Does MLB need to change way minor league players live?

[bean5302]

14 hours ago, PseudoSABR said:

Totally baseless statement.  Frankly, this kind of misinformation and judgment of the poor shouldn't stand around these parts.  

So the only people who work for under $15/hr don't try? Can you even hear yourself. 

Totally baseless that a healthy male college graduate who has the option of playing baseball for an MLB team's minor league affiliate (means no criminal record or obvious public relations snafu) around age 22 can "PROBABLY" get a job for $15/hr if they want it? We're getting off into the political weeds now, but my statement is not to be used out of context. 

[Craig Arko]

I suppose the obvious question is: would you choose to live this way?

[Unwinder]

I don't mean to get political or assume anyone else's motivations here, but I think this conversation is getting lost in the weeds in broader ideas about what fair wages even are and what employers are obligated to pay. I think that people get so used to arguing that the government shouldn't impose a higher minimum wage that they're primed for the same arguments in a conversation about whether a specific business should pay their employees more.

Regardless of how you feel about regulating wages, it's still good to take care of people who you rely on to keep your business running. It's still good, if you can afford to, to pay your employees more than you're required to pay them. Generosity is good.

Playing baseball at a professional level takes a lot of very specialized skill and talent, and other industries that require similar levels of skill tend to pay their workers a lot more (because players will still line up and make sacrifices to chase their dreams). I don't think it's necessary to split hairs over whether or not minor league players can scrape by if they're frugal enough. Baseball organizations can afford to pay minor-league players a comfortable living, and it would be morally good if they did, even if it shouldn't be mandatory for them to do so, and even if it doesn't provide a proven competitive advantage. A business that is generous with its employees is better than one that is unnecessarily stingy.

[bean5302]

All I'm saying is people have to make sacrifices when they chase their dream. MLB owners and executives unfairly take advantage of players in a lot of ways, but when it comes to MiLB compensation I don't see it being such a huge issue when the larger picture is taken into consideration.

1. MiLB players received 6-7 figure signing bonuses at age 18-22. The minimum slot bonus for the top 300 picks in baseball is more than $100,000. That's plenty to supplement income or live on directly for the entirety of their MiLB career.
2. Agent fees are not relevant for players who do not receive a large signing bonus, and for those who get a large signing bonus, they're not relevant for affording a place to live because they have enough to live on for years. For those who receive a mid-size signing bonus (Say $50-100k), the fees are typically are tax deductible and the contract payment is structurable so that taxes are minimized. The agent fees are actually similar to union dues. If you don't make much, the fee isn't much.
3. Taxes are not a significant expense for any signing bonus under $100k. If you think they are, I feel strongly you do not understand how the tax codes work, but that's not intended as an insult. Most people don't and don't care to for that matter. What matters is at the end of the day to me is the perception taxes on signing bonuses are significant to whether or not a MiLB player can afford rent is false. If you really want me to break out how the tax code would be applied on a line item for a signing bonus and subsequent MiLB salary, I can do that. I suspect you don't.
4. MiLB players who have not received a signing bonus of at least $100k are going to be college graduates who did not impress enough to make the top 10 rounds of the MLB draft. They're fringey, long shot, MiLB roster filler for the most part. Yes. College graduates, because players do not sign before graduating college without a bonus. There are some exceptions. Some IFA's from less scouted countries can get the shaft. Something needs to be done about that.
5. Service industry jobs desperately hire on the spot right now and have been hiring on the spot for anybody with experience for years now. While there are undoubtedly some cities in the US where this isn't the case, based on the reports out of every form of major media, those places not hiring are rare. Service industry jobs are hiring at far over minimum wage and most receive significant tips on top. I have plenty of friends in the service industry across the country or who've worked service industry jobs out of college. Not making at least $15/hr right now (or close to it) including tips would be unusual for a server or bartender. 
6. Sublets, and single room rentals on month to month deals are not generally super difficult. I do think MiLB should do a lot more here since it wouldn't be that hard to rent out an entire small apartment building or something for players. This part is harder, but certainly not impossible. COVID lockdowns, etc, have made it far harder... but COVID has given the shaft to huge swaths of people outside MiLB as well. It's not some unique issue here. Also, the idea players are constantly shifted between levels is absurd. They generally move 1 level per year outside rookie ball.

Managing a budget isn't necessarily fun, but it's not rocket science. I feel people have incorporated a cause into their personal identity, but have an incomplete picture of the cause they're forwarding. From what I feel is a more comprehensive position, the situation for most MiLB is not so riddled with strife as some things written on the internet may have people believing. There will always be the exception, but I don't believe more than a handful of MiLB players truly have a real issue they couldn't work out by being responsible based on their age and professional experience.

I'd be more inclined to have a discussion on front office worker compensation than MiLB compensation levels, but it honestly wouldn't likely be a "baseball" related topic and probably veer off into politics so it's not appropriate for TwinsDaily IMHO.

It's not that I don't understand where the perception is coming from. I do. I just probably know more about taxes, finances and budgeting than a large majority of people do. Maybe I'm not being fair because I have a high degree of knowledge in the area and it makes me expect a higher degree of understanding from other people or a willingness to put in effort to understand their financial situation. The MiLB player compensation level does not appear dire to me right now. The increase in pay they are receiving now is massive, but I also do agree MiLB could do a lot to improve the situation. Like the aforementioned idea of providing accomodations at an apartment building the team rents from the apartment's owner and sublets to the players. That wouldn't cost a team hardly any money.

Basically, I'm saying the argument that more than a small minority of MiLB players cannot support themselves and virtually no MiLB players do not have the option of being able to afford the basic necessities isn't accurate in my opinion. I'm also saying, if you're following a dream, sometimes you have to make sacrifices. That's what people outside the world of baseball have to do and baseball players are not special. It's just another job to me. 

[bean5302]

1 hour ago, Craig Arko said:

I suppose the obvious question is: would you choose to live this way?

The obvious answer is MiLB players do choose to live this way and did choose to live that way before their 60% pay increase.

[TheLeviathan]

43 minutes ago, Unwinder said:

I don't mean to get political or assume anyone else's motivations here, but I think this conversation is getting lost in the weeds in broader ideas about what fair wages even are and what employers are obligated to pay. I think that people get so used to arguing that the government shouldn't impose a higher minimum wage that they're primed for the same arguments in a conversation about whether a specific business should pay their employees more.

Regardless of how you feel about regulating wages, it's still good to take care of people who you rely on to keep your business running. It's still good, if you can afford to, to pay your employees more than you're required to pay them. Generosity is good.

Playing baseball at a professional level takes a lot of very specialized skill and talent, and other industries that require similar levels of skill tend to pay their workers a lot more (because players will still line up and make sacrifices to chase their dreams). I don't think it's necessary to split hairs over whether or not minor league players can scrape by if they're frugal enough. Baseball organizations can afford to pay minor-league players a comfortable living, and it would be morally good if they did, even if it shouldn't be mandatory for them to do so, and even if it doesn't provide a proven competitive advantage. A business that is generous with its employees is better than one that is unnecessarily stingy.

This post says the exact opposite of everything you said @bean5302 At this point you are long-windedly defending greed.

You should reread the post you liked and better understand the thesis so you aren't so offbase.

[bean5302]

1 hour ago, TheLeviathan said:

This post says the exact opposite of everything you said @bean5302 At this point you are long-windedly defending greed.

You should reread the post you liked and better understand the thesis so you aren't so offbase.

I don't need to agree with everything somebody says to like where they're coming from. I think the topic is getting political and I like @Unwinder pointing that out.

 

[TheLeviathan]

1 hour ago, bean5302 said:

I don't need to agree with everything somebody says to like where they're coming from. I think the topic is getting political and I like @Unwinder pointing that out.

 

If you didn't like it getting political you could have steered away from "dumb kids can't stretch peanuts" line of argument.

I'll repeat because it basically trashes all of your arguments, is not political, and compares MLB to their peers.  They're terrible.  And there is no moral or financial justification for it.

[KirbyDome89]

On 10/1/2021 at 10:47 AM, Cap'n Piranha said:

I read the same article, and the thing that struck me was that it seems like a lot of these MiLB players make pretty poor decisions on their finances.  The main subject of the article, for example, played this year for a team based in Madison, AL.  A quick rent.com search showed multiple listings of 3-4 bedroom places for around $300/br a month.  For someone making $600-$700 a week, that is perfectly affordable, particularly if roommates are brought in (which would reduce the cost to $150-$200 a month).  No one is getting rich playing MiLB ball, but that's true for just about every entry-level position in any industry, particularly one where supply far outstrips demand.

Would a smart organization do more to provide for its MiLB players?  I personally think so, but as I've previously said, the fact that every smart organization has to this point declined to do so suggests that the wisdom of providing more for MiLB players as not so obvious as it might appear.

 

On 10/1/2021 at 3:27 PM, Cap'n Piranha said:

You don't have to be the "most" financially responsible, you just have to be reasonably financially repsonsible.  I don't think it's crazy to suggest that we should expect adults (by and large) to be able to handle their finances--if the vast majority of MiLB players are so financially illiterate that they can't do that, that is a society problem, not a baseball problem.  MiLB pays above minimum wage, so this is not an issue of players not being paid enough to live, it's a problem of too many MiLB players not understanding how to budget.  Therefore, simply increasing their pay is unlikely to fix the issue.  If someone is irresponsible with $20k-$25k a year, they are not likely to all of the sudden become wise stewards of their money when given $50k.

How did we get from a single player blowing through a signing bonus to "MiLB players' financial illiteracy is a societal problem?"

25K annually is literally living check to check. You don't budget, you cross your fingers and hope an emergency doesn't come up because you almost certainly can't afford to cover it. 

The quality of life is being totally ignored here. 

[PseudoSABR]

5 hours ago, bean5302 said:

All I'm saying is people have to make sacrifices when they chase their dream.

You're presuming they make it to the point of success where those sacrifices pay off.  Only 10% of minor leaguers make the majors. 

The success of the few who make it needs to spread among those who help hold the system up but will never make it.  

Demanding that they budget rather than have a good quality of life, is supply-side political nonsense.  There's no apolitical reason they should have to make such choices. 

[Craig Arko]

6 hours ago, bean5302 said:

The obvious answer is MiLB players do choose to live this way and did choose to live that way before their 60% pay increase.

Of course that's not what I asked, is it?

[Vanimal46]

Here are some real examples of people on YouTube talking about how much they were paid playing minor league ball. The first example is Eric Sim, drafted in the 27th round in 2010 and released in 2015. Warning: There is swearing in the video. 
 

And here is another example from Kieran Lovegrove, a 10 year minor league veteran. 

Budget better. What a cold hearted response. 

[Squirrel]

To answer the question of the title ... yes, MLB needs to make changes to make the minor leaguers lives livable. I think the current wages should include housing and at least one meal/day. Some places do provide housing, but I'm not sure the cost, but it's not usually free. If MLB teams provide housing, however they do it, it would ease a lot of the struggles. Someone suggested that minor leaguers don't know how to budget ... well ... I think that's true of most kids entering adulthood today, but that isn't the source of their troubles. A budget only goes so far when you literally cannot cover the basic costs of living. It is NOT doable for most going through the minor leagues. I know that some teams provide classes to teach English, to help players get their hs diplomas, perhaps they should add classes in basic finances. Call it an enhanced 'home economics' course, but finances/budgeting, shopping, cooking, living ... that would help. You make the experience doable and livable, it will attract a larger pool of players which makes for a better MLB all the way around. When you weaken your supply chain, you will weaken the top results. So, enhance the MiL players experience, it will be better all around.

[Trov]

On 10/1/2021 at 3:35 PM, Cap'n Piranha said:

Not sure how this relates to my post.  My point was that if paying $7M a year for the entire MiLB player roster would be a huge enhancement to the performance of MiLB players, and correlate to them being better upon hitting the majors, why wouldn't the Rays or A's, two teams that value analytics, and need to save money wherever possible, have already done this?  I'm not saying this proves increased pay for MiLBers does not move the needle; I'm just saying if it was such and open-and-shut case, some team would have already done it, not because they'd attract more talent, but because the talent they get would be improved, and would be better players at the MLB level for that team, and better trade chips as well.

What I was saying is that they cannot pay more to minor league guys even if they wanted too, unless the full league chose to.  A team could not say we are going to increase the pay, but they can increase the other things like paying for apartments. Also, the higher pay is not about better performance but to help keep the minor league alive and keep the players to not have as many mental health issues.  

[Trov]

On 10/1/2021 at 6:54 PM, bean5302 said:

Limited? 56-70% of the players who batted for the Kernels received a $90k+ signing bonus (there were 3 IFA's I didn't find numbers on and an Empire League player as well). Also, the payments should never be a one and done. The payments are usually structured over at least 2 tax years. Let's assume we take the absolute minimum significant bonus I used and do some quick math. $90k signing bonus payable over 2 tax years is $45k per year. The player is going to have taxable income of maybe $30k so figure $3.5k annually in federal tax and maybe as much as $1k in state tax. Grand total income tax bill? $9k, max. Net compensation, $81k, not $50-60k.

Next step, I expect the player to use the bonus as supplemental income, not try to live off it if they can't afford to live off it. In other words. If you can't find a job which pays $15/hr right now in the U.S. you are probably not trying. Assume the player doesn't want to work during the baseball season so they only work 6 months out of the year. So that's $15k more income annually (basically tax free). How much does it cost to do subleases or rent a room out in a house while covering 1/2 your food costs? Any MiLB player should be able to make ends meet at a net of $30k/yr. So if we assume the $90k signing bonus is used as a sinking fund, the player could make ends meet, responsibly for at least 5 years. This is basic financial stuff and any player signing a contract has an agent who knows this stuff.

So what about the players who got no signing bonus? They are the long-shot players who've graduated from college or already had the financial resources to not need a signing bonus. If you want to follow a dream as a long shot hoping something good happens, you should be willing to invest in the sacrifice. It very likely won't work out, you'll be a 11th+ round pick as a college graduate and you'll probably know where you stand very quickly. In a year or two, it'll be obvious if you potentially have what it takes. If you do, you get a loan/advance from an investment company for that $15k a year you need.

This is not rocket science. 

One your math does not take into account the agent percentage for that signing bonus normally 10 to 15 percent.  Also, the pay of $500 to $700 a week is only during the season.  Then most players are expected to work out at the spring training facilities, not work during their off-season to have a living wage.  Also, not all the late round picks are college grads, which very few of them get full rides to play baseball, so they most likely have student loans if they did play in college and some are high school players that could not get into college or chose not too because they did not get a scholarship to play. If they did go to college they could not work during time in college because NCAA does not allow players to work and earn money, until recently.  

The point I am making is that if half the players about need to choose between living in poverty to maybe make their dream come true, should the MLB increase the pay to allow those players to not live in poverty?  Should the players not be exploited to try and make their dream come true to field so many teams?  Maybe we should cut to 2 minor league teams per team so those 30th round picks that need to live in poverty can just accept they will not make it. 

[a-wan]

The fact that we as Americans seem to be fine with companies treating their employees like crap, I think is one of the underlying reasons why MLB has been able to treat their minor leaguers so poorly. 

For those that are fine with the way the minor leaguers are treated, and you're fine with them being paid so poorly are you OK with the fact that teams are not putting them in the best possible position to succeed?

[DJL44]

Rod Beck had cashed some major league paychecks yet lived out of an RV parked outside the ballpark when he pitched in the minor leagues later in his career. He died at age 38.

ESPN.com: MLB - Trailer bash: Rod Beck's life in the minors

The reason the 27th round picks don't get paid anything is they can always find someone else willing to take less money to chase a dream. Nobody expects a 27th rounder to make it. They're essentially on the team because they need someone for the real prospects to play against. If people really hate being exploited by MLB there are thousands of other jobs available. Playing in the minor leagues gives someone bragging rights for the rest of their life. That doesn't mean MLB should make people chase the dream on their own dime but it also doesn't mean they have to pay a premium to get players.

[specialiststeve]

What each team needs to do for all their minor leaguers is in the Town that they are in purchase... own an apartment complex for each of their teams. Provide housing as part of their being on the team. As others have suggested their needs to be a "minimum" wage for each level. All of these are VERY doable and would be in the best interest of the player, team and community that the minor league team is in. 

[Cap'n Piranha]

On 10/1/2021 at 4:25 PM, PseudoSABR said:

This is whackadoodle thinking.  It's recommended that people spend no more than 30% on rent.  And you think 8 adult men living in a 4 bedroom house is reasonable?  

Maybe you should campaign on that slogan; don't raise the minimum wage, just get someone else to live in your actual bedroom.  

 

If someone needs to pay $300 a month in rent (which would be for 4 people living in the 4 bedroom house example I've been using), then for that to be less than 30% of rent, they need to earn only $1,000/month after taxes, or $250 a week.  Players in A ball make twice that (albeit before taxes).  Assume a player in Low A plays the whole season there, and collects 24 weekly paychecks, which is $12k.  Assume in the other 28 weeks of the year, they make $300 a week ($15/hr at 20 hours/week, $10/hr at 30 hours/week, or $7.50/hr at 40 hours/week).  That adds up to another $8,400, so a yearly total of $20,400.  According to the calculator below, that person's tax burden is $3,101, leaving them with $17,299 left.  That $300 share in the apartment is $3,600 a year, which is 20.8% of the take home pay.

My thinking is not whackadoodle, but yours is completely devoid of mathematical comprehension.

https://smartasset.com/taxes/income-taxes#0lMkUlDUp9

[Cap'n Piranha]

On 10/1/2021 at 6:54 PM, TheLeviathan said:

And your math included no agent fees and as rosy a picture as possible and still left them 30k.  My link puts that into context of professional sports along with a litany of issues you didn't consider.  

You are defending poverty on the basis of "slightly better than homeless and living off happy meals".  For what purpose....I have no freaking clue.

30k in available money to spend is nowhere close to poverty.  Even if you take 10% off for agents fees, they still have $27k, so they could spend $5400 on rent ($450/mo), $5400 on food, $5400 on other bills, and still have over $10k left to do whatever they want with.  It's befuddling to me how many people can't seem to grasp what an actual poverty rate is--according to the federal government (source below), it's just under $13k.  A player who plays May to September will collect 22 paychecks of at least $500, and will earn anywhere from $11k to $15.4k.  As such, a player would be at the poverty line only if they were at A ball and made little to no money outside of their MiLB gamechecks, and had no bonus money to supplement their paychecks.

https://aspe.hhs.gov/topics/poverty-economic-mobility/poverty-guidelines/prior-hhs-poverty-guidelines-federal-register-references/2021-poverty-guidelines

[Cap'n Piranha]

On 10/1/2021 at 8:38 PM, Vanimal46 said:

I thought minor leaguers being laughably underpaid was a universal thought. But here we are with, I guess, a debate that budgeting better is the solution? Yikes. 

If a person finds themselves unable to make ends meet, the odds are that better budgeting will be at least a portion, if not the entirety, of the solution.  It is unlikely that 18-24 year old men healthy enough to play baseball full time will have the kind of ongoing costs that would render them unable to improve their financial situation through increased fiscal responsibility.

[Cap'n Piranha]

On 10/1/2021 at 8:57 PM, DJL44 said:

Being a baseball player should pay at least $15/hr. That's $600 a week.

Minor league player don't need to live off a bonus for multiple years. Most don't make it past year 2 in the minors.

Half of minor league players are paid at least $600/wk.  The other half are 16.7% below that threshold.

[Cap'n Piranha]

On 10/2/2021 at 5:43 AM, Whitey333 said:

I am just astonished at how many of you are blaming the milb players for being on " poverty" wages.  If the greedy owners and major league players are so hell bent on squeezing out every nickel of monies, then why not dump the minor leagues like other pro sports?  I'm not advocating that, just saying.  It's sad that people are ripping the very players they are hoping get promoted to a major league team.  Whatever happened to empathy and compassion for others?  You obviously won't find it hear with many of the commentators.

I don't think anyone here is ripping minor league players.  I see people pointing out that MiLB does not pay poverty wages (which you know, hence why you put quotation marks around the word poverty), and saying that if players are living in their car, and struggling to get enough food to eat, it is probably because they make poor financial decisions, and therefore giving them more money won't help matters.  If we truly want to help the minor league players, directing them to be fiscally responsible is the best way to do that, not giving them more money that could quite possibly be squandered.

If you want proof, look no further than the individual who led off the ESPN story--he received a $400k signing bonus, and in 3 years, it was gone.  Do we really think that upping his salary would have prevented him from living as he was "forced" to do?  In fact, I am very empathetic and compassionate, which is why I don't think throwing money at someone is helpful, but often detrimental.  Often the empathetic and compassionate thing to do is let people understand the consequences of their poor decisions, and then offer them your hand to help them up.

[Cap'n Piranha]

On 10/2/2021 at 9:43 AM, Craig Arko said:

I suppose the obvious question is: would you choose to live this way?

If I wanted to play MiLB baseball, yes.

[Cap'n Piranha]

On 10/2/2021 at 1:34 PM, TheLeviathan said:

If you didn't like it getting political you could have steered away from "dumb kids can't stretch peanuts" line of argument.

I'll repeat because it basically trashes all of your arguments, is not political, and compares MLB to their peers.  They're terrible.  And there is no moral or financial justification for it.

Actually, that article you posted ignores several things.  For one, baseball players, basketball players, and hockey players are no longer peers, when it comes to the point in their lives where professional organziations pay them to play.  Jose Miranda would not be able to go play for the Iowa Wolves or Wild tomorrow, nor would any of those players (with maybe one exception every few years) be able to join a Twins MiLB team.  As such, NBA/NHL/MLB minor leaguers are no more peers than salespeople, HR representatives and software engineers working in the tech industry are.

Second, the NBA and NHL each have only one level of minor leagues, compared to baseball's 4 "official" levels (there are still complex and academy teams, and I'm sure those players aren't playing for free).  If MLB dissolved Low A, High A, and AA, I'm sure the weekly salary for AAA players would increase to $5k-$6k a month, and be largely inline with the G League and AHL.  Likewise, if the NBA and NHL added 3 levels of minor leagues, I'm guessing the pay for the currently existing leagues would go down substantially.

Third, MiLB rosters are larger than either the G League or AHL.  It's a lot easier to guarantee $7k a month when you only have to do that for 10 guys, as opposed to 28.  This isn't to say MLB owners couldn't do it, just to point out that it's an easier threshold to achieve for NBA owners (in fact, if both rosters are being paid minimum salaries, an MLB owner will pay more to his 28 AAA players than the NBA owner will to his 10).

[Cap'n Piranha]

On 10/2/2021 at 3:50 PM, KirbyDome89 said:

 

How did we get from a single player blowing through a signing bonus to "MiLB players' financial illiteracy is a societal problem?"

25K annually is literally living check to check. You don't budget, you cross your fingers and hope an emergency doesn't come up because you almost certainly can't afford to cover it. 

The quality of life is being totally ignored here. 

I said if.  If the vast majority of MiLB players can't survive on what they're being paid, then financial illiteracy is an issue, and unless you're saying that MLB deliberately seeks out financially illterate individuals to play in MiLB (making MiLB players not representatuve of society at large), the presumption is therefore that the young people in our society are not equipped to be financially literate upon graduating from HS/College.  If that is the case, it is hardly MLB's issue to solve--it's all of us who should be asking why our education system has failed so massively at preparing our youth for life.

25k annually, for a single person, is nowhere close to check to check, unless the person is living beyond their means.  That individual could spend $500/mo on rent, $500/mo on food, $500/mo on other bills, and still have $500 left for anything else they want.  Will it be a luxurious existence?  No.  But no one owes anyone a luxurious existence.

[Cap'n Piranha]

18 hours ago, Trov said:

What I was saying is that they cannot pay more to minor league guys even if they wanted too, unless the full league chose to.  A team could not say we are going to increase the pay, but they can increase the other things like paying for apartments. Also, the higher pay is not about better performance but to help keep the minor league alive and keep the players to not have as many mental health issues.  

This could easily be worked around.  The Rays could give all of their players jobs in the organization during the offseason, or open a restaurant staffed exclusively by their MiLB players and be fine operating at a loss, or require sponsors to take a couple of Rays players as paid interns.  The only reason an MLB team like the Rays or A's isn't paying MiLB players more (whether directly or indirectly) is because they are not convinced that the investment is worth it.

[Cap'n Piranha]

On 10/2/2021 at 12:52 AM, a-wan said:

Wow, just wow. Blaming the poor minor leaguers for bad budgeting. Why do billionaire owners get such a pass from fans? For the cost of a rule 5 drafted player or two, an MLB team could help subsidize a huge chunk of rent for their players.

For the same reason millionaire players get a pass from those who want to blame the owners.  If every player set aside 1% of their post-tax pay (for a player at the minimum, assuming 50% taxes, which is almost assuredly high, that's $17 a game), $40M could be provided to MiLB players annually, which would be an additional $11.5k a year, per player.  Or, MLB players could allow MiLB players into their union as junior members, and negotiate increased pay on their behalf.  If the owners are greedy, and don't want to reduce their income for MiLB players, then certainly the MLBPA is full of greedy people who don't want to reduce their income for MiLB players either.

[Mike Sixel]

45 minutes ago, Cap'n Piranha said:

If a person finds themselves unable to make ends meet, the odds are that better budgeting will be at least a portion, if not the entirety, of the solution.  It is unlikely that 18-24 year old men healthy enough to play baseball full time will have the kind of ongoing costs that would render them unable to improve their financial situation through increased fiscal responsibility.

Such a ridiculous, privileged,, statement. The main reason people can't afford stuff is that pay goes up more slowly than expenses. Not budgeting. They aren't paid enough. The data is literally all over the internet that it isn't budgeting. Not even close. Not even if you use the most powerful telescope in the world to look at it. 

[TheLeviathan]

26 minutes ago, Cap'n Piranha said:

Actually, that article you posted ignores several things.  For one, baseball players, basketball players, and hockey players are no longer peers, when it comes to the point in their lives where professional organziations pay them to play.  Jose Miranda would not be able to go play for the Iowa Wolves or Wild tomorrow, nor would any of those players (with maybe one exception every few years) be able to join a Twins MiLB team.  As such, NBA/NHL/MLB minor leaguers are no more peers than salespeople, HR representatives and software engineers working in the tech industry are.

Second, the NBA and NHL each have only one level of minor leagues, compared to baseball's 4 "official" levels (there are still complex and academy teams, and I'm sure those players aren't playing for free).  If MLB dissolved Low A, High A, and AA, I'm sure the weekly salary for AAA players would increase to $5k-$6k a month, and be largely inline with the G League and AHL.  Likewise, if the NBA and NHL added 3 levels of minor leagues, I'm guessing the pay for the currently existing leagues would go down substantially.

Third, MiLB rosters are larger than either the G League or AHL.  It's a lot easier to guarantee $7k a month when you only have to do that for 10 guys, as opposed to 28.  This isn't to say MLB owners couldn't do it, just to point out that it's an easier threshold to achieve for NBA owners (in fact, if both rosters are being paid minimum salaries, an MLB owner will pay more to his 28 AAA players than the NBA owner will to his 10).

This is impressive mental gymnastics to come to the conclusion that minor league professional athletes aren't peers.  You're not having a serious discussion of the ideas.  You are stumping on demonstrably false notions.