Leaving $$$ on the table

I think he also has some obligation to the union which put him in this position. Solidarity is the foundation of an effective union.

 

How do you arrive at this conclusion? Or do you just resent people who have unique marketable talents?

People are worth every dime they can get for their talents or services. It's the American way.

 

How exactly is it anti-union to support Cliff Lee's right to choose what he wants even if it means taking less money?

And qtlaw makes an excellent point.

 

Excellent point.

If I were the union, I would be more concerned about the guys that don't even test free agent waters - I recall there was some consternation about Mark Buerhle's in-season deal with the White Sox, to the point that the contract was in limbo for a day or two because the union considered challenging it.

 

Not necessarily that. Moreso some of the posts like "screw the union" and that "his obligation is to his family, not the union." Also, look up the old thread on Bob Kravitz's column about Sean Payton.

 

If the union gives Lee shit about this deal, then yes, I say screw them, too. It is his right and his choice. That does not mean I am anti-union.

 

Do you even understand the modern day union? Honestly, I don't think you do. I'm as pro-union as anybody here and the union has done its job. They have provided Lee with the "opportunity" to take advantage of these conditions. "Opportunity" is not something MLBPA has always had. Union negotiations aren't always about just money, it can be about benefits and working conditions as well.

Once again you are trying to come across as the smartest guy in the room, you are not. this is not the 50's through 80's where I would agree that he would have had an obligation to the union. His value is what he was offered, he did his job.

 

Why can't you make your point without this nonsense?

 

This isn't entirely right. ALL contracts affect others, but obviously some have more affect than others. There are different markets for different classes of player -- from second basemen to post-arbitration corner outfielders to slugging first basemen to back-up catchers. Instead of one bar being raised, imagine a lot of smaller bars based on all the different classes of player. Even a guy like David Ross, who signed a nice, two-year deal with Atlanta, helped his fellow back-up catchers.

 

So Whitman you think Lee had an obligationto the union to take the Yankee dollars and be unhappy instead of taking a few million less per year and being happy in Philly?

Figure it this way. The Yankees offer was $22 mill-$23 mill per year avg. The Philly deal looks like $20 mill per avg.
Consider than Pennsylvania State income tax is a few percent lower the NY State and that Philly does not have city income tax which I think is 2 1/2-3% in NYC and how much difference is there really .... a million a year. No big deal.

The union has no problem with a pitcher taking $20 mill a year

 

Why do you have to be the board contrarian to try to show how smart you are? You are wrong on this, dead wrong.

He is worth what he is offered, not what he accepted. He did his job, the union has no right to be pissed

 

I guess I think that each player has a moral obligation to at least consider the effect of a contract on the union and, therefore, his fellow players.