MLS/SUM: European free agency market for star players

Discussion in 'MLS: General' started by pc4th, Aug 31, 2007.

  1. pc4th

    pc4th New Member

    Jun 14, 2003
    North Poll
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    That's my point. I asked 'would there be any restrictions' knowing that there won't be any. This would benefit the players. A Portugese player could become a free agent after 3-4 years contract unlike in baseball where you can't be a free agent until you're 27 years old.

    If you think I don't know about the Bosman and how in the soccer world there is a lot less restrictions than in baseball, you're clueless.
     
  2. pc4th

    pc4th New Member

    Jun 14, 2003
    North Poll
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Dice K was the hottest baseball player during last year off-season. A lot of teams want him. Boston bids $51 million to get him. If that doesn't say about his 'VALUE' nothing else will. They looked at his performance in Japan and in the World Baseball Classic. He was projected to be among the top 15 pitchers in baseball.

    Matsuzaka has a 108-60 career record in Japan with a 2.95 ERA and 1,355 strikeouts in 204 games.

    In addition, he's one of the three most popular Japanese baseball player. It gives the RedSox an edge in marketing themselves in Japan.

    Also, read this article by a baseball expert who speculates how much Dice K would be worth. This was before Boston put in its bid.

    http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/putting-a-price-on-matsuzaka/
    by Jeff Sackmann
    November 01, 2006

    READ THIS ONE.

    No major league team has ever paid free-agent market value for a player acquired via the posting system. For example, after the 2000 season, the Mariners spent $13 million to negotiate with Ichiro Suzuki and then inked him to a three-year, $14 million deal.

    Basically, Ichiro was valued at $27 million for 3 years by the Mariners. ($9 mil a year). However, his salary was only $4.66 mil a year.

    Dice K was valued at $103 million for 6 years by the RedSox ($17.16 mil a year). However, his salary is only $8.67 mil a year.
     
  3. Rommul

    Rommul Member

    Aug 26, 2003
    NYC
    I really think you lack even a basic knowledge of what factors are involved in players moving and I am not alone.

    Teams are not going to just sit down and keep playing players who are just playing out their contract. Vincenzo Iaquinta was bench for Champions League matches because he wouldn't sign a new contract while Udinese was doing well in the CL. That is how much it means to teams.

    You don't know enough about what you are talking about.
     
  4. superdave

    superdave Member+

    Jul 14, 1999
    VB, VA
    Club:
    DC United
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    PC, I can't help but notice that you didn't answer my question. I must say, I'm a little bit hurt. :(

    If I'm right that Dice-K is the highest paid pitcher EVER without major league experience (and I am) then that pretty much demolishes your "point" that he's way underpaid.

    QED.
     
  5. Rommul

    Rommul Member

    Aug 26, 2003
    NYC
    You have no proof of that and your logic is horribly flawed.

    That is simply not how negotiation works.
     
  6. pc4th

    pc4th New Member

    Jun 14, 2003
    North Poll
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Thus far, no one has answered. So I will give it a try.

    Elite buying teams: They will have $40-50 million extra each year. They will chase some of the elite 30 players in the world who are now free agent for that year. They will offer much much better deal because they have $40-50 mil surplus. Example: $10 mil salary a year + $5 mil signing-on fee a year.

    Elite selling teams: They will have their star/elite players for 2-3 years more until his contract run out. For example, Rooney, Cristiano Ronaldo, Kaka will stay at their clubs (Everton, Sporting, Sao Paulo) until their contract run out. They become free agents.

    Free-agent top 30 players They will earn a lot more money. $10 mil salary + $5 mil signing-on fee a year. Example: Shevchenko as a free agent to Chelsea or Torres as a free agent to Liverpool: $10 mil salary + $6-8 mil signing-on fee. Chelsea and Liverpool paid around $60 million transfer fee for them.

    Free-agent Shevchenko/Torres: $10 mil salary + $7 mil signing-on fee a year for 5 years = $85 mil total

    Transfered Shevchenko/Torres: $60 mil transfer fee + $10 mil a year for 5 years: $110 mil


    Restrictions? None. If there are to be restrictions, it will be years from now.
     
  7. pc4th

    pc4th New Member

    Jun 14, 2003
    North Poll
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    How is he not underpaid?

    RedSox was willing to pay him $103 million for 6 years if he was a free agent.
    Instead, he got $52 million for 6 years as a non-free agent. His Japanese team (Seibu Lions) got $51 million.

    Seibu Lions has to be the luckiest team in the world. They got $51 million in exchange for 1 year without Dice K. He would become a free agent if he plays for Seibu Lions 1 more years to fullfill the "9-years before you can become a free agent" restriction.
     
  8. DirtyJerzey

    DirtyJerzey Member

    May 30, 2005
    Harrison, NJ
    Club:
    New York Red Bulls
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    While its true he's the highest paid pitcher without MLB experience, the Epstein quote about his value being the sum of transfer fee and salary is legit. While I doubt Dice-K would've gotten 100 million (since a large part of Boston paying so much has as much to do with him NOT playing in New York as with him playing in Boston) most analysts agreed that he'd probably get more than the 52 he got.

    Speaking of overpaying on transfers due to competition, thats the heart on why the transfer system exists. Say you're Sporting and you've developed one of the top talents in the world in Nani. His ambitions are obviously higher than your own club but he's still got 3 years left in his contract. In this situation, there are three parties you have to consider: buyer, seller, and player and I'll show you why its in the best interest of all three for a transfer.

    Sporting can let Nani play out of his contract and get nothing in return for developing him or they can sell him now to the highest bidder and get a very good ROI. Of course Sporting here will try to sell since its in their best interest afterall.

    Now suppose that all the top clubs are interested in this player. Thats a good 10-12 clubs in Europe. If you're say Manchester United, you can say well I'm interested Nani and if you wait till free agency you will be compensated heavily. But then its a succint possibility that the other 11 clubs after him will put in bids, which will be of course accepted by Sporting. Thus Man U. here is banking on the fact Nani says no to ALL transfer offers in search of a large payday which won't work because ...

    There's no way Sporting will allow Nani to do this. They're not morons after all. If Nani refuses solid bids by major clubs, its extremely likely that Sporting can bench Nani until he picks a club to go to. What happens to Nani if he's benched for the rest of his contract? Well Man U. is not interested anymore are they?

    This happened to Steed Malbranque at Fulham. He was doing precisely what you're suggesting, trying to get to free agency. Coleman said either sign an extension or sign a transfer. Steed did neither and found himself on the bench for a long time. Malbranque gave in, and signed a transfer to Tottenham for 2 million pounds.

    The only players that have the power to get around this are players that are too important to the team to not play. These players (sidwell, ballack) are usually already fully developed players in their mid to late 20s. Unfortunately they are the minority, since the majority of top transfers are young, promising talent.

    So in summary, your theory of having free agency rule Europe cant work due to simple economic rules of buyer and seller power, game theory, and Nash Equilibrium.

    I apologize to myself for spending so much time on a post that has no relevance to MLS at all. :)
     
  9. SideshowBob

    SideshowBob Member

    Jan 12, 2007
    Northern VA
    Club:
    Philadelphia Union
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    That seems pretty self-destructive by the club. If you had a premier player but refused to play him because he wouldn't sign a new contract, wouldn't that hurt you? Not only in the short term by not putting the best team on the field, but also in your future ability to sign such players.
     
  10. SideshowBob

    SideshowBob Member

    Jan 12, 2007
    Northern VA
    Club:
    Philadelphia Union
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I don't see how you can make that conclusion at all. A players can simultaneously be the highest paid player in some regards and still be underpaid. The two things aren't mutually exclusive.

    That doesn't mean that pc4th's point is necessarily correct, but you haven't actually proved him wrong either.
     
  11. pc4th

    pc4th New Member

    Jun 14, 2003
    North Poll
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    You're right in the fact that it might be best for players like Cristiano Ronaldo, Nani and Kaka to leave their clubs (Sporting, Porto, Sao Paulo) early for greener pasture. They got a huge paid raise after they transfer to Man U and AC Milan. Though, they have to sign a new and longer contract in doing so.

    However, what about players who are already at a big clubs like Shevchenko (AC Milan to Chelsea), Robben (Chelsea to Real Madrid), Henry (Arsenal to Barcelona) etc... What about players that sign contract extensions after they are at big clubs like Cristiano Ronaldo, Rooney and even Henry?

    Like I said, if the top 30 players all play out their contract (without any contract extension) and become free agents, they will earn a lot more because the top 8 richest soccer clubs in the world would have an extra $40-50 million each year.
     
  12. pc4th

    pc4th New Member

    Jun 14, 2003
    North Poll
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    What Rommul said is true. It's a tactic some clubs use to get players to sign contract extension. That's part of the reason why many star players sign contract extension or agree to a transfer.

    For those who are used to American sports with free agency, it seems a bit weird. Imagine the Yankees benching Alex Rodriquez because he refuses to sign a contract extension or refuse a $50 million transfer fee to another team. But it happens in soccer.

    Vincenzo Iaquinta

    http://www.channel4.com/sport/football_italia/sep20j.html
    https://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?t=246720

    Antonio Cassano (benched for 6 months)

    http://forum.acmilan-online.com/showthread.php?t=8461

    Rodrigo Taddei (benched half a season)

    http://www.channel4.com/sport/football_italia/ccu/taddeiccu.html

    David Beckham

    http://soccernet.espn.go.com/news/story?id=399849&cc=5901

    I'm sure there are others but those are just some I have found through google.
     
  13. superdave

    superdave Member+

    Jul 14, 1999
    VB, VA
    Club:
    DC United
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    You don't have any real evidence for this assertion.
     
  14. Rommul

    Rommul Member

    Aug 26, 2003
    NYC
    Prove it.
     
  15. Rommul

    Rommul Member

    Aug 26, 2003
    NYC
    It is standard practice.

    Its called leverage. Players who don't perform at ahigh level of competence don't demand high salaries. If you are on the bench you can't perform at a high level.

    The poster who created this thread wants you to believe clubs will just sit down and watch players walk away en masse.
     
  16. Rommul

    Rommul Member

    Aug 26, 2003
    NYC
    Thank. You.
     
  17. Rommul

    Rommul Member

    Aug 26, 2003
    NYC
    At this point your are getting into the semantics of what constitutes overpaid.
     
  18. Rommul

    Rommul Member

    Aug 26, 2003
    NYC
    Translation: I am just gonna go ahead and ignore all the points you made an assume that the point I is indeed correct.

    :rolleyes:
     
  19. RichardL

    RichardL BigSoccer Supporter

    May 2, 2001
    Berkshire
    Club:
    Reading FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England
  20. pc4th

    pc4th New Member

    Jun 14, 2003
    North Poll
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    But these players were not BENCHED for poor performance. They were benched for not signing contract extension.

    It happens in American sports where teams just sit and watch their star players become free agents. They can't bench a player for refusing to sign a contract extension.


    -----------------------
    Like I said numerous times, all it takes is one rich person who sign all the top agents who represent the top 30 soccer players in the world. They commit these players to become free agents. What can clubs do to prevent these players from becoming free agents? Benching them en masse?
     
  21. pc4th

    pc4th New Member

    Jun 14, 2003
    North Poll
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    You're right. It's a tactic clubs do to prevent free transfers.

    Sporting would lose $40 million in the transfer fee if Nani become a free agent.

    This prove my whole thesis that elite players could earn a lot more if a large part of that $40 mil go toward the players instead.

    Let's assume Nani salary at Man U is $8 mil a year for 4 years for a total of $32 million. His total cost to Man U is $32 mil + $40 mil = $72 mil over 4 years.

    Now assume that there is a Nani-like player (let's say a clone) who is a free agent and he wants $60 mil over 4 years. Which player would Man U get?

    Nani for $72 million over 4 years?
    Free-agent Nani-like player who is just as good for $60 mil over 4 years?

    (to not screw up the wages, the free-agent Nani wants $8 mil a year in salary + $7 mil a year in signing-on fee).
     
  22. pc4th

    pc4th New Member

    Jun 14, 2003
    North Poll
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I was just replying to his first part of the argument where it might makes sense for Nani to transfer to Man U. Playing at better team + huge pay raise on his new contract.

    As for his other points, I know about the tactic of 'sign contract extension or agree to a transfer or I will bench your ass' clubs use. It just prove my argument. Clubs don't want to lose $40 million in transfer fee thus they force player to sign contract extension.

    Why do you think clubs do this? Because they know it is not in their interest to allow star players to become free agents. Who benefit if star players become free agent?

    Also, you have ignore several points I have made.

    Answer this question that I have asked several times now.

    What would happen if the top 30 soccer players in the world all play out their contract and become free agents?

    (assuming clubs won't bench the top 30 players in the world....imagine the like of C.Ronaldo, Rooney, Torres, Messi, Kaka, Ronaldinho, Robben etc...all benched for a whole season for wanting to become free agents)
     
  23. pc4th

    pc4th New Member

    Jun 14, 2003
    North Poll
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    That is partly true. But part of the reason why the coach made that statement because Beckham signed a contract with LA Galaxy and Real Madrid got nothing. Also, if I remember correctly, Beckham was offered a contract extension toward the end. But why would he sign it when he could earn up to $50 mil in the United States.

    If Beckham came with a $30 million transfer fee, MLS/Galaxy could never afford to sign him.
     
  24. Rommul

    Rommul Member

    Aug 26, 2003
    NYC
    You are not grasping it. You can't perform at a high level if you aren't allowed to perform at all.

    Yes they can they just choose not to.

    Thats because in American sports:

    1) The leagues often expand beyond their talent bases making even the more marginal talents valuable. Furthermore most American sports are games of attrition and most of the big stars are accumulators who have a big influence on the success of failure of a team. A guy like Ben Wallace is the exception. Football is not like this you don't need a 20 goal scorer to win a title or even be competitive. You do need a 20 point per game scorers or 10-15 rebound per game guys or 12 assist per game guys to win. Winning in our sports often comes down to who has the best accumulators. Sitting one of those accumulators on the bench is suicide.

    2. Transfer fees are not a staple of American sports. American fans won't support benching a player just to force him to sign a contract when they see the team is not going to lose anything other teams don't lose.

    Thats wrong. Wrong Wrong Wrong. Its Wrong.

    You will also need all those players to agree to it. It doesn't make any sense to try to sign players' agents if the players can just turn around and fire that agent.

    You are living in a fantasy world.


    Yes. Why? Because the teams know they will enjoy all the sympathy because all the fans will look at the players who agree to this as just greedy individuals who only care about themselves. A lot of them are anyway but now it isn't as blatant.
     
  25. Rommul

    Rommul Member

    Aug 26, 2003
    NYC
    Jesus Christ stop doing that. Stop trying to pretend every peice of evidence people put out that disputes your ideas actually supports them. They don't. They actually disprove your ideas. They really do.

    Until you answer Richards question and prove that all that money will spent on elite players you have proven nothing. Nothing.

    Blah.

    Blah.

    Blah.

    Stop repeating yourself as if the people reading this don't get your point.

    They do. They just think its silly.
     

Share This Page