Showing posts with label Bill James. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bill James. Show all posts

Sunday, November 14, 2021

milb

 Regarding the absurdly low pay of minor league players:  

 
1. Of the players with a realistic chance of making the majors, most have bonus money they can use to upgrade their standard of living while in the minors.  
 
2. The rest are there for the love of the game.  If some of them can't get by on that, and leave for greener pastures, they can be easily replaced (you once wrote in a Hey Bill answer that there are always players looking for work).  
 
To what extent, in your view, is each of the above statements true?  
 
Asked by: RexLittle

Answered: 11/14/2021
 Well. . point 1; let me address that.   A couple of years ago, it was widely observed that the average salary for minor league players was less than $10,000 per year.  But no one seems to know what it was, IF YOU INCLUDED THE SIGNING BONUSES THAT WERE PAID when the players entered the system.   My guess. . . .could be wrong. . . my guess is that that would raise or would have raised the average salary of a minor leaguer to somewhere between $45,000 and $50,000.  Quite a bit different. 
 
But this is not to say that there was not a problem.  There WAS a problem.  The problem was that the bonus went to a small subsection of the minor league players, so that most of them actually WERE playing for very little money, while  a minority of them were sitting on large signing bonuses.   It was/is an inequitable system, undesirable from my standpoint.   There WERE exploited workers within the system, in my view.  
 
 
Regarding Point 2, I would question the way that you phrased it.  No doubt the rest of the minor league players love the game, but being a minor league player, playing 140 games plus a month of training.  . it's not a hell of a lot of fun, although almost everybody looks back on it afterward and remembers it as a grand experience.  But it would be equally accurate to say that they are forgoing present earnings in the hope of BIG earnings in the future, when in reality most of them had zero or near-zero chance of seeing those big earnings in the future.  They were being "paid" with an illusion that would eventually disappear on them, with the exception of an occasional player who would somehow break on through to the other side.   
 
It wasn't really a good system.   It was a system in need of reform.   But in order to reform it, you needed to accept a few hard realities that people don't want to hear.   The economic value of a minor league player in 2019 was essentially zero.   It was a different system; the minor leagues were something ENTIRELY different 140 years ago, that had changed a little bit and changed a little bit and changed a little bit, and so there was the . . .what is the word for that?  THere was this "relic" of a structure, a structure inherited from generations ago, which didn't actually serve the needs of the present either from the standpoint of the owners or the standpoint of the players, but it was still there, standing, as Coleridge said of the ancient regime in France before the revolution, still standing because no one yet had taken the trouble to push it over and blow it away.  
 
There is a word for a relic of a structure like that; I can't think what it is.  
 
Most of the minor league players in that era had zero value to the major league teams, absolutely zero value.   They had NEGATIVE value. They weren't bringing in ANY revenue to the major leagues; actually, the opposite.  They were an expense, rather than a revenue producer--and also, they had no asset value.   You couldn't sell them or trade them or get anything in return for them.   Their economic value was zero--zero asset value, and zero value in producing revenue.  
 
 ESSENTIALLY what happened two years ago--which has yet to shake itself out because of the pandemic--but what essentially happened is that the minor leaguers demanded to be paid what they were worth, at which point they discovered that they weren't actually worth anything.  The major league teams told them to get lost, we can move forward just fine without you; thank you very much.  Nobody wants to HEAR that, but that IS what happened.  Employees who had zero economic value demanded to be paid what they were worth. 
 
The "value" of 80% of the minor league players was that they created a competitive structure, a framework of teams, within which the relatively few players who had bright futures could develop their skills.   But, because they were all operating within this played-out structure inherited from generations before, the development costs were dozens of times higher than they needed to be from a practical standpoint.  So the minor leaguers attempt to organize themselves and demand living wages became the hand the pushed over the old, decayed structure within which they were operating.  

Thursday, November 26, 2020

1953 Yankees

 I was thinking about your convincing article from the Historical Abstract about why the 1961 Yankees were not a great team.  

 
And so I got to wondering what the best postwar Yankees team was, excluding the 1998 team, that is the 1947-1964 era when the franchise was ubiquitous in the World Series.  
 
The 1960-1964 teams either lost the Series, or won it by a hair, excepting 1961. The Giants seem like a better team in '62.  
 
They lost the Series in 1957, won it in 7 in 58 (why do these two Series seem forgotten by Baseball History?). Lost in 1955 and won in 7 in '56, in each case against the team that had beaten them the year before. In '53 they beat a great Dodgers team, but they probably were not as good as Brooklyn.  
 
What would you say was the best Yankees team of that era? And would any of the 1976-78 teams stand higher than the postwar ones?
Asked by: MidnighttheCat

Answered: 11/26/2020
 1953, beyond question.   It's hard to explain, but. . people remember the 1953 Dodgers as a fantastic team, which they were; they finished 105-49 and have a lot of great individual stats.  But the 1953 Yankees beat them in the World Series, and also, the 1953 Yankees had a better record until late August.  The Yankees were 82-38 on August 21; the Dodgers were 81-38, but the Yankees had a far better run/opposition run ratio at that time, 1.54 - 1 for the Yankees, 1.375 -1 for the Yankees.  Neither team had a serious challenger.  Stengel completely took his foot off the gas at that time, coasted in; Charlie Dressen continued to push until the end, so the Dodgers pulled a few games ahead although the Yankees still had a better run ratio.   The 1953 Yankees BACKUP team--guys NOT in the regular lineup--would be C--Gus Triandos or Charlie Silvera, 1B--Johnny Mize on Don Bollweg; 2B--Jerry Coleman, 3B--Andy Carey, SS--Willie Miranda, OF--Bill Renna, Irv Noren, Bob Cerv.    Their backup team was at least a .500 team.   Bollweg had 155 at bats with an .887 OPS.  Catchers, Silvera hit .280 and was a career .282 hitter as Berra's backup; Triandos was a really good catcher when he got a chance to play, in 1957 threw out 42 of 63 baserunners, 2/3.   It may be the highest percentage ever for that many chances.  Coleman was a terrific player in 1950, went into the military for two years and never got his job back.  (Like Ted Williams, Coleman was a World War II pilot who was recalled for service in Korea.)  Andy Carey was a Gold Glove quality third baseman and hit .321 with a .900+ OPS in a backup role in 1953.  Miranda was a glove wizard, was later a regular for several years.  Bill Renna got into 61 games, 121 at bats and hit .314.  Irv Noren was a good defensive center fielder who in 1950 had hit .295 with 98 RBI for Washington, had another pretty good year in 1951; the Yankees traded Jackie Jensen to get him.   Cerv hit 38 homers one year for Kansas City.  That was the team that WASN'T the team; that was the backup team.  
 
At first base, if Joe Collins and Johnny Mize and Dan Bollweg weren't good enough, in Triple-A they had Moose Skowron and Vic Power.   Skowron in 1952 hit hit .341 with 31 homers, 38 doubles, 11 triples, 134 RBI in the American Association, but did not get called up, got sent back to the minors for 1953, and had another great year, not quite AS great.  Vic Power on the same team hit .349 with 34 doubles, 10 triples, 19 homers, 93 RBI, 215 hits, and the best defensive first baseman of his time.   He didn't get called up, either.   Skowron had to play the outfield, which probably kept him in the minors an extra year.  That team (in the minors) also had Elston Howard, Alex Grammas and Bill Virdon, all of whom were ready to play, just biding their time in the minor leagues.  Grammas was 27 by then; he was later a regular for several years in the National League, and I believe won a Gold Glove one year.  

Sunday, November 15, 2020

Tuesday, September 29, 2020

Bill James on small business

 How did Mayetta, with 300 citizens, sustain 4 grocery stores? People coming in from out in the county?

Asked by: matt_okeefe


Right.  300 people, but probably 600-700 farmers from surrounding areas.   And the grocery stores were small, nothing like the supermarkets of today.   When I came to Lawrence (a much larger town) in the 1960s there were still little grocery stores everywhere.  Mom and Pop operations.  

 
This relates to the question of wealth distribution.   We do have a problem in this country with wealth distribution, too much wealth in too few hands.   It's the same problem.   In what might be called an organic local economy, everyone has a role to play, nobody is truly rich but everybody makes a living and people take care of one another.   As the economic Egg grows larger, concentrations of wealth develop, but also more people get left out, can't find an appropriate role.  It becomes necessary for the government to intervene.  
 
It's like. . . .take a Banker's Box.  If you fill it with ball bearings or shotgun pellets or rice, there is almost no air left in there, because the small pellets occupy almost the entire space.  But if you fill it with bowling balls, you only have room for two or three bowling balls, so there is lots of air in there.   The same principle; the larger the units, the more space is not reached.  The smaller the units, the more completely they fill the space.  
 
The way to fight the wealth concentrations in too few hands is not to try to tax the rich; it is, rather, to break up the economic units.   If you force Amazon and Walmart and Exxon and Apple, etc., to break into smaller companies, first of all, no one is actually hurt by that, but those competing smaller companies will reach the smallest units more effectively than the large companies ever will.