mattmitchl44 wrote: ↑26 Feb 2026 05:01 am
renostl wrote: ↑26 Feb 2026 00:15 am
mattmitchl44 wrote: ↑25 Feb 2026 08:44 am
It's easy to demonstrate that, if the economic system of baseball were "just" based on actual production, Alec Burleson should have probably already make $12+ million (a prorated ML minimum for 2022, 2023; about $3.5 million for 2024; and about $9 million for 2025) for his ML career. Under the existing system he's actually made just over $2 million ($3 million of you count his original $700K signing bonus when drafted). So his account might be considered about $10 million "in arrears" right now.
And that "in arrears" isn't related to "the owners should just pay more money to the players." It's based on that, for example, $5.28 billion went to pay player salaries in 2025, Burleson (2.1 fWAR) produced about 1/500th of the total "value" in MLB in 2025, so $5.28 billion/500 = ~$10 million (a more detailed calc gets to ~$9 million). So, even given just the size of the "pie" as it is, Burleson has been far short of getting his slice of the "pie".
He will make $3.3 million for 2026, but he if has another season consistent with 2025, he'll actually fall about another $6 million "in arrears."
In short, under the current system - even if Burleson remains healthy and productive as he was in 2025 - he'll never make up for what he already is "in arrears" in ARB-1, ARB-2, or ARB-3. Under the current system, Burleson's only hope of making up what he will be "in arrears" by the time he's through his first six years is to:
(1) remain consistently healthy
(2) remain consistently productive and
(3) then convince some team to give him a contract in FA which, in addition to paying him for what he does going forward, makes up for what he is "in arrears" from his first six seasons.
This systematic situation affects the vast majority of players as they work through their ML career, and for a sizeable fraction of them likely never gets balanced out in the long run if they never get that FA contract that balances the books.
This is where the owners need to come to the table with a proposal that does much, much better for this vast majority of players early in their careers - there needs to be a transformation to the system that puts these "Alec Burlesons" less "in arrears" from the beginning. If the owners want enough players (51%?), enough "Alec Burlesons," to support a new CBA that gives the owners what they may want (salary caps, salary floors, etc.) to improve competitiveness in MLB, winning over enough players to that CBA, IMO, has to be based on addressing this situation for players in their early careers.
What if a partial reason Burleson has a roster position is that he is a bargain. He replaced a player that was
less of a bargain it worked extremely well for AB. He's been questionable at making the roster the 2 prior seasons.
To ramp up the salary of an accumulative 0.5 WAR player prior to 2025 may also create less opportunity to establish himself. The 2025 season was rewarded in not just 3.3M but in more opportunities like a
starters position.
I support the midrange player as much as anyone. They typically are the ones to be squeezed. There
are FA's that go unsigned now. Edman getting that contract was unique. Donovan's value is also partially due
to his cost. He may not be as lucky as Edman in his FA search.
If teams replace AS level players with the next great prospect what happen win a 1-2 WAR player
cost too much. I see these 0.5-2 WAR players out of the game at 30 or trying to grab a Spring training
invite in this current system which definitely wouldn't increase their career earnings.
Just to be clear, I'm not talking about a new paradigm system that completely blows everything out of the water.
For example, in the case of Burleson, I noted that you could say he's made $2+ million but probably should have earned closer to $12+ million over 2022-2025.
Without going all the way into the details of the math, I'm looking a new system - between a higher ML min. and starting to make a new take on ARB adjustments after 1 yr. of service time - that might have paid Burleson closer to $5 million over 2022-2025. And then for 2026, I'd probably having him making about $5 million, based on his 2025 performance, vs. $3.3 million.
So, by the end of 2026, I'd have Burleson having made like $10 million instead of $5.5 million and he'd be that much less "in arrears" going into 2027.
That may not look like a huge difference in the context of a $5.28 billion industry in player salaries, but I think it would be very meaningful difference on level of individual players, in particular for guys who are "average" to "marginal" players who may have short careers and who moreso need to cash in when they can. If Burleson suffered a career ending injury this season, walking away from MLB having justifiably made $10 million instead of $5.5 million would make a huge difference in him and his family being "set for life".
In my conceptualization, even if it means Juan Soto gets $550 million instead of $750 million so that other $200 million can go to 40-50 "Alec Burlesons," I think that would be good for baseball.
The attempted point was not about blowing up the system. It was about the counter points to be made when
really intelligent people are given new parameters to work under they will adjust. The stars will get paid regardless
of the parameters.
AB has shown production. Take your examples of injury, but not career ending, or decreased production.
In present form he still has appeal due to control and past production. If looking for a job he likely gets a
prove it contract. In the arbitration/control world there won't be a pay cut and very well may
still get a little bump.
These 1-3 WAR players IMO will see few contracts being offered from teams with strict budgets. There's a very
real possibility of those players aging out faster.
The Tucker contract shows an example. Many predicted a superstar contract of $400M that seemed
questionable to myself. He got an enormous $240 but short. Done so to be able to move on from him
quickly and grab the next younger flavor of the month while the investment is just 60% of those other guesses.
Predict KT's next market at age 32. $160 seems high. Alonso got less at 1 year younger.
The AB situation as much as it might impact early, this season being the first as nothing prior
supports him getting a raise, might also have benefits where he maintains a position with
built in raises. These players get 1 extra contract now to sell themselves on. Getting more
may or may not benefit them.