December 05, 2013 at 09:31 AM (#4610983)
Lower posting fees justifies higher player contracts, which hurts only one team - the team for whom the Yankee Tax was designed.
And the NPB team that is giving up the player. And the teams that generally lose out in competitive negotiations, of which there are many but the Yankees are not generally seen as one.

It seems your argument is that under the old system the Yankees would pay less in total for Tanaka than in the new system, which is absolutely correct. In the old system, the Yankees would have failed to bid the highest on the posting fee, and they would pay Tanaka $0. In the new system, they will bid $20 million for the posting fee, and then they will compete with other teams bidding the same. It is far more likely that the Yankees will win that competition, and pay Tanaka > $0, than it was in the prior system. So, yes, they are likely to pay more for Tanaka in the new system.

The comedy here is that the new system is more like "free market, plus $20 million" whereas the old system was nowhere near a free market solution. And your argument is basically that the movement toward a free market system hurts the Yankees, because they might actually sign some players at a market rate. You have outdone yourself.

But hey, schtick with it.
   8. Avoid running at all times.-S. Paige Posted: December 05, 2013 at 09:42 AM (#4610986)
Yanks fan here and I think this probably helps them.
   9. Blastin Posted: December 05, 2013 at 09:55 AM (#4610991)
Yanks fan agreeing. Honestly, they can now say, "Well, look, our plan was based on the old system, which changed" (and they can not mention - but it's obvious - that their assumption is an A-Rod suspension, despite a full year being absurd) "and it changed, so scrap the tax plan, let's go full bore."

Win win.
   10. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: December 05, 2013 at 10:08 AM (#4611000)
It seems your argument is that under the old system the Yankees would pay less in total for Tanaka than in the new system, which is absolutely correct.


No, that isn't my argument at all. Under the current system the Yankees would pay the same amount overall, but MLB's punitive Yankee Tax would not penalize the team as much.

In the newly proposed system, they will bid $20 million for the posting fee, and then they will compete with other teams bidding the same. It is far more likely that the Yankees will win that competition, and pay Tanaka > $0, than it was in the prior system.


That simply is not correct. Under this new, anti-Yankee system the barrier to entry is very low - $20 million, a pittance every team in the league can afford. Then starts the real negotiation for the player's contract, where the Yankees, due to the onerous nature of the Yankee Tax, are forced to outpay every team twice to land the player - once by submitting the superior offer, and twice by paying protection money to the league, a penalty no other team is subjected to, and at a greater rate than any team has ever been subjected to. Under the previous system the bid was not subject to the confiscatory maw of the Yankee Tax, which made the total cost to the Yankees less punitive. The league is moving with great haste - shamelessly great haste - to ensure that the Yankees cannot obtain Mr. Tanaka's services without paying a explicit premium to the Selig Regime.

If this were a matter of principle, the league could certainly institute these negotiations now for implementation next off-season, giving all parties ample forewarning of the new structure. This current rush to completely overhaul the process is the result of the Yankees' clear signaling of their intent to pursue Mr. Tanaka's services.

The comedy here is that the new system is more like "free market, plus $20 million" whereas the old system was nowhere near a free market solution.


And as stated previously, old Bud has never met an artificial depression of player salary he didn't like. So what's the difference here? Why has the man who has vigorously pursued caps on expenditures for amateur and international talent at every turn suddenly embraced (vigorously so given the haste with which this system is being slapped together) a new model whereby the total amount expended may stay the same but the amount offered to the player increases? Because it's the amount offered to the player that yields the desired result of hurting the Yankees, to the exclusion of every other team.

If Bud liked free markets he would endorse free markets. He hates free markets when they result in baseball players getting free market value for their services, which is why he's moved time and time again for artificial suppression of free market wages.

And your argument is basically that the movement toward a free market system hurts the Yankees, because they might actually sign some players at a market rate. You have outdone yourself.


I wholly support the re-introduction of free market models back into major league baseball. That is why, naturally, I oppose the Yankee tax, and the draft cap, and the international spending cap, and any other artifice that comes between a professional baseball player's short career and maximizing their income. I don't even oppose the current proposal for the Japanese bidding process so much as oppose the obvious targeted nature of its breathless imposition, to the point where the single player the Yankees have openly targeted is literally sitting on his hands waiting to see what his future will be because the league needs to ensure the Yankees don't get the same chance to exploit a below-market contract that every other team has. If it's a matter of principle (HA!) put the system in place now, to be implemented next season so that all concerned have appropriate advance warning. Mr. Tanaka is an incidental hostage to the league's terrorist approach in dealing with the Yankees, and that's a shame.
   11. SG Posted: December 05, 2013 at 10:22 AM (#4611006)
Under the current system the Yankees would pay the same amount overall, but MLB's punitive Yankee Tax would not penalize the team as much.


I think it's time to at least call it the Dodger/Yankee tax.
   12. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: December 05, 2013 at 10:22 AM (#4611007)
I think it's time to at least call it the Dodger/Yankee tax.


Why? It doesn't seem to affect the Dodgers at all.
   13. Bitter Mouse Posted: December 05, 2013 at 10:26 AM (#4611010)
to the league's terrorist approach in dealing with the Yankees, and that's a shame


While you might even be correct about the leagues motivations I think the above statement is wrong in two important ways. First it is the opposite of terroristic. A terrorist engages in asymmetric warfare because they are at a power disadvantage. MLB/Selig have clear authority and power over this, so it may be despotic but it is not in the slightest terroristic.

Secondly acting against the Yankees is not and can never be considered a shame in any sense of the word. :)
   14. 'zop sympathizes with the wrong ####### people Posted: December 05, 2013 at 10:43 AM (#4611025)
I enjoy YR's schtick as much as the rest of y'all, but even a broke clock is right twice a day, and he's dead on here. IMO, this is a direct shot at the Yankees to prevent them from exploiting a loophole to avoid paying Yankee tax. It might benefit the Yankees long term - though, given the way that the Yankees free agent dollars are increasingly less valuable than other teams' because of the Yankee tax, I'm not even sure that's true - or it might not. But this was clearly an "oh ####, they've found a loophole" moment at MLB.

IMO, this all flows from the tax evasion achieved by constructing NYS. MLB isn't going to let that happen twice.
   15. jmurph Posted: December 05, 2013 at 10:54 AM (#4611032)
I used to feel that way, but come on it is performance art. It is part of the site like Satanic Chris Truby, It's a Trap!, and Centaur Jokes. And Mike Crudale.


Sure but those other things are funny. Also, YR's rants are just nonsensical. He's against revenue sharing, which is at least an ethos, but he's also in favor of territory rights (at least for the Yankees). So the Yankees and other big market teams should not have to share revenue, but they should be compensated if someone wants to move into their market. Because free enterprise, I guess.
   16. John M. Perkins Posted: December 05, 2013 at 10:57 AM (#4611033)
All this Yankee talk, and my first, and still biggest impression, the new system seems to help the Japanese player the most, and hurts the Japanese teams the most. The second impact is that this should lower the barrier for acquiring Japanese players, bringing in more non-stars.
   17. NJ in DC Posted: December 05, 2013 at 10:57 AM (#4611034)
I generally think YR is ridiculous, but I agree that this change hurts the Yankees. I'm not going to go full conspiracy theorist and say it was aimed at them or created for them, but it seems pretty clear that it hurts their plan.
   18. tfbg9 Posted: December 05, 2013 at 10:58 AM (#4611036)
If Tanaka has been "literally sitting on his hands" while Bud helps MLB to ensure the Yankees pay their fair share, then perhaps he's inadvertently protecting them from purchasing damaged goods.
   19. Greg Pope thinks the Cubs are reeking havoc Posted: December 05, 2013 at 11:02 AM (#4611038)
I generally think YR is ridiculous, but I agree that this change hurts the Yankees.

Hurts them financially, but gives them a better shot at actually landing the player. Does a Yankee fan care more about the team's profits or the quality of players they can put on the field?
   20. Greg Pope thinks the Cubs are reeking havoc Posted: December 05, 2013 at 11:04 AM (#4611039)
But this was clearly an "oh ####, they've found a loophole" moment at MLB.

I don't think so. Didn't the posting agreement expire or something? Maybe I'm not remembering, but wasn't there some concern that Tanaka wouldn't be able to be posted at all without a new agreement?
   21. Greg Pope thinks the Cubs are reeking havoc Posted: December 05, 2013 at 11:06 AM (#4611040)
Under this proposal, shouldn't every team just submit a $20M bid? I'm assuming they don't pay unless they win the player's services, so why shouldn't the Marlins put in a $20M bid on the off chance that Tanaka says, "Hey, I really like South Beach, I'll play for the minimum"?
   22. NJ in DC Posted: December 05, 2013 at 11:07 AM (#4611041)
Hurts them financially, but gives them a better shot at actually landing the player. Does a Yankee fan care more about the team's profits or the quality of players they can put on the field?

The assumption in all this is that the 189 figure really matters to them. If it does, then this is going to effect how much they can offer him and thus affect the quality of players they can put on the field. The entire thing about getting Tanaka was that they could use their financial advantage on the posting fee and then sign him under market after winning the posting so they still get under 189. I'm not sure what the offers would have to get to for Tanaka to put them over 189, but this pretty clearly complicates the Yankees' well known plan.

EDIT: Under this proposal, shouldn't every team just submit a $20M bid? I'm assuming they don't pay unless they win the player's services, so why shouldn't the Marlins put in a $20M bid on the off chance that Tanaka says, "Hey, I really like South Beach, I'll play for the minimum"?

Yeah, that was YR's other, valid point.
   23. Avoid running at all times.-S. Paige Posted: December 05, 2013 at 11:11 AM (#4611043)
Is it a myth that the yanks's have the greatest name recognition in Japan? Seems like they have an advantage in that regard in terms of attracting Japanese free agents. I thought for instance that Dice-K would have preferred to go to the Yanks of he had the choice.
   24. jmurph Posted: December 05, 2013 at 11:16 AM (#4611045)
It's lame when posters tell other posters to go away or stop posting, as I did earlier, so I'll retract that and apologize.

EDIT: I do still think YR is wrong about nearly everything, for the record. Except I think I remember him making fun of people who threaten to leave the country to avoid taxes. He was obviously right about that.

   25. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: December 05, 2013 at 11:20 AM (#4611049)
Also, YR's rants are just nonsensical. He's against revenue sharing, which is at least an ethos, but he's also in favor of territory rights (at least for the Yankees).


I don't think I've ever said anything other that I'm in favor of territorial rights for every team in baseball. IF you want to eliminate territorial rights, they need to be eliminated for every team in baseball. I'd rather keep them, but I'm open to arguments in favor of their complete elimination, which I don't think I've ever seen a strong case made for here.

So the Yankees and other big market teams should not have to share revenue, but they should be compensated if someone wants to move into their market.


Are you saying that there are some teams in the league who do not deserve to be compensated if someone wants to move into their market? Who stands a greater risk of complete business failure as a result of territorial infringement - the Yankees with a team moving to New Jersey, or the Rays with a team moving or Orlando?
   26. Shibal Posted: December 05, 2013 at 11:21 AM (#4611052)
It's nice that players like Tanaka will be able to get a choice in where he wants to play in the States. The other method was more of a form of slavery than anything else, for the players involved.

All that's missing would be Cashman defecating in Tanaka's mouth. As a wise, now unemployed, man once said, that isn't right.
   27. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: December 05, 2013 at 11:24 AM (#4611054)
EDIT: I do still think YR is wrong about nearly everything, for the record.


Hey wait a sec, I haven't opined on nearly everything yet.
   28. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: December 05, 2013 at 11:29 AM (#4611058)
It's nice that players like Tanaka will be able to get a choice in where he wants to play in the States. The other method was more of a form of slavery than anything else, for the players involved.


Compared to the amateur draft system, Japanese ballplayers are free as birds - the worst-case scenario under the old system was a choice between the United States and returning to Japan, with true free-agency around the corner. If we want to make efforts to improve the choices ballplayers have as to where they ply their trade we should start with our amateurs first, perhaps by removing the preposterously insulting salary caps which remove their negotiating leverage and make them indentured servants to their MLB plantations.

All that's missing would be Cashman defecating in Tanaka's mouth. As a wise, now unemployed, man once said, that isn't right.


Actually for Mr. Bashir's analogy to hold, Mr. Cashman would be pooping in your mouth. Another manufactured Dittohead hissy fit to cow the compliant librulmedia.
   29. Best Regards, President of Comfort Posted: December 05, 2013 at 11:33 AM (#4611062)
It's nice that players like Tanaka will be able to get a choice in where he wants to play in the States. The other method was more of a form of slavery than anything else, for the players involved.


Except the player could just refuse to sign with the team that won the posting bid, then play out the rest of his ten years in Japan, and be an unrestricted free agent.
   30. Bitter Mouse Posted: December 05, 2013 at 11:34 AM (#4611063)
perhaps by removing the preposterously insulting salary caps which remove their negotiating leverage and make them indentured servants to their MLB plantations


Politically I might agree with you, but as a fan I think the caps and such end up in a better overall MLB product. So go screw baseball serfs*!

If you want to propose something that helps player freedom and maintains competitive balance though I am all ears.

* I think Serf reflects their status better than servant or slave.
   31. PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth) Posted: December 05, 2013 at 11:35 AM (#4611065)
It's pretty simple: The small-market teams that benefit from the Yankee Tax have been screaming bloody murder about the Yankees evading it by paying $70 million in posting fees and then signing the player to an $80 million contract when he's worth $150 million, as the posting fee would not count against the Yankee Tax. The beneficiaries of the tax want the posting fee to count toward payroll; the Yankees and the handful of merely very wealthy teams like the system as-is; this is the compromise.

NPB isn't going to agree to that low of a cap in a million years, though. It will be more like $50 million with a gradual increase over time.

Edit: A more interesting solution for NPB would be to have a $20 million cap, but everyone who bids the $20 million has to pay it.
   32. bobm Posted: December 05, 2013 at 11:35 AM (#4611066)
IMO, this all flows from the tax evasion achieved by constructing NYS. MLB isn't going to let that happen twice.

IIRC stadium construction shielded revenue sharing contributions, not luxury taxes. Thus lots of teams benefited, not just the Yankees.

Didn't the posting agreement expire or something? 

Yes.
   33. PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth) Posted: December 05, 2013 at 11:37 AM (#4611068)
If you want to propose something that helps player freedom and maintains competitive balance though I am all ears.


OK, I'll take a shot: scrap the amateur draft and instead allot each team a spending cap that gradually goes up as you move from the team with the best record last year to the best.

(I know the question was about Japanese players, but still.)
   34. Best Regards, President of Comfort Posted: December 05, 2013 at 11:38 AM (#4611070)
NPB isn't going to agree to that low of a cap in a million years, though. It will be more like $50 million with a gradual increase over time.


The posting fee is so that NPB teams can get some return for their stars. The alternative is MLB refusing to recognize the NPB reserve clause and the NPB teams getting nothing.
   35. Bitter Mouse Posted: December 05, 2013 at 11:39 AM (#4611071)
I know the question was about Japanese players, but still


No I am open to the whole thing.

move from the team with the best record last year to the best.


One of these bests is really the worst!
   36. PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth) Posted: December 05, 2013 at 11:39 AM (#4611073)

The posting fee is so that NPB teams can get some return for their stars. The alternative is MLB refusing to recognize the NPB reserve clause and the NPB teams getting nothing.

I don't think MLB can get away with that in a world full of international media.
   37. SG Posted: December 05, 2013 at 11:39 AM (#4611074)
NPB isn't going to agree to that low of a cap in a million years, though. It will be more like $50 million with a gradual increase over time.


How about this? Make part of any posting bid non-refundable. So if you want to bid on Tanaka, it will cost you some percentage of your bid whether he signs with you or not.
   38. Sonic Youk Posted: December 05, 2013 at 11:40 AM (#4611075)
the hypothetical 189 plan is for one year, right? and then the Yankees go back to not caring at all about the luxury tax?

I think if you were rigging the game, you'd keep the old blind bid system in place, in which the Yankees never even got to the negotiating table with anyone but Kei Igawa.

The old system was ludicrously unfair for the veteran Japanese players.

   39. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: December 05, 2013 at 11:40 AM (#4611076)
NPB isn't going to agree to that low of a cap in a million years, though. It will be more like $50 million with a gradual increase over time.


All MLB needs to do is postpone the implementation of a new agreement to ensure the Yankees can't get the player they want. The unfortunate Mr. Tanaka is a hostage to their negotiations.
   40. Publius Publicola Posted: December 05, 2013 at 11:40 AM (#4611077)
My rule of thumb is, if a new rule adversely and specifically affects the Yankees, then it's a good rule.
   41. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: December 05, 2013 at 11:44 AM (#4611081)
My rule of thumb is, if a new rule adversely and specifically affects the Yankees, then it's a good rule.


Well sure, there are always some people who believe that inflicting adversity on certain other groups out of spite is always acceptable because those other groups deserve to suffer. It isn't a very admirable position when viewed in retrospect from a historical basis, of course, but you aren't without your predecessors.
   42. Greg K Posted: December 05, 2013 at 11:50 AM (#4611087)
Well sure, there are always some people who believe that inflicting adversity on certain other groups out of spite is always acceptable because those other groups deserve to suffer. It isn't a very admirable position when viewed in retrospect from a historical basis, of course, but you aren't without your predecessors.

I don't know, in all my investigations into history I'm not sure I've come across an entity as inhuman, merciless, and detrimental to the progress of humanity as the New York Yankees. Perhaps the Crystalline Entity, but I'm still on the fence about whether to count that as historical fact.

Not to get too philosophical about it, but there does have to be a worst thing in the universe. And I think you make special allowances for that.
   43. PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth) Posted: December 05, 2013 at 11:58 AM (#4611093)
Greg K, please direct me to where I can sign up for your newsletter.
   44. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: December 05, 2013 at 11:58 AM (#4611094)
I don't know, in all my investigations into history I'm not sure I've come across an entity as inhuman, merciless, and detrimental to the progress of humanity as the New York Yankees.


The Irish.
   45. SG Posted: December 05, 2013 at 12:08 PM (#4611105)
I don't know, in all my investigations into history I'm not sure I've come across an entity as inhuman, merciless, and detrimental to the progress of humanity as the New York Yankees.


Alex Rodriguez.
   46. Misirlou is on hiding to nowhere Posted: December 05, 2013 at 12:10 PM (#4611107)
but there does have to be a worst thing in the universe.


the Daleks, obviously.
   47. Bitter Mouse Posted: December 05, 2013 at 12:14 PM (#4611113)
Alex Rodriguez.


Inhuman I will grant you, but detrimental? No way man. Despite his Yankee taint ARod has given me so very much joy. Dude should go into the Hall of Fame for the Centaur painting alone.
   48. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: December 05, 2013 at 12:17 PM (#4611117)
If you want to propose something that helps player freedom and maintains competitive balance though I am all ears.


Since we've somehow reached the repugnant point in history where we've reflexively begun to equate "competitive balance" with "money for nothing and draft picks for free", the solution is obvious - retain the draft, and allow teams unfettered rights to sell draft picks, drafted players, and their own players for whatever price they determine as fair. Draft picks have enormous value, on the order of tens of millions of dollars for the rights to elite players. The posting process in Japan is a good vantage point for this - if Yu Darvish was worth $50 million plus the cost of his contract despite the uncertainties surrounding his abilities, why not let the Rays sell 2011 David Price for $75 million, or the rights to his original draft pick for $50 million, which they can then invest in their product in other ways?

Once you've replaced the current welfare system with one based on market value for desirable assets, I think we'll see teams steward their investments more wisely. These windfall talents can be an enormous boon to a team that holds them, while reducing the numerous moral and ethical risks associated with guaranteed unearned welfare in perpetuity.

Everyone wins.
   49. Bitter Mouse Posted: December 05, 2013 at 12:29 PM (#4611126)
Everyone wins.


Depends on what game you are playing. I want a competitive landscape. I do not want a pure meritocracy where the smart and wealthy organizations dominate the landscape. Even if that would - in some sense - be most fair, it would be boring and unpleasant for me as a fan. I think it OK to stack the deck to an extent to get that outcome (Edit: more balance).

Other people prefer pure meritocracy where sports (and other things) are concerned. They rail against the unfairness of it all. The best should win and the losers should be ... well ... losers. That doesn't work for me, because baseball teams are not pure competitors with each other, they are also partners in a joint enterprise and as such normal free market dynamics don't work like some people think they should. There are also enough vanity owners than market pressures will not normally apply, making for a more distorted and unpleasant MLB environment that exist today.

Still others (owners and players) want money, more money, still more money, and wins and flags are great also. Money in the owners/players pockets is not a pure good to me. I am fine with it, they are providing a service I enjoy, but bilking taxpayers does not thrill me as it does many of them.

So I really doubt your "Everybody wins" contention.
   50. Best Regards, President of Comfort Posted: December 05, 2013 at 12:31 PM (#4611128)
I don't think MLB can get away with that in a world full of international media.


Which is why Alfonso Soriano plays in Japan.
   51. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: December 05, 2013 at 01:14 PM (#4611163)
So I really doubt your "Everybody wins" contention.


For all your commentary I didn't see you mention who didn't win under my more equitable proposal, which finally allows teams to monetize resources they've previously been disallowed from exploiting properly.

In fact I'm not sure exactly what you're advocating; would it be in baseball's best interested to funnel talent to the Chicago Cubs given the historic importance of that franchise and their equally historic run of failure? Disgraced former NBA referee Tim Donaghy spoke of how NBA commissioner David Stern made his preferences for the outcomes of certain series known to the referee squads prior to important playoff rounds, is this the sort of thing you're advocating, a thumb on the scales in favor of the "right" outcomes, ability subverted in the interest of "fairness"?
   52. jdennis Posted: December 05, 2013 at 01:16 PM (#4611167)
I'm shocked the NPB teams are accepting a cap to posting fees. Is this some weird sudden manifestation of nobility? Is this because they want to prevent players from leaving? They are forfeiting tens of millions of dollars and global marketability.
   53. Bitter Mouse Posted: December 05, 2013 at 01:20 PM (#4611173)
For all your commentary I didn't see you mention who didn't win under my more equitable proposal, which finally allows teams to monetize resources they've previously been disallowed from exploiting properly.


Me. I don't win. Monetizing assets does nothing for a fan who wants more equal competition. Salary caps and salary floors insure a certain level of investment in the on field product. Selling draft picks doesn't.
   54. KT's Pot Arb Posted: December 05, 2013 at 01:36 PM (#4611183)
It's so sad the Yankees have to pay the "Yankee Tax" when they are only able to steal a majority of game day revenues by siphoning them to YES.

Baseball was built around the concept that visiting teams got 40% of the game revenues. When TV & Radio broadcasts & merchandise sales became lucrative teams like the Yankees cleverly created shell corporations to hide most of the new revenues so they could steal from visiting teams.

I think the Yankees should spend a year with their A squad playing their B squad and then see how they feel about paying the "yankee tax".
   55. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: December 05, 2013 at 01:37 PM (#4611184)
Me. I don't win.


How so?

Monetizing assets does nothing for a fan who wants more equal competition.


Why not? More money to spend on players is a good thing, isn't it? Now if you're worried about your Jeffrey Loria's selling Jose Fernandez for $75 million and pocketing it because he's a penurious prick who hates baseball and only wants to fill his coffers I can understand that line of reasons, but I don't see how you could then justify sending that same Jeffrey Loria tens of millions of dollars of free no-strings-attached money as in any way surerior.

Salary caps and salary floors insure a certain level of investment in the on field product.


Baseball has neither. Baseball currently has a very well-defined welfare program to endlessly funnel money into the pockets of Bud Selig's cronies, and occasionally his daughter.

Surprisingly enough I'm not entirely opposed to a salary cap, but it would have to be implemented with a host of other restrictions on how franchises use their money. That's a conversation I'd be happy to have.

Selling draft picks doesn't.


Selling draft picks is superior to your market-distorting capology because it doesn't artificially depress player salaries to the benefit of owners. Players have a short window to make their money, while owners can continue to exploit their franchises for decades without cease, then pass it to their children. Make no mistake about whose side I'm on in this equation.
   56. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: December 05, 2013 at 01:59 PM (#4611199)
It's so sad the Yankees have to pay the "Yankee Tax" when they are only able to steal a majority of game day revenues by siphoning them to YES.


You don't even know the difference between the Yankee Tax and Revenue Stealing. Obviously further discussion with you is pointless until you get up to speed.
   57. The Pequod Posted: December 05, 2013 at 02:08 PM (#4611203)
Couldn't this end up screwing the Yankees if Rakuten doesn't post Tanaka at all?


Rakuten Golden Eagles president Yozo Tachibana addressed the Japanese media today and indicated that the team may not necessarily post Masahiro Tanaka in light of the new posting system's $20MM maximum bid, according to a report from Sponichi (Japanese link). Dylan Hernandez of the L.A. Times elaborates in his most recent article and offers translated quotes from Tachibana.


http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2013/12/rakuten-golden-eagles-may-not-post-masahiro-tanaka.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
   58. Bitter Mouse Posted: December 05, 2013 at 02:10 PM (#4611205)
Why not? More money to spend on players is a good thing, isn't it?


No. Competitive balance is a good thing (IMO). You seem to be skipping over the whole competitive balance thing. I get why, you are a Yankee fan and want your wealthy well run club to win all the time. But as a MLB fan that is a boring outcome.

Having a franchise crippled because they make a stupid decision and sell draft picks does not help competitive balance even if it monetizes something new.

Baseball has neither.


I did not claim there was a cap or floor, any more than you claimed you could sell draft picks.

Selling draft picks is superior to your market-distorting capology because it doesn't artificially depress player salaries to the benefit of owners. Players have a short window to make their money, while owners can continue to exploit their franchises for decades without cease, then pass it to their children. Make no mistake about whose side I'm on in this equation.


I favor the players over the owners as well. But I favor competitive balance over both. You keep wanting to make this owners versus players and bud versus Yanks. Have fun having that discussion, but my priority is competitive balance, and having the Yankees with relatively limitless revenue and limitless ability to spend and willing to use those advantages in a smart way leads ... I say again ... to a boring product.

If you can come up with a plan for competitive balance that is neutral towards owners and players I am for it, but good luck being neutral towards the Yankees. They have an advantage and to a large degree it is well earned. But I don't care, I still want balance.
   59. tfbg9 Posted: December 05, 2013 at 02:26 PM (#4611213)
Make no mistake about whose side I'm on in this equation.


The NYY's.
   60. Hank G. Posted: December 05, 2013 at 02:41 PM (#4611221)
Are you saying that there are some teams in the league who do not deserve to be compensated if someone wants to move into their market? Who stands a greater risk of complete business failure as a result of territorial infringement - the Yankees with a team moving to New Jersey, or the Rays with a team moving or Orlando?


In what world would a team even consider moving to Orlando if they could move to Brooklyn or New Jersey? In fact, in what world would a second team consider moving to Orlando if they could move to the metropolitan NY area that already had three teams?
   61. cmd600 Posted: December 05, 2013 at 03:09 PM (#4611237)
Who stands a greater risk of complete business failure as a result of territorial infringement - the Yankees with a team moving to New Jersey, or the Rays with a team moving or Orlando?


The team moving into Orlando. Which is why they wouldn't do it. The team moving into New Jersey would stand a better chance than the Rays being left alone, which is why teams would move into the greater NY area without the territorial rights.
   62. Avoid running at all times.-S. Paige Posted: December 05, 2013 at 03:19 PM (#4611243)
That new Tanaka development is pretty interesting. Apparently they were the one Japanese team to vote against the agreement.
   63. Slivers of Maranville descends into chaos (SdeB) Posted: December 05, 2013 at 03:26 PM (#4611249)
Bip.
   64. tfbg9 Posted: December 05, 2013 at 03:29 PM (#4611251)
Baseball was built around the concept that visiting teams got 40% of the game revenues.


Yep.

Didn't the posting agreement expire or something?

Yes.


So, there goes that whole conspiracy thing out the window I guess?
   65. Bitter Mouse Posted: December 05, 2013 at 03:37 PM (#4611257)
So, there goes that whole conspiracy thing out the window I guess?


New to the internet, huh? :)
   66. Fancy Pants Handle doesn't need no water Posted: December 05, 2013 at 03:41 PM (#4611261)
So, there goes that whole conspiracy thing out the window I guess?

New to the internet, huh? :)

Internet handbook for general handling of conspiracy theories:
1. Absence of evidence is proof of a cover-up, and only confirms the theory
2. Evidence to the contrary is clearly manufactured and simply a trick to gain plausible dependability, and also further confirms the theory
   67. AROM Posted: December 05, 2013 at 04:22 PM (#4611286)
Rakuten Golden Eagles president Yozo Tachibana addressed the Japanese media today and indicated that the team may not necessarily post Masahiro Tanaka in light of the new posting system's $20MM maximum bid


How many more years before Tanaka is a full free agent? Given the max bid, it now makes sense for the team to hold onto him until he's got one year left.
   68. SG Posted: December 05, 2013 at 04:27 PM (#4611288)
How many more years before Tanaka is a full free agent?


Tanaka's got seven years in, I think he needs two more seasons.
   69. Avoid running at all times.-S. Paige Posted: December 05, 2013 at 04:29 PM (#4611292)
So is it the player in Japan who lets it be known that he wants to be posted? Does he request to be posted, or is it more an idea that's arrived at by both team and player?
   70. KJOK Posted: December 05, 2013 at 10:48 PM (#4611618)
I'm shocked the NPB teams are accepting a cap to posting fees. Is this some weird sudden manifestation of nobility? Is this because they want to prevent players from leaving? They are forfeiting tens of millions of dollars and global marketability


Under the old system, if the one team winning the bid couldn't come to terms with the player, the team got nothing, other than they retained the player of course. I think the thought here is with multiple teams negotiating there will almost always be a bid high enough that the player will except and the team will pocket the posting fee, at least for the top players.


Tanaka's got seven years in, I think he needs two more seasons.


I believe that is correct. If it were 8 years, the team would be in a tough spot because not posting him would mean they're getting nothing for him the following year. They will certainly post him next year if they don't do it this year.

So is it the player in Japan who lets it be known that he wants to be posted? Does he request to be posted, or is it more an idea that's arrived at by both team and player?


Yes, he lets the team know he's interested, then the teams I think usually have some response like, "yes", "NO", or "maybe, let's talk about it some more".

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Dingbat_Charlie
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogOMNICHATTER: Wednesday April 16, 2014
(15 - 3:01pm, Apr 16)
Last: madvillain

NewsblogDoug Glanville: I Was Racially Profiled in My Own Driveway
(124 - 2:59pm, Apr 16)
Last: Jolly Old St. Nick Still Gags in October

NewsblogDaniel Bryan's 'YES!' chant has spread to the Pirates' dugout
(21 - 2:55pm, Apr 16)
Last: Dock Ellis on Acid

NewsblogVerducci: Overuse of young pitchers fueling MLB's Tommy John surgery problem
(26 - 2:52pm, Apr 16)
Last: if nature called, ladodger34 would listen

NewsblogOT: The Soccer Thread March, 2014
(852 - 2:52pm, Apr 16)
Last: Jose Can Still Seabiscuit

NewsblogNightengale: Pujols nears 500 home runs...and no one seems to care
(34 - 2:52pm, Apr 16)
Last: Mirabelli Dictu (Chris McClinch)

NewsblogMinuteman News Center: Giandurco: This means WAR
(37 - 2:47pm, Apr 16)
Last: Karl from NY

NewsblogGleeman: Mets minor league team is hosting “Seinfeld night”
(1 - 2:46pm, Apr 16)
Last: winnipegwhip

NewsblogOT: NBA Monthly Thread - April 2014
(224 - 2:46pm, Apr 16)
Last: andrewberg

NewsblogOTP April 2014: BurstNET Sued for Not Making Equipment Lease Payments
(1316 - 2:46pm, Apr 16)
Last: McCoy

NewsblogAstros To Promote George Springer
(26 - 2:45pm, Apr 16)
Last: puck

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 4-16-2014
(7 - 2:43pm, Apr 16)
Last: Dan Lee prefers good shortstops to great paintings

NewsblogExposition:The Jonah Keri Mega Q&A
(3 - 2:15pm, Apr 16)
Last: Jose Can Still Seabiscuit

NewsblogGothamist: Yankee Stadium Is Selling Nachos In A Helmet For $20
(62 - 2:04pm, Apr 16)
Last: Canker Soriano

NewsblogOT: The NHL is finally back thread, part 2
(131 - 1:10pm, Apr 16)
Last: Fear is Moses Taylor's Bacon Bits

Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats

 

 

 

 

Page rendered in 0.8015 seconds
52 querie(s) executed