The problem with changing the system is that the people who would most benefit from a change aren’t represented by anybody in the current system. The union doesn’t work for those kids in the draft or overseas, and the veterans who control the union know any attempt to do so would necessarily come out of their pocketbooks — plus they’ve “done their time” and are now benefiting from the current arrangement. And it’s not like the teams have any particular interest in a more equitable distribution of wealth among the players.

You could make a bit of an analogy with copyright law: the creator of a work (team that develops a player) gets exclusive benefit from it for a fixed period of time. The reason for that in the case of copyright law is to promote the creation of new works for the public good (not, as is commonly believed, specifically to benefit the creator financially). Copyright holders naturally always press to have that exclusive period extended (as well as trying to get ever-harsher sanctions for copyright violators). The works themselves have no interest in the matter of course, but there is a general benefit in having the works reach “free agency” where they can be employed by anyone (and, in the case of copyable works of art, by everyone simultaneously). Obviously this analogy has limits, but it suggests any change to the system that caused the younger players to get paid more equitably and/or left team control sooner might have an impact on the minor league system: if the teams don’t get a payoff in terms of a few cheap years from a rising star, they won’t have much incentive to develop them. Of course the rookie players have to come from somewhere, but they might look instead at getting them from overseas, or an expanded jr college/college system, etc. It certainly might affect how carefully teams protected their younger players in terms of innings pitched and other health issues.

Also, with players like Tulo, the trade off is that they will have to wait an extra 1-3 years to receive their pot-of-gold. It’s either some guaranteed money now or a huge raise in arbitration or free agency. I think pitchers want the guaranteed money today because they are more prone to career-ending injuries. If I was an agent, I would push for guaranteed money for pitchers and a wait approach for position players.

The one thing they need to change is the retirement package (mainly medical). Correct me if I am wrong, but to recieve full benefits from the players union after retirement, a player must have 10-years service time under their belts. At the very least, they need to offer the full medical benefits for players with at least 5-years service time and those who meet a watermark of games if they are 28-years old and older. Some players are career minor leaguers and do not get their opportunity to play until after they are 28-years old+. They are sacrificing valuable time to get educated and are less likely to stick in the league for at least 10 years to receive full medical benefits.

But then again, I am not familiar with all of the details regarding retirement for players. They could already have these kind of provisions in them.

Are you serious? Or was the satire? Is your job part of a nation (continent?) wide monopoly making several billion dollars a year and only has 1000 or so employees who ARE the attraction? I can’t believe people when they compare their data entry job at BF Electrical to major league ballplayers. If we had 25-55,000 people paying $25+ a whack 162 times a year to watch us work we’d all get pay raises too.

I don’t know many people that stick with jobs anymore anyway, so the average career outside of sports isn’t really that long anyway. I guess changing teams within the same field of work (baseball) is similar to changing companies in the same field.

A lot of people change their field of work even within entertainment industries. I went with half as a high mark and did say “maybe less”…

My thought is that the average MLB career is half as long (maybe less) as the average career otherwise.

Hmmm….think you’re overestimating that, or looking only at above average players. A lot of players wash out after six years or so, and there’s the high injury factor for pitchers.

Then there’s the minor league pay, which isn’t nearly as good…Can’t say that the total career, including minors, isn’t much more than 10-12 years.

The players that are complaining are all likely to get a big payday in future years. They are the cream of the crop and know it, which is what their argument is in the first place. I haven’t read any of them arguing for more marginal role players to get a big pay increase if they’re young so I don’t think those players fit into the conversation very much. The $400K minimum is pretty good for a system that is essentially like just coming out of college for your field. The guys that are complaining mostly had less than 4 years of it.

My thought is that the average MLB career is half as long (maybe less) as the average career otherwise. The longest MLB careers have been about 20-27 years or so and the longest careers otherwise are in the 45-50 year range. I understand that the industry is different than average, so how about comparing it to another entertainment field. Jim Carrey wasn’t making $25M a film after only a couple success’. There isn’t a field of work that I know of that you can earn top money after such a short work history. I think the players need to get over themselves and do their job to earn a bigger contract. Anyone who complains about only getting a 25% raise after the equivalent of 6 months of work needs to STFU. I have absolutely no concern or sympathy for someone making $400K for a year and being worried that they’ll only get $500K the next. Every field of work I’ve ever been in, heard from people about or read about gets smaller raises and slower pay increases in comparison than sports. It is so absolutely not my problem and I agree that if they have an issue with it they need to bargain for an increase in the next CBA. Maybe there could be different pay scales like the ‘type A,B, etc. FA’s where how you produce puts you in a range of players that make your contract have to be in a certain range. I really have no sympathy though…

the goodwill you generate with a relatively small expense could pay off bigtime down the line

Ask the Cleveland Cavaliers what became of the goodwill they generated with Carlos Boozer.

I would also like to hear Derek’s ideas on this – both the theoretical ideal system, and the chances of it coming to fruition.