Mookie and Andrew Mcutchen .....

[notin]

Mike Trout and Mookie are 1 and 1a..Mikes contract is a barometer of what we are looking at with Mookie .I happen to think Mike is the best player I’ve ever witnessed besides Bonds .Mookie salary won’t equal that of Mikes but it will be within 30 million .

 

 

I won't go that far.

 

Trout is 28 years old and has been worth 73.4 fWAR in his career. Betts is 27 years old and has been worth 37.4 fWAR in his career. I'm doubtful Betts can bridge the 36 fWAR gap in a single season, even if it is his option year...

[Swiharts Ghost]

I won't go that far.

 

Trout is 28 years old and has been worth 73.4 fWAR in his career. Betts is 27 years old and has been worth 37.4 fWAR in his career. I'm doubtful Betts can bridge the 36 fWAR gap in a single season, even if it is his option year...

 

Notin although I want to think the way you do about war it’s just the perception of these two men as joined at the hip .I believe Mookie gets north of 350 maybe as much as 380

[moonslav59]

Notin although I want to think the way you do about war it’s just the perception of these two men as joined at the hip .I believe Mookie gets north of 350 maybe as much as 380

 

I think he gets $330/10 or $340/10 or $350/11, $360/12- maybe $372/12 tops.

[Larry Cook]

I think he gets $330/10 or $340/10 or $350/11, $360/12- maybe $372/12 tops.

 

What a terrible contract any of those options would be.

 

Let’s hope it is not “hang ‘em chiam” signing any of those potential contracts. Let Betts go to Atlanta after he has a great 2020 for us.

[moonslav59]

What a terrible contract any of those options would be.

 

Let’s hope it is not “hang ‘em chiam” signing any of those potential contracts. Let Betts go to Atlanta after he has a great 2020 for us.

 

So, a comp pick for Betts.

[Slasher9]

Mike Trout is the greatest player to ever put on a uniform. sorry but Betts doesnt get to be compared to him yet. or probably ever.

[Bellhorn04]

Mike Trout is the greatest player to ever put on a uniform. sorry but Betts doesnt get to be compared to him yet. or probably ever.

 

I agree.

[notin]

I agree.

 

I wouldn’t say Trout is the greatest ever, but I have said many times he will be among them. At some point in the future, anyone talking about Ruth, Mays and Aaron will find themselves saying “ Ruth, Mays, Aaron and Trout”...

[OH FOY]

I think he gets $330/10 or $340/10 or $350/11, $360/12- maybe $372/12 tops.

 

Maybe, but 90% sure not from the Sox. Bloom big on analytics, and he'll compare through the years, if long term contracts are good investment for team, throughout the contract.

[OH FOY]

Angels need Trout for Fans, Sox can survive with this Fan Base, that has been generational through the years. They will still come even without Mookie.

You think the Stadium will suddenly be empty or Big Drop-off if Mookie is dealt.

I don't. First little winning streak the Gates will be full.

I think Bloom is betting on this, and his philosophy is he can have a competitive team without huge spending on players. That's all you need. Not one single player in Baseball, can determine if you win a WS. Still a team sport.

Edited November 14, 2019 by OH FOY!

[moonslav59]

Angels need Trout for Fans, Sox can survive with this Fan Base, that has been generational through the years. They will still come even without Mookie.

You think the Stadium will suddenly be empty or Big Drop-off if Mookie is dealt.

I don't. First little winning streak the Gates will be full.

I think Bloom is betting on this, and his philosophy is he can have a competitive team without huge spending on players. That's all you need. Not one single player in Baseball, can determine if you win a WS. Still a team sport.

 

There was already a drop off in viewership the last 2 years. Losing Betts will not add anyone.

 

Will people who wanted to buy a Betts jersey, still buy one of Devers or Bogey? Probably, many will.

 

IMO, Betts will earn the $330M/30 year deal he may get.... and then some.

[OH FOY]

Lost Fisk, Burleson, Lynn, still OK in Stadium, even back then, might have a little drop, but they will come back, always do.

Baseball is dying on TV because of length of game.

Been a Fan since 1960, very hard to watch entire game anymore, even with Mookie.

Edited November 14, 2019 by OH FOY!

[OH FOY]

There was already a drop off in viewership the last 2 years. Losing Betts will not add anyone.

 

Will people who wanted to buy a Betts jersey, still buy one of Devers or Bogey? Probably, many will.

 

IMO, Betts will earn the $330M/30 year deal he may get.... and then some.

 

For every good long term Contract like Manny, what's the ratio of bad ones. 10-1 you think? Don't know just throwing a number. If you think that is pretty accurate, then its a 10% chance signing Mookie long term, is a good gamble.

10 years how many WS, he can bring back you think? 3 because of his domination, then I agree its worth it.

Edited November 14, 2019 by OH FOY!

[OH FOY]

Jerseys never though about that one. They trade him, they will become a collectors item. Then they will market Bogey and Devers ones next. That's the way the cycle goes. Always someone next.

[moonslav59]

For every good long term Contract like Manny, what's the ratio of bad ones. 10-1 you think? Don't know just throwing a number. If you think that is pretty accurate, then its a 10% chance signing Mookie long term, is a good gamble.

10 years how many WS, he can bring back you think? 3 because of his domination, then I agree its worth it.

 

I already posted a list of all the top contracts of all time. (Go to the Realistic thread. I just reposted it.)

 

It's not even close to 10:1, but the judging criteria is subjective.

 

I'd say it's more like 3:2 or 5:3, but if you narrow it down to 8+ year deals with players 27 or 28, my guess is the numbers are close to 1:1.

Edited November 14, 2019 by moonslav59

[Slasher9]

i would guess a player like betts that sells a ton of #50 merch would be profitable for an owner into the $3-$400MM range. the flipside is that if you invest that amount of $$ into 1 player that prevents signing other players that could potentially bring us parades (see: pitchers).

many on here for years have been stating the JH doesnt care about budgets and that player payroll doesnt matter. clearly it does. 2020 will be the 2nd time during his ownership that this has been shown. we are finally getting out from the panda/hram contracts but are still saddled with price/sale. do we want to have $345/10 on the books for the next decade for 1 player?

[notin]

Jerseys never though about that one. They trade him, they will become a collectors item. Then they will market Bogey and Devers ones next. That's the way the cycle goes. Always someone next.

 

Aren't jersey sales property of MLB anyway?

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

No one is saying Betts is as good as Trout. But Mookie has been as good or better than everyone else in his six MLB years. Therefore, Betts -- about to enter his prime -- has earned and deserves a top-of-the-market contract -- whatever those numbers are, beginning in 2021.

 

If Mookie isn't worthy, then who is? Fans certainly can't decide the payscale of an entire industry. All we can do is drive it up with our financial support or drive it down by avoiding it.

 

Mookie Betts has also played great in three pennant races (and before anyone cites postseason stats, remember Trout has only made the playoffs once, when he hit .083). Trout is already an all-time great, but has only really participated in one pennant race and his team has had losing records in five of his eight full seasons.

 

.

[kenmeister]

Lost Fisk, Burleson, Lynn, still OK in Stadium, even back then, might have a little drop, but they will come back, always do.

Baseball is dying on TV because of length of game.

Been a Fan since 1960, very hard to watch entire game anymore, even with Mookie.

 

Also, the playoffs go from 8 pm EST to midnight. Too late and too long. Hopefully the 3 batter minimum helps with the length, but the games still need to start at a reasonable hour. Games shouldn't go past 10 pm.

[moonslav59]

Aren't jersey sales property of MLB anyway?

 

Who gets the money if sold at Fenway Park?

[Slasher9]

Who gets the money if sold at Fenway Park?

 

52% to the Red Sox

48% to revenue sharing

[notin]

Who gets the money if sold at Fenway Park?

 

From very brief internet research:

 

Apparently it depends on the jersey, etc. But for licensed jerseys, the MLBPA gets 11-15% and divides it EQUALLY among the members. The rest goes to the manufacturer and retailer. For unlicensed jerseys bearing the player's name but no official team logo, the player does get a royalty.

 

The upshot seems to be that Red Sox get nothing from Betts' jersey sales. All they get is the money for leasing the space to the retailer if it is sold at Fenway Park...

[notin]

52% to the Red Sox

48% to revenue sharing

 

Where did you find that? I found nothing that says anything remotely close. But my research was admittedly very cursory...

[Slasher9]

Where did you find that? I found nothing that says anything remotely close. But my research was admittedly very cursory...

 

BR

 

In Major League Baseball, 48% of local revenues are subject to revenue sharing and are distributed equally among all 30 teams, with each team receiving 3.3% of the total sum generated. As a result, in 2018, each team received $118 million from this pot. Teams alsoreceive a share of national revenues, which were estimated to be $91 million per team, also in 2018.

[moonslav59]

BR

 

In Major League Baseball, 48% of local revenues are subject to revenue sharing and are distributed equally among all 30 teams, with each team receiving 3.3% of the total sum generated. As a result, in 2018, each team received $118 million from this pot. Teams also receive a share of national revenues, which were estimated to be $91 million per team, also in 2018.

 

So, basically, the whole player budget up to the luxury tax is paid before they even to the gate receipts and TV revenue.

[notin]

BR

 

In Major League Baseball, 48% of local revenues are subject to revenue sharing and are distributed equally among all 30 teams, with each team receiving 3.3% of the total sum generated. As a result, in 2018, each team received $118 million from this pot. Teams alsoreceive a share of national revenues, which were estimated to be $91 million per team, also in 2018.

 

Doesn't that refer to ticket money?

 

I think merchandising is different, since team logos are considered property of MLB and not of the individual teams...

[notin]

So, basically, the whole player budget up to the luxury tax is paid before they even to the gate receipts and TV revenue.

 

I think what he is referring to is the gate revenue...

[Slasher9]

Doesn't that refer to ticket money?

 

I think merchandising is different, since team logos are considered property of MLB and not of the individual teams...

 

Among measures that are typically part of revenue sharing are splitting national television rights, pooling of merchandising revenues, and in the case of Major League Baseball, developing and pooling revenues from the internet via mlb.com. Revenue sharing can also include some redistributive measures such as a luxury tax, or even forcing teams to pay a portion of their local television revenues into a common pool (something which has been contemplated but never implemented in MLB). The common thread is that these measures treat richer and poorer teams on an equal footing, or in the case of redistributive measures, take some of the excess revenues of richer teams and provide these to less-favored teams.

[notin]

Among measures that are typically part of revenue sharing are splitting national television rights, pooling of merchandising revenues, and in the case of Major League Baseball, developing and pooling revenues from the internet via mlb.com. Revenue sharing can also include some redistributive measures such as a luxury tax, or even forcing teams to pay a portion of their local television revenues into a common pool (something which has been contemplated but never implemented in MLB). The common thread is that these measures treat richer and poorer teams on an equal footing, or in the case of redistributive measures, take some of the excess revenues of richer teams and provide these to less-favored teams.

 

OK, but I think again that is only among the portion the league gets.

 

"Between 11 percent and 15 percent of the merchandise sales will go to the league and is then shared equally among the teams. The rest goes to the manufacturer."

 

Source: https://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2016/10/03/good-question-sports-merchandise/

 

Worth pointing out, that is 3 years old and might be outdated. But maybe the 48%/52% split is of the 11-15%, which means teams are getting about 5%-ish of the revenue from each jersey sale. So for a $75 jersey, that selling team team gets between $4.29 and $5.85 and the revenue sharing portion is between $3.96 and $5.40. That seem about right?

 

The manufacturers do make a bundle on these things...

[Slasher9]

yeah. i also found this:

In general, MLB merchandise sales have remained around $3 billion per year over the past ten years. Scott Sillcox from the Licensed Sports Blog suggests that MLB receives a royalty payment of 12% of the $3.4B in sales or roughly $400 Million that is split equally between all teams. In addition, MLB receives an unknown amount of licensing revenue from other sources.