Home
Forums
New Posts
Illini Basketball
Illini Football
Sports Talk
Log in
Register
What's new
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Sports
Sports Talk
Chicago Cubs 2021 season
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="ChiefGritty" data-source="post: 1697496" data-attributes="member: 746137"><p>That it has changed has been extensively documented, but pointing to the steroid era as a potential explanatory factor I think is probably pretty sensible.</p><p><img src="https://blogs.fangraphs.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/aging_curve_woba.jpg" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" /></p><p>[URL unfurl="true"]https://blogs.fangraphs.com/hitters-no-longer-peak-only-decline/[/URL]</p><p>[URL unfurl="true"]https://blogs.fangraphs.com/checking-in-on-the-aging-curve/[/URL]</p><p></p><p>Regardless, when combined with service time manipulation on the front end, free agency is no longer structured in a way that allows players to reap their full value over their careers.</p><p></p><p>This is anathema to the players, but I think they ought to be taking owners up on the concept of tying free agent eligibility to age rather than service time. That would completely eliminate service time manipulation in one fell swoop, give the players a line to defend in negotiations moving forward rather than having to play offense against the system they fought to set up, and it would make MLB a younger game, which presumably is in line with other changes to the game that would make it more watchable and benefit everyone. It's a bit of a virtuous cycle.</p><p></p><p>The owners proposed 29 as an age which would give them far more team control than they have now, obviously unacceptable, but what about something like 27 plus at least 3 years of service time or something? The union needs to get creative, they are occupying low ground currently.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="ChiefGritty, post: 1697496, member: 746137"] That it has changed has been extensively documented, but pointing to the steroid era as a potential explanatory factor I think is probably pretty sensible. [IMG]https://blogs.fangraphs.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/aging_curve_woba.jpg[/IMG] [URL unfurl="true"]https://blogs.fangraphs.com/hitters-no-longer-peak-only-decline/[/URL] [URL unfurl="true"]https://blogs.fangraphs.com/checking-in-on-the-aging-curve/[/URL] Regardless, when combined with service time manipulation on the front end, free agency is no longer structured in a way that allows players to reap their full value over their careers. This is anathema to the players, but I think they ought to be taking owners up on the concept of tying free agent eligibility to age rather than service time. That would completely eliminate service time manipulation in one fell swoop, give the players a line to defend in negotiations moving forward rather than having to play offense against the system they fought to set up, and it would make MLB a younger game, which presumably is in line with other changes to the game that would make it more watchable and benefit everyone. It's a bit of a virtuous cycle. The owners proposed 29 as an age which would give them far more team control than they have now, obviously unacceptable, but what about something like 27 plus at least 3 years of service time or something? The union needs to get creative, they are occupying low ground currently. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Sports
Sports Talk
Chicago Cubs 2021 season
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…