Anthony Rizzo LOCKED up !!!

  1. This post has been removed.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from soxnewmex. Show soxnewmex's posts

    Re: Anthony Rizzo LOCKED up !!!

    Locking up young guys you believe in for mostly the right reasons at less money than you'd have to pay if you waited seems smart to me, a calculated risk for sure, and I think the Cubs are doing the right thing with Rizzo and Starling and the young pitcher too, signing them on now for the long term, believing in them.  Sox did it with Pedroia and Lester and that mostly worked out.

     
  3. This post has been removed.

     
  4. This post has been removed.

     
  5. This post has been removed.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from crazyworldoftroybrown. Show crazyworldoftroybrown's posts

    Re: Anthony Rizzo LOCKED up !!!

    Funny how things work out. Sox didn't have to anything, and they would have their 1st baseman for many years.
    Whats dumber though is the Padres. At least we got a couple of young arms, in our deal.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from S5. Show S5's posts

    Re: Anthony Rizzo LOCKED up !!!

    In response to softlaw2's comment:

     

    It's reasonable, only because of what has been unreasonable in a closed shop. I like the performance portion, even though the MLBPA has fought against anything but superficial performance based contracts.

     



    Who's crazier, the owners for paying it or the players for taking it? 

     

    It's a funny thing about that "closed shop".  It correlates nicely with the exemption to the anti-trust laws that benefits the owners.  Yes, the closed shop benefits the players but at the same time the exemption to anti-trust laws allows the owners to maintain a monopoly in MLB. 

    In essence the owners can offer anything they want to offer because the players have no other league to play in. 

    The thing that benefits the players is that the owners trust one another so  little that owners are unable to make a player a reasonable offer for fear that another owner will top that offer.  The owners are "eating themselves".

    I'm not suggesting that the owners should collude.  That would be illegal and immoral.  What I AM suggesting is that the owners should be looking out of themselves and one another by independently not running the bidding up on players.  But in their individual greed they know they can't trust one another enough to do that. So I have very little sympathy for the owners in this situation. 

     

     

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from BosoxJoe5. Show BosoxJoe5's posts

    Re: Anthony Rizzo LOCKED up !!!

    In response to softlaw2's comment:

    It's reasonable, only because of what has been unreasonable in a closed shop. I like the performance portion, even though the MLBPA has fought against anything but superficial performance based contracts.



    How many times do we have to go through this. Until players are freely able to shop their wares, owners will always surpress salaries. 

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Ice-Cream. Show Ice-Cream's posts

    Re: Anthony Rizzo LOCKED up !!!

     

    Good move for the Cubs.  I guess this has been the only good news for the Cubs during the past several years.   LOL

     

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from JimfromFlorida. Show JimfromFlorida's posts

    Re: Anthony Rizzo LOCKED up !!!

    In response to BosoxJoe5's comment:

    In response to softlaw2's comment:

     

    It's reasonable, only because of what has been unreasonable in a closed shop. I like the performance portion, even though the MLBPA has fought against anything but superficial performance based contracts.

     



    How many times do we have to go through this. Until players are freely able to shop their wares, owners will always surpress salaries. 

     



    ??????????? Suppress their salaries? Players are free to shop around already?

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from JimfromFlorida. Show JimfromFlorida's posts

    Re: Anthony Rizzo LOCKED up !!!

    Gee no one complaining about the 4th yr and beyond like you do with any RS contract?

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from pinstripezac35. Show pinstripezac35's posts

    Re: Anthony Rizzo LOCKED up !!!

    In response to S5's comment:



    Who's crazier, the owners for paying it or the players for taking it? 

     

    It's a funny thing about that "closed shop".  It correlates nicely with the exemption to the anti-trust laws that benefits the owners.  Yes, the closed shop benefits the players but at the same time the exemption to anti-trust laws allows the owners to maintain a monopoly in MLB. 

    In essence the owners can offer anything they want to offer because the players have no other league to play in. 

    The thing that benefits the players is that the owners trust one another so  little that owners are unable to make a player a reasonable offer for fear that another owner will top that offer.  The owners are "eating themselves".

    I'm not suggesting that the owners should collude.  That would be illegal and immoral.  What I AM suggesting is that the owners should be looking out of themselves and one another by independently not running the bidding up on players.  But in their individual greed they know they can't trust one another enough to do that. So I have very little sympathy for the owners in this situation. 

     

     

    greetings S5

     

    while your point has merit

    I think the word 'greed' is a tad harsh

    these guys are just trying to win

    in my world greed is keeping the money in your pocket

     

     




     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from S5. Show S5's posts

    Re: Anthony Rizzo LOCKED up !!!

    In response to pinstripezac35's comment:

    In response to S5's comment:



    Who's crazier, the owners for paying it or the players for taking it? 

     

    It's a funny thing about that "closed shop".  It correlates nicely with the exemption to the anti-trust laws that benefits the owners.  Yes, the closed shop benefits the players but at the same time the exemption to anti-trust laws allows the owners to maintain a monopoly in MLB. 

    In essence the owners can offer anything they want to offer because the players have no other league to play in. 

    The thing that benefits the players is that the owners trust one another so  little that owners are unable to make a player a reasonable offer for fear that another owner will top that offer.  The owners are "eating themselves".

    I'm not suggesting that the owners should collude.  That would be illegal and immoral.  What I AM suggesting is that the owners should be looking out of themselves and one another by independently not running the bidding up on players.  But in their individual greed they know they can't trust one another enough to do that. So I have very little sympathy for the owners in this situation. 

     

     

    greetings S5

     

    while your point has merit

    I think the word 'greed' is a tad harsh

    these guys are just trying to win

    in my world greed is keeping the money in your pocket

     

     






    Good Day, Zac!

    Possibly what we have is a difference in definition of "greed".  While I DO see greed as keeping the money in the pockets I also see greed as wanting championship after championship, which leads to.... making more money!  And my team is as guilty of it as yours.

    Lord know the Sox have made some <ahem> "questionable decisions" regarding paying huge salaries in the past few years and those decisions were made in the interest of winning games a/k/a making money. 

    Most of my point in my previous post was to point out that as a fan with few dollars tied up in the organizations I find it almost humorous that the owners, the ones who have the most to gain, don't trust one another enough to allow it to happen.  It's got to be a lonely life, wondering who's going to shoot at you next.  :-)

    I love the avitar but don't you think it's time to take the bag off?  :-)

     

     

     
  14. This post has been removed.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from pinstripezac35. Show pinstripezac35's posts

    Re: Anthony Rizzo LOCKED up !!!

    In response to S5's comment:

    Possibly what we have is a difference in definition of "greed".

    I guess so

      While I DO see greed as keeping the money in the pockets I also see greed as wanting championship after championship, which leads to.... making more money!  And my team is as guilty of it as yours.

    normally I'm as cynical as they come

    but I'm choosing to believe in most cases it's more about

    competing than making money when it comes to big FA contracts

    Lord know the Sox have made some <ahem> "questionable decisions" regarding paying huge salaries in the past few years and those decisions were made in the interest of winning games a/k/a making money. 

    no doubt marketing is always in play

    as U know it is a biz

    some suggest the yanks only signed soriano

    because they didn't make a splash all that winter

     

    Most of my point in my previous post was to point out that as a fan with few dollars tied up in the organizations I find it almost humorous that the owners, the ones who have the most to gain, don't trust one another enough to allow it to happen.  It's got to be a lonely life, wondering who's going to shoot at you next.  :-)

    I hear U S5

    I'm just not sure if any of these owners got to where they are

    by trusting their competition

     

    like you mentioned in your 1st post

    it's hard for the owners to get a handle on this

    due to the fear of collusion charges

     

     

    I love the avitar but don't you think it's time to take the bag off?  :-)

     LOL don't want to jinx it ;-)

    besides I know it's only may

     




     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from southpaw777. Show southpaw777's posts

    Re: Anthony Rizzo LOCKED up !!!

    Good for Rizzo and the Cubbies. Loved this kid when he was here. He looked like the real deal in AA before we traded him. Its not the "normal" big contract, but like Pedey said, "what can I buy with 100M, that I cant but with 40M." The kid has set him and his family up for life, playing a game he loves. I wish him the best.

     
  17. This post has been removed.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from southpaw777. Show southpaw777's posts

    Re: Anthony Rizzo LOCKED up !!!

    Loved when I read that statement for pedey.

     
  19. This post has been removed.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from Ice-Cream. Show Ice-Cream's posts

    Re: Anthony Rizzo LOCKED up !!!

     

    If I was a baseball player, then the Cubs would be on my no-trade list.   LOL

     

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from BosoxJoe5. Show BosoxJoe5's posts

    Re: Anthony Rizzo LOCKED up !!!

    In response to JimfromFlorida's comment:

    In response to BosoxJoe5's comment:

     

    In response to softlaw2's comment:

     

    It's reasonable, only because of what has been unreasonable in a closed shop. I like the performance portion, even though the MLBPA has fought against anything but superficial performance based contracts.

     



    How many times do we have to go through this. Until players are freely able to shop their wares, owners will always surpress salaries. 

     

     



    ??????????? Suppress their salaries? Players are free to shop around already?

     



    No they aren't. They get assigned to an organization, have to make it through the minors, and wait 6 years to sign with a team in conclusion with 29 other teams. Baseball is by far the best of the major sports to allow player movement but it is still one of two legal monopolies. When you got your first real job did you have wait 6 years to find a new one.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share