How To Get By In The Minors On $1,500 A Month

Goosegg posted:

To all those who somehow think that because it's baseball (the "dream"), an employee should be thankful for earning $4/hr, would you think the same way if your kid who got his dream job on Wall Street, Apple, Amazon or whatever, should be thankful about earning the same $4/hr?

What is it about baseball that makes this job different? Is it the fact that teams collectively agree to pay these wages, prohibit the players from marketing their talent in a free market, control their lives 24/7/365 without paying for it - what is the magic here?  Kids who play pro-ball spent over a decade developing their talent into the top amateurs in the world - and simply don't get paid even minimum wage. Meanwhile, the kid who learned computer programming over that decade steps out of school for a six figure job. The competition for those top jobs are just as fierce, yet free markets dictate the terms of these contracts; but, somehow, baseball is different (maybe because it's the same game as he played since he was old enough walk).

While playing proball is a great experience and can be used as a stepping stone to all sorts of jobs - inside and outside of baseball, it is a tough road and often subsidized by parents. Simply put, baseball has succeeded in off loading the overhead to those parents who love watching their sons play a familiar game.

An industry run my billionaires off loading the cost of health clubs, lessons, even baseball gloves and cleats to middle class parents. Kudos to the system!

It's a game.

Here's the ripoff right here ...

Since the 70's the dollar has inflated 300%. MiLB minimum pay has increased 75%.

If MiLB salaries had kept up with inflation the players would have reasonable pay and eat better. Nutrition is an important part of physical development. On the road the players get a $20 per diem for thee meals and clubhouse tips. I'm guessing minor leaguers aren't sending clothes to the dry cleaners on road trips.

BTW people, if you ask minor league players how they like "living the dream" almost all most all of them will tell you they're NOT "living the dream" . . . . yet.   I've asked a few of them the question about how they liked "living the dream" and I'd get this puzzled look on their face as they reply: "this isn't the dream.  the dream is when we're called up to the majors."  Yes, they enjoy the work that they do . . . but it's "the dream" they're working towards and hoping for.  It's the carrot that's held out to them that keeps them enduring the low pay, the low living working conditions until they make it or they're thrown away (released) for a new crop.  I suppose that because these people are so young, it's acceptable that they can be treated this way.  And if it's done in some other professions, that makes everything OK too.  

Go44dad posted:

Goosegg posted:

To all those who somehow think that because it's baseball (the "dream"), an employee should be thankful for earning $4/hr, would you think the same way if your kid who got his dream job on Wall Street, Apple, Amazon or whatever, should be thankful about earning the same $4/hr?

What is it about baseball that makes this job different? Is it the fact that teams collectively agree to pay these wages, prohibit the players from marketing their talent in a free market, control their lives 24/7/365 without paying for it - what is the magic here?  Kids who play pro-ball spent over a decade developing their talent into the top amateurs in the world - and simply don't get paid even minimum wage. Meanwhile, the kid who learned computer programming over that decade steps out of school for a six figure job. The competition for those top jobs are just as fierce, yet free markets dictate the terms of these contracts; but, somehow, baseball is different (maybe because it's the same game as he played since he was old enough walk).

While playing proball is a great experience and can be used as a stepping stone to all sorts of jobs - inside and outside of baseball, it is a tough road and often subsidized by parents. Simply put, baseball has succeeded in off loading the overhead to those parents who love watching their sons play a familiar game.

An industry run my billionaires off loading the cost of health clubs, lessons, even baseball gloves and cleats to middle class parents. Kudos to the system!

It's a game.

It's entertainment business.   It's a game only if it's for fun and no profit motives involved.

Truman posted:

Go44dad posted:

Goosegg posted:

To all those who somehow think that because it's baseball (the "dream"), an employee should be thankful for earning $4/hr, would you think the same way if your kid who got his dream job on Wall Street, Apple, Amazon or whatever, should be thankful about earning the same $4/hr?

What is it about baseball that makes this job different? Is it the fact that teams collectively agree to pay these wages, prohibit the players from marketing their talent in a free market, control their lives 24/7/365 without paying for it - what is the magic here?  Kids who play pro-ball spent over a decade developing their talent into the top amateurs in the world - and simply don't get paid even minimum wage. Meanwhile, the kid who learned computer programming over that decade steps out of school for a six figure job. The competition for those top jobs are just as fierce, yet free markets dictate the terms of these contracts; but, somehow, baseball is different (maybe because it's the same game as he played since he was old enough walk).

While playing proball is a great experience and can be used as a stepping stone to all sorts of jobs - inside and outside of baseball, it is a tough road and often subsidized by parents. Simply put, baseball has succeeded in off loading the overhead to those parents who love watching their sons play a familiar game.

An industry run my billionaires off loading the cost of health clubs, lessons, even baseball gloves and cleats to middle class parents. Kudos to the system!

It's a game.

It's entertainment business.   It's a game only if it's for fun and no profit motives involved.

OK, it's an unfair, low paying entertainment business.  Don't play.

Go44dad posted:

Truman posted:

Go44dad posted:

Goosegg posted:

To all those who somehow think that because it's baseball (the "dream"), an employee should be thankful for earning $4/hr, would you think the same way if your kid who got his dream job on Wall Street, Apple, Amazon or whatever, should be thankful about earning the same $4/hr?

What is it about baseball that makes this job different? Is it the fact that teams collectively agree to pay these wages, prohibit the players from marketing their talent in a free market, control their lives 24/7/365 without paying for it - what is the magic here?  Kids who play pro-ball spent over a decade developing their talent into the top amateurs in the world - and simply don't get paid even minimum wage. Meanwhile, the kid who learned computer programming over that decade steps out of school for a six figure job. The competition for those top jobs are just as fierce, yet free markets dictate the terms of these contracts; but, somehow, baseball is different (maybe because it's the same game as he played since he was old enough walk).

While playing proball is a great experience and can be used as a stepping stone to all sorts of jobs - inside and outside of baseball, it is a tough road and often subsidized by parents. Simply put, baseball has succeeded in off loading the overhead to those parents who love watching their sons play a familiar game.

An industry run my billionaires off loading the cost of health clubs, lessons, even baseball gloves and cleats to middle class parents. Kudos to the system!

It's a game.

It's entertainment business.   It's a game only if it's for fun and no profit motives involved.

OK, it's an unfair, low paying entertainment business.  Don't play.

Turning away from a problem or having a problem go to someone else doesn't solve the problem.

Go44dad posted:

Truman posted:

Go44dad posted:

Goosegg posted:

To all those who somehow think that because it's baseball (the "dream"), an employee should be thankful for earning $4/hr, would you think the same way if your kid who got his dream job on Wall Street, Apple, Amazon or whatever, should be thankful about earning the same $4/hr?

What is it about baseball that makes this job different? Is it the fact that teams collectively agree to pay these wages, prohibit the players from marketing their talent in a free market, control their lives 24/7/365 without paying for it - what is the magic here?  Kids who play pro-ball spent over a decade developing their talent into the top amateurs in the world - and simply don't get paid even minimum wage. Meanwhile, the kid who learned computer programming over that decade steps out of school for a six figure job. The competition for those top jobs are just as fierce, yet free markets dictate the terms of these contracts; but, somehow, baseball is different (maybe because it's the same game as he played since he was old enough walk).

While playing proball is a great experience and can be used as a stepping stone to all sorts of jobs - inside and outside of baseball, it is a tough road and often subsidized by parents. Simply put, baseball has succeeded in off loading the overhead to those parents who love watching their sons play a familiar game.

An industry run my billionaires off loading the cost of health clubs, lessons, even baseball gloves and cleats to middle class parents. Kudos to the system!

It's a game.

It's entertainment business.   It's a game only if it's for fun and no profit motives involved.

OK, it's an unfair, low paying entertainment business.  Don't play.

Go leave it to you to sum things up so well in so few words!  Last time I checked nobody is forcing these guys. And only a couple people have begrudgingly admitted that it opens doors for a lifetime. If my son was miserable doing something I would definitely advise him. It to do it. This is what it is. It's the progression of things. In travel ball we pay more than we would like for our kids to play ball. In college with the help of excellent grades and a little baseball money maybe it's close to a wash. In minor league ball it's better than a wash at least you get a little something for the effort. Then if you make it all the way it's big cash. If you don't like any step along the 'journey' and can't simply 'enjoy the ride'. Then quit!!  

Just to be clear I am all for the minor leaguers getting more money. I wish we could all get more money. But that doesn't mean what's happening now is somehow egregiously wrong and if all of us don't see that we are horrible people!  Everything is a value judgement. That comes down to each and every individuals choice. Personally I hope you guys convince thousands, maybe 10,000+ kids from the class of 2020 that they shouldn't tolerate this...  

Sorry people, but, it's simply survival of the fittest.  Those better adapted to living on $1500 a month will flourish.  Those ill adapted will attempt the get their parents to help them adapt.  And those that still can't adapt will perish.

its also supply and demand.  There is an endless supply of young, and not so young, men willing to try for the chance at the dream of MLB.  There is not an endless supply of programmers that are capable of making 6 figures.

CaCO3Girl posted:

Sorry people, but, it's simply survival of the fittest.  Those better adapted to living on $1500 a month will flourish.  Those ill adapted will attempt the get their parents to help them adapt.  And those that still can't adapt will perish.

its also supply and demand.  There is an endless supply of young, and not so young, men willing to try for the chance at the dream of MLB.  There is not an endless supply of programmers that are capable of making 6 figures.

It's not supply and demand.  S/D suggests an open and free market where the rate (in this case the pay) is set freely by the market at an equilibrium where the two balance, and the supply (ballplayers) has the opportunity to move freely until that equilibrium is established.  MiLB is anything but that.  The fact that programmers make 6 figures IS supply and demand.  It's exactly that.  If there were a higher number (availability) of competent programmers, the corresponding pay would be less.  If there are fewer programmers, the pay is more. 

Just because a party (ballplayers) is willing to be taken advantage of, doesn't mean they are not being taken advantage of.

2020dad posted:

Go44dad posted:

Truman posted:

Go44dad posted:

Goosegg posted:

To all those who somehow think that because it's baseball (the "dream"), an employee should be thankful for earning $4/hr, would you think the same way if your kid who got his dream job on Wall Street, Apple, Amazon or whatever, should be thankful about earning the same $4/hr?

What is it about baseball that makes this job different? Is it the fact that teams collectively agree to pay these wages, prohibit the players from marketing their talent in a free market, control their lives 24/7/365 without paying for it - what is the magic here?  Kids who play pro-ball spent over a decade developing their talent into the top amateurs in the world - and simply don't get paid even minimum wage. Meanwhile, the kid who learned computer programming over that decade steps out of school for a six figure job. The competition for those top jobs are just as fierce, yet free markets dictate the terms of these contracts; but, somehow, baseball is different (maybe because it's the same game as he played since he was old enough walk).

While playing proball is a great experience and can be used as a stepping stone to all sorts of jobs - inside and outside of baseball, it is a tough road and often subsidized by parents. Simply put, baseball has succeeded in off loading the overhead to those parents who love watching their sons play a familiar game.

An industry run my billionaires off loading the cost of health clubs, lessons, even baseball gloves and cleats to middle class parents. Kudos to the system!

It's a game.

It's entertainment business.   It's a game only if it's for fun and no profit motives involved.

OK, it's an unfair, low paying entertainment business.  Don't play.

Go leave it to you to sum things up so well in so few words!  Last time I checked nobody is forcing these guys. And only a couple people have begrudgingly admitted that it opens doors for a lifetime. If my son was miserable doing something I would definitely advise him. It to do it. This is what it is. It's the progression of things. In travel ball we pay more than we would like for our kids to play ball. In college with the help of excellent grades and a little baseball money maybe it's close to a wash. In minor league ball it's better than a wash at least you get a little something for the effort. Then if you make it all the way it's big cash. If you don't like any step along the 'journey' and can't simply 'enjoy the ride'. Then quit!!  

I would not say it opens doors for a lifetime. Yeah you can give lessons but the number of high paying jobs in pro and college baseball is really not high, even in lower level pro ball many jobs don't pay all that well.

Washing out in the minors is not really a dream, you basically have to start your career again. You could say playing the minors is like a lottery but I still don't think it is a good practice to have talent do an unpaid internship  (the really good companies like silicon Valley type have stepped away from that too I think and pay their interns well albeit their probably would be a lot of good code writers who would do half a year for google for free (because if you do well it basically means you can pick your job after that).

Of course you could say there are enough others who do it and this is true but still it might hurt the talent level of baseball because it might make some good two way hs athletes to pick basketball or football over baseball.

"Sorry people, but, it's simply survival of the fittest. Those better adapted to living on $1500 a month will flourish. Those ill adapted will attempt the get their parents to help them adapt. And those that still can't adapt will perish."

Not only isn't it supply and demand, as 9and7 points out - since baseball stands alone in sports in a judicially created fiction of an anti-trust exemption - it is not survival of the fittest either. Making it to MLB has nothing whatsoever to do with whether a player has a positive or negative cash flow from his $1500 (actually less in the lower minors).  This is not some sort of perverse budgeting test where guys who save a shekel advance and others don't. 

CaCO3Girl posted:

Sorry people, but, it's simply survival of the fittest.  Those better adapted to living on $1500 a month will flourish.  Those ill adapted will attempt the get their parents to help them adapt.  And those that still can't adapt will perish.

its also supply and demand.  There is an endless supply of young, and not so young, men willing to try for the chance at the dream of MLB.  There is not an endless supply of programmers that are capable of making 6 figures.

$1,500/month for 12 months starting out would actually be a pretty good start.  Now try making it on $1,100 for 5, maybe six months, not having any real control over which city you play ball in, having to work through changes in living arrangements (still love to know how they manage deposits and utilities) and then presumably pack up and head "home" where maybe you can start maybe making some real money working weekends as a ref.

Egregious might be a little strong, but I'd much rather hear some MiLB player whine about living on $1,100/month (gross let's not even discuss deducts - almost like working/living in the old factory town and getting paid with company scrip) than I would some MLB player talking about their lower share of revenue anyday.  It's barely legal and it just doesn't feel right understanding the contribution to the bigger cause (i.e. MLB superstars or future stars) that these guys make.  Is it true that the single A clubby actually makes more than most of the players?

GOOSEGG - What's a shekel?  Regardless, good point!

Goosegg posted:

"Sorry people, but, it's simply survival of the fittest. Those better adapted to living on $1500 a month will flourish. Those ill adapted will attempt the get their parents to help them adapt. And those that still can't adapt will perish."

Not only isn't it supply and demand, as 9and7 points out - since baseball stands alone in sports in a judicially created fiction of an anti-trust exemption - it is not survival of the fittest either. Making it to MLB has nothing whatsoever to do with whether a player has a positive or negative cash flow from his $1500 (actually less in the lower minors).  This is not some sort of perverse budgeting test where guys who save a shekel advance and others don't. 

If you can adapt you thrive.  If there are 400,000 people qualified and ready to do your job it's a form or supply and demand.  You take their demands or they find a different supply.

2017LHPscrewball posted:

CaCO3Girl posted:

Sorry people, but, it's simply survival of the fittest.  Those better adapted to living on $1500 a month will flourish.  Those ill adapted will attempt the get their parents to help them adapt.  And those that still can't adapt will perish.

its also supply and demand.  There is an endless supply of young, and not so young, men willing to try for the chance at the dream of MLB.  There is not an endless supply of programmers that are capable of making 6 figures.

$1,500/month for 12 months starting out would actually be a pretty good start.  Now try making it on $1,100 for 5, maybe six months, not having any real control over which city you play ball in, having to work through changes in living arrangements (still love to know how they manage deposits and utilities) and then presumably pack up and head "home" where maybe you can start maybe making some real money working weekends as a ref.

Egregious might be a little strong, but I'd much rather hear some MiLB player whine about living on $1,100/month (gross let's not even discuss deducts - almost like working/living in the old factory town and getting paid with company scrip) than I would some MLB player talking about their lower share of revenue anyday.  It's barely legal and it just doesn't feel right understanding the contribution to the bigger cause (i.e. MLB superstars or future stars) that these guys make.  Is it true that the single A clubby actually makes more than most of the players?

I look at it like this.  If you went fairly high in the draft then you have some savings. If you went fairly low in the draft you are there for the love of the game and would do it for no salary.

It is the GOLD-en RULE!!!

Hmmm???  Like baseball players, indentured laborers have/had a choice as to whether or not to sign a contract.  Does having such a choice negate problem(s) with such contracts?

There seems to be a misconception about who makes it to proball and who doesn't.

There is not a line - like at a grocery store - whereby if a patron leaves the line, the next person moves forward. That is not how the proball system works.

Every player signed or drafted (courtesy picks aside) has been identified by his organization (and probably others, though it only takes one) as having a potential MLB tool. While some players may be missed, no team signs and devotes time and coaching to a player who doesn't have that potential tool.

There are no limits to the number of players a team may sign; there is no finite number of hotel beds available in ST which cap the number, no rule - written or unwritten - restricting teams from signing players who that organization has identified as having that MLB tool.

So, while there are 400,000 players lined up waiting for the one who refuses out of principle to accept $4/hr, there will still be those same 400,000 waiting while the principled player chooses another path.

Pro ball is unique animal; protected by an anamolous legal precedent, with high paid lobbyists (see the result of the lobbying in the proposed Save Our Pastime Act [giving baseball - and baseball alone - a minimum wage exemption]), and people who somehow equate that product with their recollection of carefree youth and HS baseball. 

CaCO3Girl posted:

Goosegg posted:

"Sorry people, but, it's simply survival of the fittest. Those better adapted to living on $1500 a month will flourish. Those ill adapted will attempt the get their parents to help them adapt. And those that still can't adapt will perish."

Not only isn't it supply and demand, as 9and7 points out - since baseball stands alone in sports in a judicially created fiction of an anti-trust exemption - it is not survival of the fittest either. Making it to MLB has nothing whatsoever to do with whether a player has a positive or negative cash flow from his $1500 (actually less in the lower minors).  This is not some sort of perverse budgeting test where guys who save a shekel advance and others don't. 

If you can adapt you thrive.  If there are 400,000 people qualified and ready to do your job it's a form or supply and demand.  You take their demands or they find a different supply.

Just because one can swing a bat and throw a ball doesn't make anyone qualified to play at the MiLB level.  If that were so you wouldn't have the draft and you wouldn't have the different levels within MiLB.  MLB wants the very best ball players to provide competitive training for their top prospects.  The statistical numbers the MLB collects bears that out.  So, there really aren't that many qualified players waiting in the wings.  The principle of supply and demand isn't at work at the MiLB levels.

Truman posted:

CaCO3Girl posted:

Goosegg posted:

"Sorry people, but, it's simply survival of the fittest. Those better adapted to living on $1500 a month will flourish. Those ill adapted will attempt the get their parents to help them adapt. And those that still can't adapt will perish."

Not only isn't it supply and demand, as 9and7 points out - since baseball stands alone in sports in a judicially created fiction of an anti-trust exemption - it is not survival of the fittest either. Making it to MLB has nothing whatsoever to do with whether a player has a positive or negative cash flow from his $1500 (actually less in the lower minors).  This is not some sort of perverse budgeting test where guys who save a shekel advance and others don't. 

If you can adapt you thrive.  If there are 400,000 people qualified and ready to do your job it's a form or supply and demand.  You take their demands or they find a different supply.

Just because one can swing a bat and throw a ball doesn't make anyone qualified to play at the MiLB level.  If that were so you wouldn't have the draft and you wouldn't have the different levels within MiLB.  MLB wants the very best ball players to provide competitive training for their top prospects.  The statistical numbers the MLB collects bears that out.  So, there really aren't that many qualified players waiting in the wings.  The principle of supply and demand isn't at work at the MiLB levels.

If what you are saying is true then why do we hear about guys stuck at the same low level for years?  It appears from the outside looking in that they keep a ready supply of low level never going to make it people for a LONG time.  Why is that?

EDIT: according to Wikipedia there are 244 minor league teams.  If we say 25 to a team that makes over 6000 players to maintain the supply.

CaCO3Girl posted:

Truman posted:

CaCO3Girl posted:

Goosegg posted:

"Sorry people, but, it's simply survival of the fittest. Those better adapted to living on $1500 a month will flourish. Those ill adapted will attempt the get their parents to help them adapt. And those that still can't adapt will perish."

Not only isn't it supply and demand, as 9and7 points out - since baseball stands alone in sports in a judicially created fiction of an anti-trust exemption - it is not survival of the fittest either. Making it to MLB has nothing whatsoever to do with whether a player has a positive or negative cash flow from his $1500 (actually less in the lower minors).  This is not some sort of perverse budgeting test where guys who save a shekel advance and others don't. 

If you can adapt you thrive.  If there are 400,000 people qualified and ready to do your job it's a form or supply and demand.  You take their demands or they find a different supply.

Just because one can swing a bat and throw a ball doesn't make anyone qualified to play at the MiLB level.  If that were so you wouldn't have the draft and you wouldn't have the different levels within MiLB.  MLB wants the very best ball players to provide competitive training for their top prospects.  The statistical numbers the MLB collects bears that out.  So, there really aren't that many qualified players waiting in the wings.  The principle of supply and demand isn't at work at the MiLB levels.

If what you are saying is true then why do we hear about guys stuck at the same low level for years?  It appears from the outside looking in that they keep a ready supply of low level never going to make it people for a LONG time.  Why is that?

They're only kept until someone better if found.  Some play well enough long enough, yet can't quite get over the hump into MLB.  Sometimes there are those around for a long time as they are MLB material, but there's a log jam in their path keeping them down at the lower levels (often, this is where you see trading going on).   If the law of supply and demand were at work, these lower level players would have a lot more control over who they play for, where and when. . . which would certainly drive up the price to organizations.  The organizations don't want to give up that control, mostly for that reason.

Do not conflate advancing IN the minors, with making it TO the minors.

Goosegg posted:

Do not conflate advancing IN the minors, with making it TO the minors.

Very true, 400K hoping to get to minors.  6K actually in the minors.

Truman I think you missed my definition of supply and demand.  There is a large supply, so they better yield to the demands.

In truth I know you have to be born with something special to have a shot at MLB and not everyone can do it, even if they try their hardest.  But I also know there are not just a handful a generation, the number is large, and people will put up with a lot for a shot at their dream.  

As the lottery commercial says "you have to play to win".  Yes the wage is pitiful and yet I'm sure over half would do it for nothing. This is widely known and the real reason the salary won't change much.

I agree that there are very few who actually are good enough play on a ML field in milb. Every once in a while you find a gem.

Keep in mind, very important, that most players drafted because they are needed to provide a team for those that will someday be a ML player.  My personal opinion is that they really don't care much about most players.  My son became a free agent before his 6th year. The team that signed him as a free agent really  only cared for their draft guys.  If a player has played ML ball, you get treated better. You have that experience they are looking for.

I think there is a reason why players arent afforded the opportunity to be FA until their 6th year. It takes time to develop as a player. Switching teams is like transferring in college.  It takes awhile until you get acclimated to your new home, new teammates and most of all managers, who BTW can make you or break you.  Teams have specific philosophies.  Even if that manager loves you, he has to play who they tell him to play. That's it. Sometimes change is good, if you were traded and a top prospect, you will still be considered as such.

A HS player has 5 years and a college player has 4 years to make a 40 man roster. My feeling is that if one doesn't  make the 40, at that time, chances are it's not going to happen. As I have said before, if you make it to AA there is a chance because IMO it's the break point.

Caco, brought up a good point, the less you have had in your life, the easier it is to live on less.  That's why young Latin players seem to adapt easier to the system.  Since someone asked, because son had a cable account and electric account in college he was the guy who did that stuff. He was also the guy who took the bigger room and gave his slightly used cleats or turf shoes etc to those who couldn't afford them.  Remember, most of the time you might not even know where you will be, when someone moves out, someone moves in and sometimes you may not be able to afford that rent plus utilities. That's where having that xtra bonus money helps.  

I don't care what anyone says it's very difficult to live on 1100, 1300, 1500.  The higher up you go the more clubhouse dues you will owe, at home and on the road.  You are given 2 meals, pre game and post game.  AAA is almost ML, better accommodations, better food.  Sometimes it's hot dogs, sometimes it's subs.  Nutrition is something you need to figure out on your own.

 The pay is what it is and it's not changing.   It definitely isn't for everyone.

The real reason the salary is what it is has NOTHING to do with the players willing to take zero or a million (well, I guess, theoretically if EVERY player identified with a potential MLB tool decided not to play for the present salary, things would change. I guess that would be called a strike).

The reason the wages are what they are has to do with a system which is not subject to the laws of a free market.

Yes, you need to play baseball to even have a shot; but, unless you have that critical potential tool, You. Don't. Get. That. Shot - at any wage. (Although, MLB could create revenues by setting aside a couple of dozen slots in MILB and auction them off to the highest bidder regardless of potential). 

Goosegg posted:

The real reason the salary is what it is has NOTHING to do with the players willing to take zero or a million (well, I guess, theoretically if EVERY player identified with a potential MLB tool decided not to play for the present salary, things would change. I guess that would be called a strike).

The reason the wages are what they are has to do with a system which is not subject to the laws of a free market.

Yes, you need to play baseball to even have a shot; but, unless you have that critical potential tool, You. Don't. Get. That. Shot - at any wage. (Although, MLB could create revenues by setting aside a couple of dozen slots in MILB and auction them off to the highest bidder regardless of potential). 

But you would agree there are over 6000 people in the minor leagues right now?

Would you agree there are over 750 people in MLB right now?

Would you agree there are about 7000 people with that "critical potential tool"?  Or are there really like 1000 people with the tool and 6000 people chasing the dream that won't ever happen because they are just there to play against the 1000 that are truly special?

There is much truth to TPM's observations.

There are huge differences (apparent even to me) in the potential of players in MILB. For example, some have multiple potential tools, while another may have only one - and that one will probably not even develop to MLB level.

And no matter what, the odds are still long that even if a player with multiple potential tools gets to play proball, he will make it all the way (and there are lots of reasons apart from potential for that result - the most prevalent being injury).

A journey to even make it to HS, a mountain climb to make it to college, a moonshot to make it to MILB, and I can't even think of the metaphor to make it to MLB. Hard, hard, hard. 

Good grades, good college, good long term view of life - to me parents setting priorities are key to that; then when that era of ridiculous wages has been run to ground, life begins - for the overwhelming majority of players.

CaCO3Girl posted:

Goosegg posted:

The real reason the salary is what it is has NOTHING to do with the players willing to take zero or a million (well, I guess, theoretically if EVERY player identified with a potential MLB tool decided not to play for the present salary, things would change. I guess that would be called a strike).

The reason the wages are what they are has to do with a system which is not subject to the laws of a free market.

Yes, you need to play baseball to even have a shot; but, unless you have that critical potential tool, You. Don't. Get. That. Shot - at any wage. (Although, MLB could create revenues by setting aside a couple of dozen slots in MILB and auction them off to the highest bidder regardless of potential). 

But you would agree there are over 6000 people in the minor leagues right now?

Would you agree there are over 750 people in MLB right now?

Would you agree there are about 7000 people with that "critical potential tool"?  Or are there really like 1000 people with the tool and 6000 people chasing the dream that won't ever happen because they are just there to play against the 1000 that are truly special?

I am going to take a shot, maybe a few hundred will actually stick.  

Each team has 40 men on their roster.  That means 15 are in AA or AAA. There are rules in place for call up and send back down. 

So if you are not on the roster, keep in mind that you have players in front of you. If you wannamake it to the big city you have to pray for everyone to get injured, or DFA.

Statistics given to me by sons agent, 4 years is the average time a player spends in ML.

I am not sure of your point but I tried.

TPM posted:

CaCO3Girl posted:

Goosegg posted:

The real reason the salary is what it is has NOTHING to do with the players willing to take zero or a million (well, I guess, theoretically if EVERY player identified with a potential MLB tool decided not to play for the present salary, things would change. I guess that would be called a strike).

The reason the wages are what they are has to do with a system which is not subject to the laws of a free market.

Yes, you need to play baseball to even have a shot; but, unless you have that critical potential tool, You. Don't. Get. That. Shot - at any wage. (Although, MLB could create revenues by setting aside a couple of dozen slots in MILB and auction them off to the highest bidder regardless of potential). 

But you would agree there are over 6000 people in the minor leagues right now?

Would you agree there are over 750 people in MLB right now?

Would you agree there are about 7000 people with that "critical potential tool"?  Or are there really like 1000 people with the tool and 6000 people chasing the dream that won't ever happen because they are just there to play against the 1000 that are truly special?

I am going to take a shot, maybe a few hundred will actually stick.  

Each team has 40 men on their roster.  That means 15 are in AA or AAA. There are rules in place for call up and send back down. 

So if you are not on the roster, keep in mind that you have players in front of you. If you wanna ET to the big city you have to pray for everyone to get injured, or DFA.

Statistics given to me by sons agent, 4 years is the average time a player spends in ML.

I am not sure of your point but I tried.

My point was there are thousands of people on the MiLB praying for their shot.  There are thousands outside of MiLB praying for their shot.  Most are not actually going to make it and a fair many are there as bodies who can assist in the training of the people who will make it, and there is more behind them just hopping to be one of those bodies because "if they could just REALLY show what they could do" they would make it to MLB.

As far as MLB is concerned the supply is endless, so they don't have to make anything "fair".  People will still line up down the block, around the corner, and into the next county for "their shot".

$1,150 - $1,500 a month for 6 months, just isn't enough to reflect these skilled and experienced player's true value to their organizations.  Yes, they play for these amounts for the love of the game and that's what the organizations are exploiting.  Just figuring on a 40 hr. work week, $1,500 calculates to $8.65 hr (gross/before-taxes) and the hours are more than that when being there just about every day 7 days per week.  Before the season starts, the month of Spring Training, the players don't get any salary at all (though housing is provided, like a shared hotel room, as is a per diem for food).  So, during this time other living expenses and obligations need to be taken care of some how. And then there's the off season when they're expected to maintain physical fitness and skills, which can be quite some expense and take a big chunk out of a part time job that tends to also be low paying too.   These players shouldn't have to be in a position of depending on family for support until they're done with pro ball.  If MiLB players, especially at the lower levels, had better wages to get them through the off season, I'd expect players, as a whole, would start the new season more fit and skilled for the up coming season.   MLB organizations can afford to do better, but they won't unless they are forced to. . . like any large industry, I suppose.  These skilled and dedicated players are at the organizations mercy and will find a way to get by financially to do what they love to do for as long as they are allowed.  

It's good thing this is a young man's profession and the longer he's in it the further behind his contemporary age group he becomes (even in terms of relationships for building a family).

CaCO3Girl posted:

As far as MLB is concerned the supply is endless, so they don't have to make anything "fair".  People will still line up down the block, around the corner, and into the next county for "their shot".

I agree there is virtually an endless supply who'd line up and love to have such a shot at MLB, BUT. . . 

there simply isn't that many that are talented enough that the organizations would want.  All those that would line up, aren't wanted!  Therefore, what's the point?   It's not like the organizations want to take on unskilled people, like say the food industry does.  Those at the MiLB level, even the lower levels of it, are not as replaceable as you seem to suggest.  There's only a certain percentage of an age group that are capable.

CaCO3Girl posted:

TPM posted:

CaCO3Girl posted:

Goosegg posted:

The real reason the salary is what it is has NOTHING to do with the players willing to take zero or a million (well, I guess, theoretically if EVERY player identified with a potential MLB tool decided not to play for the present salary, things would change. I guess that would be called a strike).

The reason the wages are what they are has to do with a system which is not subject to the laws of a free market.

Yes, you need to play baseball to even have a shot; but, unless you have that critical potential tool, You. Don't. Get. That. Shot - at any wage. (Although, MLB could create revenues by setting aside a couple of dozen slots in MILB and auction them off to the highest bidder regardless of potential). 

But you would agree there are over 6000 people in the minor leagues right now?

Would you agree there are over 750 people in MLB right now?

Would you agree there are about 7000 people with that "critical potential tool"?  Or are there really like 1000 people with the tool and 6000 people chasing the dream that won't ever happen because they are just there to play against the 1000 that are truly special?

I am going to take a shot, maybe a few hundred will actually stick.  

Each team has 40 men on their roster.  That means 15 are in AA or AAA. There are rules in place for call up and send back down. 

So if you are not on the roster, keep in mind that you have players in front of you. If you wanna ET to the big city you have to pray for everyone to get injured, or DFA.

Statistics given to me by sons agent, 4 years is the average time a player spends in ML.

I am not sure of your point but I tried.

My point was there are thousands of people on the MiLB praying for their shot.  There are thousands outside of MiLB praying for their shot.  Most are not actually going to make it and a fair many are there as bodies who can assist in the training of the people who will make it, and there is more behind them just hopping to be one of those bodies because "if they could just REALLY show what they could do" they would make it to MLB.

As far as MLB is concerned the supply is endless, so they don't have to make anything "fair".  People will still line up down the block, around the corner, and into the next county for "their shot".

You are correct. As long as the supply keeps flowing, salaries will remain as they are.

Just for the record, I never had a problem with the low wages, there were other concerns. I think the experience alone is the paycheck. Son is who he is because of his life experiences.

But I also believe having a plan B is very important.

Truman posted:

CaCO3Girl posted:

As far as MLB is concerned the supply is endless, so they don't have to make anything "fair".  People will still line up down the block, around the corner, and into the next county for "their shot".

I agree there is virtually an endless supply who'd line up and love to have such a shot at MLB, BUT. . . 

there simply isn't that many that are talented enough that the organizations would want.  All those that would line up, aren't wanted!  Therefore, what's the point?   It's not like the organizations want to take on unskilled people, like say the food industry does.  Those at the MiLB level, even the lower levels of it, are not as replaceable as you seem to suggest.  There's only a certain percentage of an age group that are capable.

Truman, are you saying there are people in the MiLB that aren't qualified to be there?

Pretty sure 6000+ people in the MiLB would make up my line and 6000 people likely looks like an endless supply to every MLB team. You could make the 30 MLB teams eight times over, even if you only consider 25 man roster, which many MiLB have more than 25.  244 MiLB teams, 30 MLB teams. 

CaCO3Girl posted:

Goosegg posted:

The real reason the salary is what it is has NOTHING to do with the players willing to take zero or a million (well, I guess, theoretically if EVERY player identified with a potential MLB tool decided not to play for the present salary, things would change. I guess that would be called a strike).

The reason the wages are what they are has to do with a system which is not subject to the laws of a free market.

Yes, you need to play baseball to even have a shot; but, unless you have that critical potential tool, You. Don't. Get. That. Shot - at any wage. (Although, MLB could create revenues by setting aside a couple of dozen slots in MILB and auction them off to the highest bidder regardless of potential). 

But you would agree there are over 6000 people in the minor leagues right now?

Would you agree there are over 750 people in MLB right now?

Would you agree there are about 7000 people with that "critical potential tool"?  Or are there really like 1000 people with the tool and 6000 people chasing the dream that won't ever happen because they are just there to play against the 1000 that are truly special?

Most of the players in the minors are there so the legitimate pro prospects have teammates. A handful of the legit prospects make it to the majors and stick. 

Had all the AAA and AA prospects in the minors for the Red Sox about three years ago made it they could have been as good as a MLB bottom feeder. But many of them failed at the MLB level, especially the pitchers.

CaCO3Girl posted:

Truman posted:

CaCO3Girl posted:

As far as MLB is concerned the supply is endless, so they don't have to make anything "fair".  People will still line up down the block, around the corner, and into the next county for "their shot".

I agree there is virtually an endless supply who'd line up and love to have such a shot at MLB, BUT. . . 

there simply isn't that many that are talented enough that the organizations would want.  All those that would line up, aren't wanted!  Therefore, what's the point?   It's not like the organizations want to take on unskilled people, like say the food industry does.  Those at the MiLB level, even the lower levels of it, are not as replaceable as you seem to suggest.  There's only a certain percentage of an age group that are capable.

Truman, are you saying there are people in the MiLB that aren't qualified to be there?

Pretty sure 6000+ people in the MiLB would make up my line and 6000 people likely looks like an endless supply to every MLB team. You could make the 30 MLB teams eight times over, even if you only consider 25 man roster, which many MiLB have more than 25.  244 MiLB teams, 30 MLB teams. 

While I do feel there are just a few each year of that 6000 that really aren't qualified (often seen as those released soon after their first year of rookie ball and even some that get in due to nepotism), but, no . . . I'm not referring to that 6000.  I'm referring the the hordes ready to line up to replace those 6000.

2017LHPscrewball posted:

GOOSEGG - What's a shekel?  Regardless, good point!

money. 

Same meaning  for gelt!

The baseball industry is much larger than the players.  However, it is full of former baseball players. Coaching, scouting, agents, instructors, front office personnel, GMs, etc.  Many so called fill ins, end up with long careers in baseball.

The money is what it is until it is changed.  Absolutely no one is forced to live the life.  Obviously it is about the dream of making it big.  For some it isn't as difficult as others.  It's a chance for many.  It can be valuable whether you make it or not.  I'm sure every former professional player has that as an important part of his resume.

What bothers me more than the low pay at the entry level is the number of very good players that will never get the opportunity.  Young men that would gladly play for nothing just because they believe they have a chance and they love the game.  

9and7dad posted:

CaCO3Girl posted:

Sorry people, but, it's simply survival of the fittest.  Those better adapted to living on $1500 a month will flourish.  Those ill adapted will attempt the get their parents to help them adapt.  And those that still can't adapt will perish.

its also supply and demand.  There is an endless supply of young, and not so young, men willing to try for the chance at the dream of MLB.  There is not an endless supply of programmers that are capable of making 6 figures.

It's not supply and demand.  S/D suggests an open and free market where the rate (in this case the pay) is set freely by the market at an equilibrium where the two balance, and the supply (ballplayers) has the opportunity to move freely until that equilibrium is established.  MiLB is anything but that.  The fact that programmers make 6 figures IS supply and demand.  It's exactly that.  If there were a higher number (availability) of competent programmers, the corresponding pay would be less.  If there are fewer programmers, the pay is more. 

Just because a party (ballplayers) is willing to be taken advantage of, doesn't mean they are not being taken advantage of.

Actually your argument would support the opinion that minor leaguers are OVERPAID!  Since the supply far outruns demand. Many many thousands would play minor league baseball for free just for their shot at glory. So if you look at it simply as crass capitalism wages are artificially high. I do not believe that. Again I hope they do get a raise. But at the same time everybody knows the score. It's a free country do it or don't do it. But nobody wants to hear the woe is me story. 

Addressing some points here...

1. It does open doors for a lifetime. Especially in baseball itself. Even if it's doing $80 an hour lessons at the local academy. Not bad money by the way. Former minor leaguers never had it better with this personal instruction obsession we now have. 

2. The 'value' of these players is highly debatable. As someone mentioned most of them are there to play catch with real prospects. Every once in a while one of them fools you and makes it - good for them!  The ones the club really wants got bonuses to help them through these years. And the lower level minor leaguers are very replaceable. By the time you get to that point you are separating kids by hairs, very small degrees if talent and mostly a guessing game. Like which 86mph guy does the D1 take to round out their bullpen. Very replaceable. 

3. Fair...  what does that even mean?  I hate to be so cliche but life is not fair. I wish my kid was more fast twitch. It's not 'fair' that he's not. I wish he was more recruitable in baseball than he is in football. But let me ask you this...  if he gets a football scholarship some day, that same scholarship thousands of football kids across the country were hoping for is it 'fair' to those kids left behind if he does nothing but complain about the fact he got a football scholarship rather than a baseball scholarship??  

Bottom line be thankful AND HUMBLE about the opportunity you have been given. Appreciate it. Work hard mostly for yourself and your future family but maybe a little for those kids left behind too. Honor the game. That's what I would tell my son if he were drafted in the 40th round with a bonus of a bus ticket or if he takes a scholarship to play football. Be grateful and humble and like Capt. John Miller said on the bridge - EARN THIS!!