Toggle sidebar

Will MLB BOG Push for Salary Cap in Next CBA

I highly doubt it. There isn't much interest for one, the smaller market owners like Butting have zero desire to build a winning team and are fine with collecting their revenue sharing checks.

It's not like parity doesn't exist. In the last decade, only the Dodgers and Astros have won it more than once.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ColinM
BigBadBruins7708 said:
I dont think it will have much support honestly.

The rich owners want to be able to spend. The poor owners wont want it because under the current system they get ~$50 million a year each from the rich teams. Revenue sharing would almost certainly be dead in a cap situation
Click to expand...

Not completely true, Hal Steinbrenner for years has stated how much he doesn’t believe a team needs to spend over 200 million payroll to win (Rays being the best example). He might be the one of big market owners that want a cap. If you read the article, the RSN situation is another big reason why a cap might happen:



Certainly you are right about teams like Pirates not wanting a floor, but don’t how they won’t be in the owners are in agreement on the issue. I think a cap is more likely than most want to admit imo
 
Nope.

And even if the cheaper owners ever pushed for one, then the richer owners would counterpush for a significant salary floor in retaliation. And vice versa.

Neither are going to happen.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Voight and DaveG
The PA will want a salary floor too. Even if one can be agreed upon the limit will be so high that the big clubs can still spend.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DaveG
I thought they had a soft salary cap, if you go over a number, then there is a luxury tax.
 
Just make the penalties stricter for going over the luxury tax. Instead of moving back a number of spots, just forfeit it altogether. A stricter penalty would be to give the pick to the team who finishes the closest behind them without having gone over the luxury cap.
 
Jumptheshark said:
MLB has the tax system in place do they not?
Click to expand...

They do and it works. People are just bringing this up because the Dodgers managed to make some massive free agent signings in the last couple of years (Freeman, Ohtani, Yamamoto, Snell) and they are likely jealous their teams didn't do the same. I dont have an issue with it at all, if the Dodgers want to pay the tax, let them. Their only goal is to win championships, more teams should think like them.

If players are willing to defer huge amounts of money, that's on them.
 
I think the owners would do well to focus on tightening Free Agency / contract lengths than having a hard salary cap. An easier win would be pushing for 8 years in the Majors before free agency rather than 6 as well as length limits for each contract.
 
There should be more insistence of a punitive (high) salary floor than a salary cap, in my opinion.

Big market, spend-willing owners should not be punished. Small market owners who work on a shoestring budget should act like billionaire owners who are part of an exclusive club who can afford owning a big league sports team.
 
  • Like
Reactions: oknazevad
TheTotalPackage said:
There should be more insistence of a punitive (high) salary floor than a salary cap, in my opinion.

Big market, spend-willing owners should not be punished. Small market owners who work on a shoestring budget should act like billionaire owners who are part of an exclusive club who can afford owning a big league sports team.
Click to expand...
No there should be a salary cap, and along with that you will get a salary floor.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RCGP2, CTHabsfan and oknazevad
TheTotalPackage said:
There should be more insistence of a punitive (high) salary floor than a salary cap, in my opinion.

Big market, spend-willing owners should not be punished. Small market owners who work on a shoestring budget should act like billionaire owners who are part of an exclusive club who can afford owning a big league sports team.
Click to expand...
Would it benefit mlb much if more smaller or mid sized markets won vs LA, Houston, NY, etc such as KC, Stl, Pitt? Probably not.
 
It's not the cap that's the problem, although the luxury tax could be strengthened.
How about a cap floor, do something with deferrals and other cap hit shenanigans, and kill the stupid bonus draft picks for the "weaker" markets.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheTotalPackage
Strummer53 said:
It's not the cap that's the problem, although the luxury tax could be strengthened.
How about a cap floor, do something with deferrals and other cap hit shenanigans, and kill the stupid bonus draft picks for the "weaker" markets.
Click to expand...
MLB needs to get more clubs to actually compete. Too many club owners content to pocket the luxury tax money vs use it to improve the roster.
 
StreetHawk said:
MLB needs to get more clubs to actually compete. Too many club owners content to pocket the luxury tax money vs use it to improve the roster.
Click to expand...
I get ROI and that.
However, owning a sports franchise is pretty much akin to printing money for the super rich.
 
Does the MLB care enough about competitive disadvantage between franchises? The Luxury tax isn't relevant enough but it's at least a gesture.

It's not the same situation as the NHL where the cap was needed for financial viability.

The NFLs cap is for competitive purposes more than financial. Does the MLB need the tier 2 and tier 3 markets to be relevant if the top 10 or so can carry the total league viability?
 
There are many MLB owners, big market and small market, that would support a salary cap. Excepting small market teams that are experts in player development (Tampa) or hit home runs in the draft (Kansas City, Baltimore), there isn’t much incentive to compete for the small market teams. For big market teams, owner’s are increasing uncomfortable with the salary demands of the superstars you need to win. I imagine there are only a handful of teams that would genuinely oppose a salary cap: e.g. the Dodgers who are so big market they make lots of money even when paying a heavy luxury tax and the Pirates who would oppose a salary floor.

The real opposition will come from the players who have benefited immensely from elevated salaries. While the lower tier players might benefit from a salary floor, overall the current system benefits players the most.
 
Bjorn Le said:
There are many MLB owners, big market and small market, that would support a salary cap. Excepting small market teams that are experts in player development (Tampa) or hit home runs in the draft (Kansas City, Baltimore), there isn’t much incentive to compete for the small market teams. For big market teams, owner’s are increasing uncomfortable with the salary demands of the superstars you need to win. I imagine there are only a handful of teams that would genuinely oppose a salary cap: e.g. the Dodgers who are so big market they make lots of money even when paying a heavy luxury tax and the Pirates who would oppose a salary floor.

The real opposition will come from the players who have benefited immensely from elevated salaries. While the lower tier players might benefit from a salary floor, overall the current system benefits players the most.
Click to expand...
If the Dodgers are just going to keep throwing tens of millions at whoever they want every season that gets pretty boring pretty quickly for fans of the league.

I loved the savvy team construction of the 05 White Sox and the exciting rebuild coming to fruition for the 16 Cubs. I’d imagine they sort of thing is a lot more compelling than the Yankees and Dodgers throwing their money around and having 16 farm squads in the MLB developing players for them
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mike Louis, oknazevad, The Marquis and 2 others
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)

Latest posts

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom