Knowing vs Not Knowing Salary...

[mhuber92211]

I wonder if we, the fans, make too many decisions about a player based on how much money they earn.

 

If we didn't know how much a player got paid would we be happier with a player or more supportive or excited that he is on our team.

 

I guess this question has resulted in a realization I made the other day. I can't remember the last time I had a "favorite" player. I would have to probably say it was Ryne Sandberg back when I was playing little league but even then, his "retirement" left me rethinking that.

 

I don't know, I guess I feel that I get disallusioned with players once I know how much they make or factor that in when I look at his performance. In reality, I should love to watch Pierre play because he is geniunily working hard, playing hard, trying hard and seemingly enjoying playing the game.

 

What do you all think? Would it make a difference towards our opinions on a player if money was not known?

[A New Era]

It would make a difference if they made what they did back when baseball was young, and many players had to actually get 2nd jobs. That was TRUELY playing for the love of the sport. .

[Tracer Bullet]

I don't think it really matters. Frankly, I can't tell you off the top of my head what Pierre made last season. But I can tell you that he grounded out to 2nd way too frequently for a guy who depends so much on his speed. And he didn't take nearly enough walks for a leadoff hitter. And my 2-year-old son has a strong throwing arm.

 

If the Cubs were a small market club, I might care more about salaries. But it's less important to me b/c we can afford to make a mistake or two and still field a good team. The fact that we haven't had good teams recently, imo, is more about the ineptitude of our GM rather than lack of payroll. It's not that we don't have the money to overcome relying on Wood as a starter or signing Neifi, it's that we also acquired Macias, Jones, Pierre, etc. We're not trying to overcome 1-2 bad moves, we're trying to overcome 5-7 (or more).

 

In my case, I think there are 2 reasons I don't have a favorite player anymore: 1. I no longer idolize baseball players (I don't spend days and nights dreaming I played SS for the Cubs like I did when I was 10), and 2. players don't stay with one team their entire career - I loved Sandberg (until I tried to talk to him in St Louis after a game once - yikes) but guys just don't spend a decade with the same team so its hard to invest much in a particular guy. He's either only been with the team a couple years or there's always a sense that he could be gone at any time via trade or FA.

[BigbadB]

As long as the cost of a ticket comes out of the fans pocket, it wouldn't change a thing. A middle income family of 5 can't afford more than a game a year. The cost of tickets has become ridiculous. The reason tickets have become ridiculous is a vicious circle. Players demand a bigger percentage, the owners increase ticket prices to accomodate the players, and the fans of the game are the ones who suffer.

 

It doesn't cost $40 a person to see a movie. At the same time, anyone making 1m or more a year to play any sport is making too much money for what they do.

 

The question becomes how much it will be tolerated. The tolerance level is actually pretty mindboggling. The last strike definitely impacted the tolerance level, but not enough to change anything.

 

Will there be a McGwire or Sosa to bring the fans back the next time there is a strike? I'm not so sure.

 

I admit that my tolerance level for Juan Pierre was definitely impacted by the fact that it cost 3 prospects and nearly 6m for a 1 year rental, but he still would have frustrated me batting lead off all year if he was a minimum salary CFer. My frustration there isn't really on Pierre, but rather the GM who values what little tools he has, and the manager, who feels those tools are most valuable in the lead off spot.

 

There is no cap in baseball, and there also isn't any uniformity. Free agency really kicked uniformity to the curb. If free agency didn't become so prominant, I'm sure there would still be 1st, 2nd and 3rd tier teams in regards to market size and visibility, but it really would be a thing of beauty if most of these teams could actually keep the players they drafted and groomed to be major league ballplayers.

 

In other words, when the A's had too many long term major leaguers on the roster (Giambi, Tejada, Chavez, Hudson, Mulder, Zito, etc...) and needed to free up salary (because ticket prices are no more than $15-20 a seat), they could trade that talent to a team that can afford to take on salary, and the A's could get young talent in return rather than draft pick compensation, which has such a poor percentage of producing major league talent.

 

What I really miss is baseball pre-free agency.

 

And there really is a flaw in the system when a guy like David Wright can produce: .311 .381 .531 for $367K

 

and a guy like Juan Pierre can produce: .292 .330 .388 and make $5.75m

 

Granted, Wright hasn't reached his arby years yet, but it's just plain silly that a guy who is head over heals better at his job than someone who has been around for awhile gets less than 10X the amount of said veteran. Actually closer to 20X than 10X.

 

I can't believe there isn't more rioting or protesting when a team like Pittsburgh trades off all their good players for prospects if the end result doesn't reduce ticket prices. When Florida cut their payroll in half or 2/3 (not sure how much they were before their latest fire sale), ticket prices should have been cut by that much as well.

 

Maybe this doesn't answer your actual question, but I felt it needed to be said. I love the game and I'm more hooked now than I've ever been. But, there are a lot of things about this game that frustrate me to no end.

 

That I know how much Pierre makes per year, and how overpaid he actually is bugs me, but it's more of how he was used and what he cost the team in talent that bugs me more. If that makes any sense.

 

I can live with the salaries these guys make. I don't like it, but it's not what irritates me the most about this game. What irritates me the most is imcompetence of the people in charge. Valuing the wrong things and ignoring the true problems.

[mhuber92211]

I can live with the salaries these guys make. I don't like it, but it's not what irritates me the most about this game. What irritates me the most is imcompetence of the people in charge. Valuing the wrong things and ignoring the true problems.

 

Your post make some sense right here to me BBB. Thanks for the nice thoughts earlier too.

 

Baseball almost parallels politics in this way i guess. We have little to do with who runs the team but we can have an impact of change when the general majority wants the same thing. For example, the majority of people were excited with Dusty first came and 4 years later they tired of him.

 

I would venture to guess that the majority of Cub Fans are extremely excited about this offseason. Never before have the Cubs signed 1 (if not 2 or 3) of the most popular and highly sought after players. To the average fan that sees that the Cubs have signed several "headline" players makes a big difference to them.

 

But i suspect that in a few years the majority of the fans will support a rebuilding process through the farm after they are "turned off" by the recent crop of players.

 

I think also above, the note about Free Agency combined with the number of players that change teams is a good point. We are always fans of a team first. But normally, if a favorite player went elsewhere I would follow that team from afar or at least be able to watch a game. Now not so much.

 

Thanks for the thoughts everyone

[BigbadB]

Shawon Dunston was one of my all time favorite players. Funny, considering my SABR views. But, when he was a Cub, I didn't look at OBP. I looked at AVG, defensive ability and hustle back then as the main indicators of a players abilities.

 

But, when he was no longer a Cub, I paid zero attention to him.

 

Fergie Jenkins was one of my all time favorite Cub pitchers. When he got traded to the Rangers, I didn't keep up with how he was doing in the AL at all.

 

I'm happy for those guys if they continue to have successful years (easy there all you Dunston haters :D ), but I didn't care enough to follow their careers with other teams.

 

Maybe it's different now that you can draft your favorite players on your fantasy teams, and there is much more visibility of other teams on cable tv. But, I've yet to really show dedication or loyalty to players nearly as much as I do for the team, unless they are actually on the team.

 

But, just because they are on the team doesn't necessarily mean I'll show dedication or loyalty. They have to show values that I appreciate.

 

And there really is something to be said for the lifers like Sandberg and Ripken. There aren't many of those anymore. Ripken saw playoff action 3 times in his 21 seasons. Sandberg saw 2 in his 16 seasons. They didn't have to stay loyal to organizations who suffered futility more often than success, but they did it anyway. I was never a Ripken fan, but I take my hat off to him.

[Jon]

I think for most fans, media hype has a bigger effect than salary. Just look at the A-Rod/Jeter situation.

 

Of course, some GMs seem to focus more on media hype than on salary, as well...

[Outshined_One]

I can see the arguments in favor of privatizing a player's salary, but I honestly don't think it's feasible. There are simply too many problems that could come up under this system.

 

For one, how private should it be? Part of the importance of this system is that it makes everything highly visible. Player's contracts are easily accessible for the public and any authoritative bodies who would have an interest in their contracts. Moreover, the players themselves know what everyone else makes.

 

Let's say David Wright hits free agency next offseason. He's going to want fair market value for his services, meaning that he'll want to be paid comparably to other guys at his position who put up similar production. He'll also want similar merchandising rights, incentives, bonuses, and so on. If he has no access to these contracts, the teams he bargains with will be in an unfair position.

 

So, why not only let teams, players, and agents know about contract numbers? Well, the more people who know about this stuff, the harder it will be to keep under wraps. It'll be pretty freakin' obvious that teams like the Royals won't be spending as much money as the Red Sox or Yankees. "Inside sources" will be happy to give out contract information to sources like ESPN since fans will always be clamoring for this stuff.

 

There's also the matter of accountability to the fans. We as fans invest a lot of money into their products. You can make the argument that we deserve to know how our money is being spent. These players would not be getting paid millions upon millions of dollars if it were not for us, much less might not even be playing baseball. If they are not performing up to our expectations and our dollars, we can hold them accountable accordingly.

 

Heck, more than that, it makes teams accountable to their fans. It's bad faith for teams to claim to be competitive and spending money when in fact they aren't spending squat on their team. Again, we spend money on our teams; we should know that teams aren't pocketing it all for themselves. At least with this level of visibility, teams have to answer to their fans.

 

So, that's some of the flip side of that argument.

[ltb]

What I really miss is baseball pre-free agency.

 

And there really is a flaw in the system when a guy like David Wright can produce: .311 .381 .531 for $367K

 

and a guy like Juan Pierre can produce: .292 .330 .388 and make $5.75m

 

Granted, Wright hasn't reached his arby years yet, but it's just plain silly that a guy who is head over heals better at his job than someone who has been around for awhile gets less than 10X the amount of said veteran. Actually closer to 20X than 10X.

 

you miss charlie finley paying his players the absolute minimum? the game would be a lot worse without free agency.