Should MLB Have a Hard Salary Cap?

[marl1220]

With LA signing Snell I got to thinking about a hard cap in MLB. I can't cry about teams spending $$$ as I'm a Yankee fan. However, fans of smaller market teams have to have strong thoughts/beliefs on this subject. Grandfathering in current contracts would probably be a nightmare but I'm sure they would think of something. What are your thoughts?

Forgot to add thoughts on a salary "floor" as well.

[Cactuspies]

tell smaller market teams they no longer get shared revenue money and see what happens to their spending habits. they are going to have to fold or relocate if they don't sign players and get butts in the seats.

[atk825]

Originally Posted by Cactuspies

tell smaller market teams they no longer get shared revenue money and see what happens to their spending habits. they are going to have to fold or relocate if they don't sign players and get butts in the seats.

It's ok. They are all glorified property development shell companies at this point, where most of their profit comes from other revenue streams and the appreciation of franchise values.

[steg22]

I know there are a lot of people who feel differently than me, but I adamantly believe that a hard salary cap is the ONLY way to even the playing field and keep the MLB from becoming even less relevant.

Many people say that it's fair because teams not in the top 10 salary spots often make the playoffs and occasionally win the World Series. Here's an analogy for you:

Let's say ten world-class sprinters take part in a series of races to determine who's the fastest, but they always give the same two or three sprinters a 5-foot headstart. Those two or three guys aren't going to win every race, but it's still incredibly unfair.

The Dodgers and Yankees can afford to buy their way into the playoff almost every single year. They would be playoff teams EVERY SINGLE YEAR if not for injuries. The Dodgers had injuries to their entire starting rotation and STILL easily won the World Series!

The people who say it's fair are NOT fans of the Pirates, Royals, Athletics, Rays, Marlins, Mariners, Rockies, Tigers, Brewers, or Reds. Hell, I'm a Cardinals fan and we're usually somewhere between 8 - 15 in payroll. I know that I'm fortunate because we can afford a semi-high value free agent every two or three years.

Many of you will disagree, but I feel this is one of the two or three primary reasons baseball has fallen out of favor with many fans. I had ZERO desire to watch the World Series this year because of the unfairness. The current format is not sustainable, and fans are going to continue to peel off. 20 teams have to count on every single thing working out PERFECTLY in order to win a World Series (the 2015 Royals are a good example). The Dodgers and Yankees can still lose 4 or 5 key players to injury and compete for a championship.

There is no doubt that GMs are a big factor. GMs of the Rays, Braves, and Astros always seem to do a great job. Personally, I think Brian Cashman is one of the worst GMs in baseball history. If other GMs had the same money to spend year-in and year-out as this no-talent ass-clown, I can almost guarantee they'd win more than one World Series in the last 23 years!

Everyone knows that Skenes will almost assuredly end up with the Yankees or Dodgers, just like Gerrit Cole and many others before him. We knew Ohtani would end up with Dodgers. If Judge didn't already play for the Yankees, we know he'd up there anyway. We know where the top superstars will likely end up, because there's only 4 or 5 teams that can afford them.

Sorry for venting, but I'm at my wit's end with this crap.

[byronscott4ever]

There should be at least a minimum and a taxable ceiling

[Bob Ross]

Skenes is going to look great in a Yankees or Dodgers uniform in 5 years.

EDIT: the Pirates are the prime example of why there should be a change. Their owner treats this team as a revenue stream to his pockets and nothing more. He does just enough to make it look like they're trying. Then when someone plays well and gets value, off they go for some no name double A "talent."

[no10pin]

The most common argument against a cap is 'tell your owner to spend more money'. It's not that simple. The vast majority of top free agents don't even look at small market teams because they know their contract would cripple the team. So in that case, spending more money is overpaying for mid-level free agents.

As a Royals fan, I'd be good with getting rid of shared revenue if it was accompanied by a salary cap and salary floor. Bad decisions that cost a lot of money should have a negative impact on a team, but the top teams just go get the next guy up.

[marl1220]

[QUOTE=byronscott4ever;19717375]There should be at least a minimum and a taxable ceiling[/QUOTE]

There is but it doesn't matter with some owners. The owners of the Dodgers and Mets will spend money out of their own pockets (money not earned through their team) on players without a second thought. Hell, they're probably willing to lose money if it means getting what they want.

[Anejo]

Originally Posted by marl1220

With LA signing Snell I got to thinking about a hard cap in MLB. I can't cry about teams spending $$$ as I'm a Yankee fan. However, fans of smaller market teams have to have strong thoughts/beliefs on this subject. Grandfathering in current contracts would probably be a nightmare but I'm sure they would think of something. What are your thoughts?

Forgot to add thoughts on a salary "floor" as well.

I am a Yankee fan and yes there should be. However this will never happen, the baseball union is one of the best in the USA.

[marl1220]

Originally Posted by Anejo

I am a Yankee fan and yes there should be. However this will never happen, the baseball union is one of the best in the USA.

I think the owners could wait them out in the next CBA. All they have to do is set their minds to it and wait. I would support the owners on the issue.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by steg22

I know there are a lot of people who feel differently than me, but I adamantly believe that a hard salary cap is the ONLY way to even the playing field and keep the MLB from becoming even less relevant.

Agree. The NFL is the most popular professional sports league. MLB has gone from first to third. They need to adopt a NFL-like revenue sharing plan, a hard salary cap and floor set at a negotiated percentage of all revenues.

One small market team has won in the last 33 years. If a third of your teams are never going to be competitive, your league is not going to be popular. Until this happens, MLB is going to continue declining in popularity.

[awz50]

Yeah but good luck every getting one implemented

[rats60]

Originally Posted by marl1220

I think the owners could wait them out in the next CBA. All they have to do is set their minds to it and wait. I would support the owners on the issue.

All it takes is the bottom third of owners to not agree to a new CBA unless it is going to be a contract that allows them to be competitive.

[marl1220]

Originally Posted by rats60

Agree. The NFL is the most popular professional sports league. MLB has gone from first to third. They need to adopt a NFL-like revenue sharing plan, a hard salary cap and floor set at a negotiated percentage of all revenues.

One small market team has won in the last 33 years. If a third of your teams are never going to be competitive, your league is not going to be popular. Until this happens, MLB is going to continue declining in popularity.

The players don't care. As long as they keep getting the big $$$$ it won't matter to them. That's why, IMO, it's going to take a VERY UGLY CBA to make it happen. The owners are going to have to be willing to out-wait the players. No matter how long it takes.

[ottobord]

Teams should be allowed to spend whatever they want based on a % of their revenue. You shouldn't be able to import personal funds. Meanwhile teams should be forced to spend based on % of revenue. I wouldn't cry if the league had less teams but the existing ones were profitable. It's ridiculous that Tampa can't fix their roof. Just end the franchise. I know that won't happen.

[atk825]

Originally Posted by rats60

All it takes is the bottom third of owners to not agree to a new CBA unless it is going to be a contract that allows them to be competitive.

The bottom third of the owners are all tax recipients. They love this system.

[whitmm]

Originally Posted by rats60

All it takes is the bottom third of owners to not agree to a new CBA unless it is going to be a contract that allows them to be competitive.

The bottom teams don't care if they are competitive.

There would be too much infighting between the owners to agree on anything before it ever made it to the CBA table.

The bottom feeders don't want to spend more money and the big spenders don't want to be capped.

[Bosoxfan5990]

Originally Posted by ottobord

Teams should be allowed to spend whatever they want based on a % of their revenue. You shouldn't be able to import personal funds. Meanwhile teams should be forced to spend based on % of revenue. I wouldn't cry if the league had less teams but the existing ones were profitable. It's ridiculous that Tampa can't fix their roof. Just end the franchise. I know that won't happen.

It's not that they can't fix it; it's that it doesn't make financial sense for them to fix it, given they're looking at a new stadium in the next few years.

[whitmm]

Originally Posted by ottobord

Teams should be allowed to spend whatever they want based on a % of their revenue. You shouldn't be able to import personal funds. Meanwhile teams should be forced to spend based on % of revenue. I wouldn't cry if the league had less teams but the existing ones were profitable. It's ridiculous that Tampa can't fix their roof. Just end the franchise. I know that won't happen.

In 2023, the Yankees generated $679 million in revenue, roughly $130 million more than the next team. Oakland was last at $241 million. Spending based on a percentage of their own revenue would make things worse.

Here's why. Tampa, the team you think should be folded, has been extremely competitive the last few years. So has Cleveland. And the Brewers and now Orioles. All of those teams had revenue under $330 million. Putting a cap on those teams prevents them from ever being competitive if it's based on revenue, due to market size.

Heck, let's ignore the lower market teams. Philly, Atlanta, Texas, and Houston all had revenue under $475 million in 2023. All four have been WS teams in recent years. Capping their payroll based on revenues would handcuff them in competing against the Yankees and Dodgers.

[Skipscards]

No salary cap necessary. The MLB just has to stop the local tv deals and get better at sharing revenue.

[ThoseBackPages]

i voted no

[duwal]

A hard cap doesn't mean anything though if teams can simply deferred portions of the contract for years and years down the line. Dodgers now have nearly a billion dollars worth of deferred money for the next 15 years

[whitmm]

Originally Posted by duwal

A hard cap doesn't mean anything though if teams can simply deferred portions of the contract for years and years down the line. Dodgers now have nearly a billion dollars worth of deferred money for the next 15 years

Deferred money still counts towards the luxury tax. Ohtani counted for like $46 million against the CBT.

It's a running joke with the NFL that the salary cap doesn't exist because of the number of ways teams are able to manipulate it.

[inaka]

This essence of this satirical 2003 article from The Onion still plays well today:

Yankees Ensure 2003 Pennant By Signing Every Player In Baseball
https://theonion.com/yankees-ensure-...in-1819566731/



Cap and floor.
To me, as a former fan of a small-market MLB team, I've known for years that baseball is fundamentally broken. Now, fans of other markets are finally seeing it first-hand.

[ottobord]

Originally Posted by whitmm

In 2023, the Yankees generated $679 million in revenue, roughly $130 million more than the next team. Oakland was last at $241 million. Spending based on a percentage of their own revenue would make things worse.

Here's why. Tampa, the team you think should be folded, has been extremely competitive the last few years. So has Cleveland. And the Brewers and now Orioles. All of those teams had revenue under $330 million. Putting a cap on those teams prevents them from ever being competitive if it's based on revenue, due to market size.

Heck, let's ignore the lower market teams. Philly, Atlanta, Texas, and Houston all had revenue under $475 million in 2023. All four have been WS teams in recent years. Capping their payroll based on revenues would handcuff them in competing against the Yankees and Dodgers.

Fair enough. I see I didn't explain myself well. I guess my point is a team shouldn't be punished for making allot of money and then investing it back in the franchise. So no salary cap. At the same time an Elon Musk shouldn't be able to buy a franchise and pour money into that wasn't produced by the franchise. I also think that poorly run franchises or franchises that are in bad markets should eventually face repercussions.

At the end of the day I don't want another strike or lockout. So I've kind of resigned to agree with whatever avoids that from happening.