Derrick cole( a pitcher) just singed a 9 year 324 million dollar deal.

vex

Legend
Both sports are “skill” sports - you either develop the elite skills or you don’t make it anywhere. But skills aside tennis (singles) clearly REQUIRES you to be in a level of physical shape that is far beyond anything required in baseball. You can be fat and slow and still be a great ball player. Baseball also requires basically no cardio
 

JaoSousa

Hall of Fame
for a tennis player they get various other payments besides just the prize money for match wins
appearance fees: which is payment for showing up at a tournament, i would guess the big 3 probably get a mil or so the bigger ur name the higher this is (even if they decide to pull out of a tournament they still get this payment)
various other prizes: this can vary widely for each tournament but beside the prize money they will win things like cars, jet ski, boats, or even animals like horses or cows
i think the most lucrative would be exhibitions the amount can vary but its a quasi serious friendly practice match that they get paid for
I read somewhere that Fed's appearance fee at Basel and Dubai is more that the winner's prize money. Crazy.
 

insideguy

G.O.A.T.
for a tennis player they get various other payments besides just the prize money for match wins
appearance fees: which is payment for showing up at a tournament, i would guess the big 3 probably get a mil or so the bigger ur name the higher this is (even if they decide to pull out of a tournament they still get this payment)
various other prizes: this can vary widely for each tournament but beside the prize money they will win things like cars, jet ski, boats, or even animals like horses or cows
i think the most lucrative would be exhibitions the amount can vary but its a quasi serious friendly practice match that they get paid for
Sure. I mean yea the top 5 or 10 do they make tons of cash, and more if you are from Japan or something. But that is such a small group. But it is an individual sport. Boxing is probably similar. Maybe worse I don't know.
 

insideguy

G.O.A.T.
Both sports are “skill” sports - you either develop the elite skills or you don’t make it anywhere. But skills aside tennis (singles) clearly REQUIRES you to be in a level of physical shape that is far beyond anything required in baseball. You can be fat and slow and still be a great ball player. Baseball also requires basically no cardio
That really depends. You can't be fat and slow and be a shortstop or a center fielder or a 2nd baseman. You just can't.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vex

Mike Sams

G.O.A.T.
Sure. But he's top of the top of the top. Another player Rendon just signed a 245 million 7 year deal with Angels.
Sounds nice but it's only $35 million per year. The big 3 make more than that just in endorsements. Federer makes $86 mill from his sponsors yearly. Heck he makes that just from Uniqlo per year.
 

Mike Sams

G.O.A.T.
If you wanna know who the worst paid athletes are, check out MMA fighters. Here are the salaries for UFC 241 which was a big PPV event a few months back. Most of them are barely able to survive in the sport. Making basically peanuts while spilling blood and getting their bones broken. They rely on win bonuses and have no sponsorships.

  • Stipe Miocic: $750,000 (no win bonus) def. Daniel Cormier: $500,000
  • Nate Diaz: $250,000 (no win bonus) def. Anthony Pettis: $155,000
  • Paulo Costa: $120,000 (includes $60,000 win bonus) def. Yoel Romero: $150,000
  • Sodiq Yusuff: $28,000 (includes $14,000 win bonus) def. Gabriel Benítez: $40,000
  • Derek Brunson: $190,000 (includes $95,000 win bonus) def. Ian Heinisch: $25,000
  • Khama Worthy: $24,000 (includes $12,000 win bonus) def. Devonte Smith: $23,000
  • Cory Sandhagen: $154,000 (includes $77,000 win bonus) def. Raphael Assunção: $79,000
  • Drakkar Klose: $56,000 (includes $28,000 win bonus) def. Christos Giagos: $28,000
  • Casey Kenney: $28,000 (includes $14,000 win bonus) def. Manny Bermudez: $20,000
  • Hannah Cifers: $28,000 (includes $14,000 win bonus) def. Jodie Esquibel: $10,000
  • Kyung Ho Kang: $44,000 (includes $22,000 win bonus) def. Brandon Davis: $21,000
  • Sabina Mazo: $20,000 (includes $10,000 win bonus) def. Shana Dobson: $12,000
 

BorgTheGOAT

Legend
Soccer is better to fall asleep to, wake up an hour later and realize you didnt miss anything
I think this is why it is the worlds most popular sport and the WC is the biggest sport event on the planet, while baseball is played in the US and as far as I know in Japan, Cuba and Venezuela with the whole rest of the world couldn’t care less about it.
By the way it is football not soccer.
 

insideguy

G.O.A.T.
Sounds nice but it's only $35 million per year. The big 3 make more than that just in endorsements. Federer makes $86 mill from his sponsors yearly. Heck he makes that just from Uniqlo per year.
I agree guys like Fed, Rafa, Nova, and some others make tons of money and blow baseball guys away because of endorsements. Don't get me wrong. But those are the elite of the elite. The 20th best baseball players blows the 20th best tennis player away in money. Not to mention the benefits they get in free travel, free lodging, per diem meals ect. Its not even close.
 

Mike Sams

G.O.A.T.
I agree guys like Fed, Rafa, Nova, and some others make tons of money and blow baseball guys away because of endorsements. Don't get me wrong. But those are the elite of the elite. The 20th best baseball players blows the 20th best tennis player away in money. Not to mention the benefits they get in free travel, free lodging, per diem meals ect. Its not even close.
True but baseball generates much bigger revenue than tennis ever has. Plus there are baseball players making $555K per season while elite players make $35 million per season. So there is a significant disparity in pay between the best players and the guys on the bench.
 

weakera

Talk Tennis Guru
We should also keep in mind baseball players are on vacation for 4-5 months a year. It truly is a better life for an athlete.
 

stringertom

Bionic Poster
We should also keep in mind baseball players are on vacation for 4-5 months a year. It truly is a better life for an athlete.
Traveling with 24 other compadres is also a plus. I would also imagine the shorter time in the air (longest road trip normally is 5 hours) is less burdensome on the body and mind.
 

bjsnider

Hall of Fame
A more apt comparison than baseball is golf, where the last I heard, there's also a lot more money for the golfers. The decline of US interest in tennis is a big problem and there's no obvious solution.
 

vex

Legend
That really depends. You can't be fat and slow and be a shortstop or a center fielder or a 2nd baseman. You just can't.
No doubt. Obviously I’m talking about the minority of ball players like DH, 1B and Ps that can get away with being overweight. The real separation is cardio endurance.
 

insideguy

G.O.A.T.
No doubt. Obviously I’m talking about the minority of ball players like DH, 1B and Ps that can get away with being overweight. The real separation is cardio endurance.
Sure. But Cardio is not really an indication of amazing athletics. I mean a marathon runner or a guy running a 10,000 meter run is better cardio wise than a tennis player. That doesn't mean he's a better athlete.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vex

insideguy

G.O.A.T.
A more apt comparison than baseball is golf, where the last I heard, there's also a lot more money for the golfers. The decline of US interest in tennis is a big problem and there's no obvious solution.
Golf is kind of amazing with the payouts they have. How that all works has to be interesting.
 

vex

Legend
Sure. But Cardio is not really an indication of amazing athletics. I mean a marathon runner or a guy running a 10,000 meter run is better cardio wise than a tennis player. That doesn't mean he's a better athlete.
I just think you’d be hard pressed to say that a baseball player is a better athlete than a tennis player. The drop em in a different sport test def favors the tennis player. Tennis players would be generally better at basketball, leagues better at soccer, and clearly better on the track. Baseball players would probably be better at football depending on the position and maybe better at hockey - not sure they have the cardio for it
 

insideguy

G.O.A.T.
I just think you’d be hard pressed to say that a baseball player is a better athlete than a tennis player. The drop em in a different sport test def favors the tennis player. Tennis players would be generally better at basketball, leagues better at soccer, and clearly better on the track. Baseball players would probably be better at football depending on the position and maybe better at hockey - not sure they have the cardio for it
But baseball guys are generally stronger, and bigger and more powerful. In fact in almost all cases they are. They build their bodies around what the sport requires. A guy like Trout or Bellinger, or man there are so many others are superb athletes. Juan Soto from the nats. These guys are monsters with amazing abilities.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vex

RS

Bionic Poster
the top tennis players make as much as anyone, but obviously the dropoff after that is massive compared to other sports.
I think in some ways that is a good thing though. You actually have to win to develop your popularity and pay in tennis. In football if your a top player regardless of how you team is doing you can still get a 100k plus a week salary.
 

Bobby Jr

G.O.A.T.
You don’t watch enough baseball. All around athleticism is on display in abundance and has been for decades. I’ll take the top 5-tool (hit for average, hit for power, field and arm strength, speed) baseball stars of any decade in the past 70 years over the top tennis players of the same decade:
I watched baseball for years when I lived in a baseball fanatical country (Japan), including watching MLB on TV. The best are obviously great athletes - a call that can be made about almost any sport - but the all-round athletic attributes required (not just nice to have) to be good pails in comparison to tennis where you virtually can't succeed at all without being an all-rounded plus have to be skilled in technique on multiple levels which no position in baseball comes even close to requiring (or AFL for that matter).

This is just a variation/rehash of the tired old "Lebron would have been a top tennis player if he'd chosen tennis" when all evidence we have shows that the specific skill and aptitude set required to be even remotely good at tennis is so rare it almost certainly is a major reason why so many people don't play tennis - because it's just beyond the majority of people, amazing athletes in other sports included, to ever excel at such a dynamic, technique and athleticism intense sport like tennis.
 

Bobby Jr

G.O.A.T.
But baseball guys are generally stronger, and bigger and more powerful. In fact in almost all cases they are. They build their bodies around what the sport requires...
So, just one corner of what athleticism entails at the almost complete expense of the other corners. No-one is denying that the top guys are special athletes but they are extremely niche and very narrow in their skillset - almost as close to the opposite of a tennis player as you can find.
 

stringertom

Bionic Poster
I watched baseball for years when I lived in a baseball fanatical country (Japan), including watching MLB on TV. The best are obviously great athletes - a call that can be made about almost any sport - but the all-round athletic attributes required (not just nice to have) to be good pails in comparison to tennis where you virtually can't succeed at all without being an all-rounded plus have to be skilled in technique on multiple levels which no position in baseball comes even close to requiring (or AFL for that matter).

This is just a variation/rehash of the tired old "Lebron would have been a top tennis player if he'd chosen tennis" when all evidence we have shows that the specific skill and aptitude set required to be even remotely good at tennis is so rare it almost certainly is a major reason why so many people don't play tennis - because it's just beyond the majority of people, amazing athletes in other sports included, to ever excel at such a dynamic, technique and athleticism intense sport like tennis.
We’ll agree to disagree. The real reason why kids pick up racquets less has absolutely nothing to do with athletic skills required. Tennis is an expensive and inefficient use of facilities. One field keeps 18 kids busy at baseball, 22 kids at soccer and a BB court fulfills 10 individual ambitions. They often share bats, balls and gloves. Tennis keeps two kids in singles, four max in dubs and they all need racquets.

Tell me how many tennis camps get opened for the poor kids in places like Cuba and the Dominican Republic, whereas MLB sends or hires local scouts to find the next generation of kids that show talents with bat, ball and/or glove.
 

Sysyphus

Talk Tennis Guru
Who are all these kids who sit down with their excel sheets to decide which sport would be most financially lucrative to pursue?

I did a bunch of different sports growing up, and none of my peers thought like that. (In liberal countries) Kids pursue the sports they want to pursue, those that interest them, and healthy parents let them do so. Availibility and infrastructure (most towns only have so and so many organized sports), cultural influence (e.g. Nordic culture prices winter sports, so many get into that), and social factors (in most of the world, a boy must play football to fit in) matter. But rational deliberations about salary don't really factor into it for most.

For whatever reason, most who repeat that trope -- «big salaries are stealing the best talent» -- seem to be American. Tempting to think that this reflects some cultural oddity.
 

BringBackSV

Hall of Fame
We’ll agree to disagree. The real reason why kids pick up racquets less has absolutely nothing to do with athletic skills required. Tennis is an expensive and inefficient use of facilities. One field keeps 18 kids busy at baseball, 22 kids at soccer and a BB court fulfills 10 individual ambitions. They often share bats, balls and gloves. Tennis keeps two kids in singles, four max in dubs and they all need racquets.

Tell me how many tennis camps get opened for the poor kids in places like Cuba and the Dominican Republic, whereas MLB sends or hires local scouts to find the next generation of kids that show talents with bat, ball and/or glove.

Tennis just isn't that popular in America, it has nothing to do with lack of athleticism. If it were about that there were be plenty of elite American tennis players.
 

Bobby Jr

G.O.A.T.
We’ll agree to disagree. The real reason why kids pick up racquets less has absolutely nothing to do with athletic skills required.
..A point I have made for years. But there is one corner of the topic here that is very relevant. Tennis is much, much, much harder to get good enough at for most people to remain enthusiastic about to a level they want to continue playing. Just as important, the parents play a large part in this. It is **** easy - beyond easy in fact - to chuck a ball around in the back yard as a parent with a kid even if the kid is completely rubbish at playing catch/hitting a ball. There's variations of this which cater to the less talented too.

Tennis by huge contrast has hurdles in the path which dissuade the majority of people who try it to continue. And that's before you even consider the facilities aspect which you also mention

But, back to my previous reply to you. OK, give me an example of any role in baseball which requires even a tenth of the technique as playing tennis? There simply isn't one. The most techincally specific position is pitching - which roughly relates to serving alone in tennis. That's it. Every other role in baseball is very low skilled by comparison or really niche in one specific thing.

Tennis is an expensive and inefficient use of facilities. One field keeps 18 kids busy at baseball, 22 kids at soccer and a BB court fulfills 10 individual ambitions. They often share bats, balls and gloves. Tennis keeps two kids in singles, four max in dubs and they all need racquets.
Beyond this - you haven't hit the core of this topic yet - is that schools are the place where the majority of kids get into sports at any moderately decent level the most initially. And these facility and equipment efficiencies force schools to make the best use of what they've got so in America especially they massively learn towards the sports where it's easy to line 30, 40 kids up and make them do easily measurable activities (throwing, jumping, sprinting etc). This, in turn, becomes the top-end funnel to identifying who will likely suit a particular role in one of the classic American-centric sports.

This has the definite side-effect of not just steering kids towards those sport but also reducing the pool of potential tennis players not because they chose another sport but because schools/coaches chose the easy (often sheer lazy) path because of the limited resources they have available to them.

Tell me how many tennis camps get opened for the poor kids in places like Cuba and the Dominican Republic, whereas MLB sends or hires local scouts to find the next generation of kids that show talents with bat, ball and/or glove.
Hardly any, if any. But this is completely irrelevant to the athletic ability/aptitude argument. It's just about resources, the same as the American school system but on a more extreme level.
 
Last edited:

TheIntrovert

Hall of Fame
If you wanna know who the worst paid athletes are, check out MMA fighters. Here are the salaries for UFC 241 which was a big PPV event a few months back. Most of them are barely able to survive in the sport. Making basically peanuts while spilling blood and getting their bones broken. They rely on win bonuses and have no sponsorships.

  • Stipe Miocic: $750,000 (no win bonus) def. Daniel Cormier: $500,000
  • Nate Diaz: $250,000 (no win bonus) def. Anthony Pettis: $155,000
  • Paulo Costa: $120,000 (includes $60,000 win bonus) def. Yoel Romero: $150,000
  • Sodiq Yusuff: $28,000 (includes $14,000 win bonus) def. Gabriel Benítez: $40,000
  • Derek Brunson: $190,000 (includes $95,000 win bonus) def. Ian Heinisch: $25,000
  • Khama Worthy: $24,000 (includes $12,000 win bonus) def. Devonte Smith: $23,000
  • Cory Sandhagen: $154,000 (includes $77,000 win bonus) def. Raphael Assunção: $79,000
  • Drakkar Klose: $56,000 (includes $28,000 win bonus) def. Christos Giagos: $28,000
  • Casey Kenney: $28,000 (includes $14,000 win bonus) def. Manny Bermudez: $20,000
  • Hannah Cifers: $28,000 (includes $14,000 win bonus) def. Jodie Esquibel: $10,000
  • Kyung Ho Kang: $44,000 (includes $22,000 win bonus) def. Brandon Davis: $21,000
  • Sabina Mazo: $20,000 (includes $10,000 win bonus) def. Shana Dobson: $12,000
Wait what? Nate Diaz only got 250k? Wow
 

stringertom

Bionic Poster
..A point I have made for years. But there is one corner of the topic here that is very relevant. Tennis is much, much, much harder to get good enough at for most people to remain enthusiastic about to a level they want to continue playing. Just as important, the parents play a large part in this. It is **** easy - beyond easy in fact - to chuck a ball around in the back yard as a parent with a kid even if the kid is completely rubbish at playing catch/hitting a ball. There's variations of this which cater to the less talented too.

Tennis by huge contrast has hurdles in the path which dissuade the majority of people who try it to continue. And that's before you even consider the facilities aspect which you also mention

But, back to my previous reply to you. OK, give me an example of any role in baseball which requires even a tenth of the technique as playing tennis? There simply isn't one. The most techincally specific position is pitching - which roughly relates to serving alone in tennis. That's it. Every other role in baseball is very low skilled by comparison or really niche in one specific thing.


Beyond this - you haven't hit the core of this topic yet - is that schools are the place where the majority of kids get into sports at any moderately decent level the most initially. And these facility and equipment efficiencies force schools to make the best use of what they've got so in America especially they massively learn towards the sports where it's easy to line 30, 40 kids up and make them so easily measurable activities. This, in turn, becomes the top funnel to identifying who will likely suit a particular role in one of the classic American-centric sports.

This has the definite side-effect of not just steering kids towards those sport but also reducing the pool of potential tennis players not because they chose another sport but because schools/coaches chose the easy (often sheer lazy) path because of the limited resources they have available to them.


Hardly any, if any. But this is completely irrelevant to the athletic ability/aptitude argument. It's just about resources, the same as the American school system but on a more extreme level.
TL/DR.

Delude yourself on your own, bud. Tennis is a lot easier skills wise than hitting a pitched ball at speeds exceeding 100mph from 60 feet six inches and that’s before all the necessary athleticism required to be a Gold Glove fielder.

I’m done arguing with you. We have different opinions and will never agree.
 

weakera

Talk Tennis Guru
Kids pursue the sports they want to pursue, those that interest them, and healthy parents let them do so.

Actually in most cases child prodigies are pushed by their parents into committing to one sport with which they have the highest likelihood of success.
 

Mike Sams

G.O.A.T.
Actually in most cases child prodigies are pushed by their parents into committing to one sport with which they have the highest likelihood of success.
Sporty parents push their kids. Most other times it's the kid who desires to pursue a sport. Federer being one example. His parents never pushed him into taking up any sport. I believe Djokovic also was self driven. His parents became more active once realizing he was special.
 

insideguy

G.O.A.T.
You
..A point I have made for years. But there is one corner of the topic here that is very relevant. Tennis is much, much, much harder to get good enough at for most people to remain enthusiastic about to a level they want to continue playing. Just as important, the parents play a large part in this. It is **** easy - beyond easy in fact - to chuck a ball around in the back yard as a parent with a kid even if the kid is completely rubbish at playing catch/hitting a ball. There's variations of this which cater to the less talented too.

Tennis by huge contrast has hurdles in the path which dissuade the majority of people who try it to continue. And that's before you even consider the facilities aspect which you also mention

But, back to my previous reply to you. OK, give me an example of any role in baseball which requires even a tenth of the technique as playing tennis? There simply isn't one. The most techincally specific position is pitching - which roughly relates to serving alone in tennis. That's it. Every other role in baseball is very low skilled by comparison or really niche in one specific thing.


Beyond this - you haven't hit the core of this topic yet - is that schools are the place where the majority of kids get into sports at any moderately decent level the most initially. And these facility and equipment efficiencies force schools to make the best use of what they've got so in America especially they massively learn towards the sports where it's easy to line 30, 40 kids up and make them so easily measurable activities. This, in turn, becomes the top funnel to identifying who will likely suit a particular role in one of the classic American-centric sports.

This has the definite side-effect of not just steering kids towards those sport but also reducing the pool of potential tennis players not because they chose another sport but because schools/coaches chose the easy (often sheer lazy) path because of the limited resources they have available to them.


Hardly any, if any. But this is completely irrelevant to the athletic ability/aptitude argument. It's just about resources, the same as the American school system but on a more extreme level.
You are out of your flipping mind. Most baseball players can't even make a major league team till they are 24, or 25. You don't have a clue on the skill and athletic ability it takes.
 

Bobby Jr

G.O.A.T.
You are out of your flipping mind. Most baseball players can't even make a major league team till they are 24, or 25. You don't have a clue on the skill and athletic ability it takes.
What did I say which you have mistakenly misread to suggest baseball is remotely easy for young people? :sneaky:
 

insideguy

G.O.A.T.
What did I say which you have mistakenly misread to suggest baseball is remotely easy for young people? :sneaky:
The skills needed to develop a baseball player playing at a high level are much more than a tennis player. Unless he is an exceptional talent he won't break into the majors before 23. That isn't the case for a pro on the atp tour. You have guys like Nadal and Fed and Novak and so many others playing atp level tennis in their teens. That is unheard of with a very few exceptions in baseball. So saying that the skills needed to play tennis are higher than baseball is just stupid.
 

Bobby Jr

G.O.A.T.
The skills needed to develop a baseball player playing at a high level are much more than a tennis player. Unless he is an exceptional talent he won't break into the majors before 23. That isn't the case for a pro on the atp tour. You have guys like Nadal and Fed and Novak and so many others playing atp level tennis in their teens. That is unheard of with a very few exceptions in baseball. So saying that the skills needed to play tennis are higher than baseball is just stupid.
You, my friend, need to put the crack pipe down and rejoin reality. :-D

Bar almost none, tennis is the highest level skill-centric sport there is. Baseball is barely above average in all sports in terms of high skills required across the whole team. What it excels at is finding extreme specialists who are skilled in one niche thing and also typically physical specimens. Other than that baseball is very modest.

The age factor is completely and utterly irrelevant. That's purely about physical maturation and the right amount of accumulated experience. By that reasoning I could make an argument that Ironman length triathlons are much higher skilled given that the best in the business have historically been 28+.

I can't believe I'm having this debate with an adult who has the ability to use a computer. It's so ridiculously stupid that I wonder if you have some cocked up notion of what "skill" even means.
 
Last edited:
Top