Salary Cap

[BSN07]

•

Bloomberg News reporter Danielle Sessa writes that Milwaukee Brewers owner Mark Attanasio said baseball might need a salary cap. Sessa also attributes Attanasio to saying Major League Baseball's attempt to curb spending isn't working for the Yankees.

 

The Yankees might have opened pandora's box here.

 

The labor agreement is up in 2011, and if the economy hasn't picked up by then it could lead to the owners wanting a salary cap.

 

 

http://insider.espn.go.com/espn/blog/index?name=olney_buster&action=upsell&appRedirect=http://insider.espn.go.com/espn/blog/index%3fname%3dolney_buster

[TheKilo]

No chance in hell.

 

JWH, while making a killing in his investment market, has decided to sit on the wealth yet again. Don't expect that to change. Salary cap doesn't mean anything since many owners purposefully don't spend money to make profits thanks to revenue sharing.

[BSN07]

Yes but with a Salary cap, they would have a bult in excuse for why not to spend the money. I am not for the owners getting richer, but I do think something needs to be done to equal the playing field as it where.

 

It can't be good for baseball in general to have teams show up in ST and have absolutley no shot at winning/ being competitive.

 

And while the reavenue sharing has helped this, the Yanks found there loop hole(building a new stadium) and things seem to be very unbalanced again in the league.

[TheKilo]

Yes but with a Salary cap, they would have a bult in excuse for why not to spend the money. I am not for the owners getting richer, but I do think something needs to be done to equal the playing field as it where.

It can't be good for baseball in general to have teams show up in ST and have absolutley no shot at winning/ being competitive.

 

And while the reavenue sharing has helped this, the Yanks found there loop hole(building a new stadium) and things seem to be very unbalanced again in the league.

 

Tell that to Tampa and Philly.

[BSN07]

Yes there is the occasional Marlin, Rays teams, but we both know most small market have a very limited chance. And we all know the KC's, Pittsburg's of the world have no shot.

[BSN07]

Tell that to Tampa and Philly.

 

Philly is also capable of spending money. They can't go nuts, but they can spend more them some teams. I didn't see TB give Ibanez a 3 year deal at 10M per yer.

[jacksonianmarch]

the only way a salary cap is instituted is after a very long work stoppage

[BSN07]

the only way a salary cap is instituted is after a very long work stoppage

 

And it could very well happen.

[ORS]

the only way a salary cap is instituted is after a very long work stoppage

And I'm cool with that. In fact, let some replacement players come in and take the field for a year or two earning 1/20th of what players make now and still making more than they ever will for the rest of their lives.

 

Baseball is a sport. In every sane person's mind, sports is about competition on a level playing field. All play by the same rules, and you win by being better within those rules than your opponents. Team management should be no different. Allowing a handful of teams to horde the most talented players only on the basis of having more money betrays the notion of a fair playing field.

 

The first tired argument someone will make is that an owner should be allowed to spend as much on the success of his team as he wants. Does that freedom extend to their resource market? No, they, by the confederation of the league, are bound to an agreed upon market in which they can operate. These markets are inherently unequal, so the freedom of choice argument goes out the window.

 

The next will be that too many owners are willing to just pocket the money. Well, with a salary cap there will of course have to be expanded revenue sharing. In other sports with more broad revenue sharing, the salary cap is actually a spending range, ie a cap and floor. This will be necessary as well.

 

I actually won't be upset if the Yankees win a championship or two between now and the next CBA. It will probably be necessary to strengthen the resolve of those who want to push for a cap. If they win in '09, so be it. And hopefully their gluttony makes them open the vault for Holliday. I hope it does, and whoever else they deem a "can't pass on" player. Then, in 2011, lock the doors and start calling the independent leagues for players. I'll support it.

[BSN07]

A Salary cap with a minimum and a maximum would be great. With all the extra money the owners would make, make them pay more revenue sharing, thus leveling the playing field even more. It seems like an obvious thing to do to creat a level playing field. Teams would have to realy on scouting, drafting, player development, smart FA spending more then they do know. I think it would really show what an organization is made of.

[26 to 6]

And I'm cool with that. In fact, let some replacement players come in and take the field for a year or two earning 1/20th of what players make now and still making more than they ever will for the rest of their lives.

 

Baseball is a sport. In every sane person's mind, sports is about competition on a level playing field. All play by the same rules, and you win by being better within those rules than your opponents. Team management should be no different. Allowing a handful of teams to horde the most talented players only on the basis of having more money betrays the notion of a fair playing field.

 

The first tired argument someone will make is that an owner should be allowed to spend as much on the success of his team as he wants. Does that freedom extend to their resource market? No, they, by the confederation of the league, are bound to an agreed upon market in which they can operate. These markets are inherently unequal, so the freedom of choice argument goes out the window.

 

The next will be that too many owners are willing to just pocket the money. Well, with a salary cap there will of course have to be expanded revenue sharing. In other sports with more broad revenue sharing, the salary cap is actually a spending range, ie a cap and floor. This will be necessary as well.

 

I actually won't be upset if the Yankees win a championship or two between now and the next CBA. It will probably be necessary to strengthen the resolve of those who want to push for a cap. If they win in '09, so be it. And hopefully their gluttony makes them open the vault for Holliday. I hope it does, and whoever else they deem a "can't pass on" player. Then, in 2011, lock the doors and start calling the independent leagues for players. I'll support it.

s***, as crazy as it sounds I'm with you. I might even try out lol

[example1]

And I'm cool with that. In fact, let some replacement players come in and take the field for a year or two earning 1/20th of what players make now and still making more than they ever will for the rest of their lives.

 

Baseball is a sport. In every sane person's mind, sports is about competition on a level playing field. All play by the same rules, and you win by being better within those rules than your opponents. Team management should be no different. Allowing a handful of teams to horde the most talented players only on the basis of having more money betrays the notion of a fair playing field.

 

The first tired argument someone will make is that an owner should be allowed to spend as much on the success of his team as he wants. Does that freedom extend to their resource market? No, they, by the confederation of the league, are bound to an agreed upon market in which they can operate. These markets are inherently unequal, so the freedom of choice argument goes out the window.

 

The next will be that too many owners are willing to just pocket the money. Well, with a salary cap there will of course have to be expanded revenue sharing. In other sports with more broad revenue sharing, the salary cap is actually a spending range, ie a cap and floor. This will be necessary as well.

 

I actually won't be upset if the Yankees win a championship or two between now and the next CBA. It will probably be necessary to strengthen the resolve of those who want to push for a cap. If they win in '09, so be it. And hopefully their gluttony makes them open the vault for Holliday. I hope it does, and whoever else they deem a "can't pass on" player. Then, in 2011, lock the doors and start calling the independent leagues for players. I'll support it.

 

 

I am shocked that you favor a salary cap but I largely agree with you. I'm not just trying to knock the Yankees of a pedestal either, I think fairness in salary would improve the chances of random teams winning. I also think it would be interesting for different teams to end up with higher draft picks.

 

Personally, I don't think the Yankee ownership could win with a cap. They would have to understand how to win with a budget.

[26 to 6]

I'm not necessarily in favor of a cap, but if it means cutting the spending, which in turn should (note I said should, not would lol) reduce the costs for fans of tickets, concessions, merchandise, etc. then I'm all for it. Plus, I would love to see some replacement players out there living their dreams and playing whole-heartedly for the love of the game.

[rician blast]

Tell that to Tampa and Philly.

 

Philly had a payroll of approx $100m last year..hardly a small payroll. They also don't have a team within their division outspending them by $80m.

 

As for TB, c'mon..they had a great year...but they've competed for a title exactly once in their history. Small payrolls can compete...once in a great while. However, that ability to contend will not last if they can't retain/pay the players they've developed. The "look at TB" argument is only telling as to how few times a team with a low payroll can contend.

[rician blast]

I'm for parity, even if it means the Red Sox will have greater competition from teams that are currently not able to contend due to the payroll disparity. Set a ceiling and set a floor, take care of the ancillaries, and may the best run organization win.

[a700hitter]

I'm for parity' date=' even if it means the Red Sox will have greater competition from teams that are currently not able to contend due to the payroll disparity. Set a ceiling and set a floor, take care of the ancillaries, and may the best run organization win.[/quote']It is probably not the Red Sox. The Red Sox are really good at making money, and their financial strength allows them to overcome lots of personnel mistakes.

[pinstripezac]

A Salary cap with a minimum and a maximum would be great. With all the extra money the owners would make' date=' make them pay more revenue sharing, thus leveling the playing field even more. It seems like an obvious thing to do to creat a level playing field. .[/quote']

 

 

problem is the small market teams don't want a cap precisely for that reason

 

they don't want a minimum

 

 

Teams would have to realy on scouting, drafting, player development, smart FA spending more then they do know. I think it would really show what an organization is made of

 

that's true but the big guys will just use their advantage there

 

why were you guys able to draft hansen ?

 

it will just get worse and end up hurting the teams you are trying to help

 

 

 

is there really a need for a cap ?

 

 

- Over the past 10 years, eight different teams have won the World Series. In all, 15 teams made the World Series -- half of the teams in baseball.

 

-- Over the past 20 years, 14 different teams have won the World Series. In all 22 teams made the World Series. Now, we're at more than two-thirds who have reached the Series.

 

-- Over the last 30 years, 20 different teams have won the World Series, and only four -- Cubs, Mariners, Rangers and the Expos/Nationals -- have failed to get there.

 

By comparison, NFL teams that have not made the Super Bowl the last 30 years include: The Jets, Browns, Chiefs, Saints, Cardinals, Lions, Jaguars, Texans and Vikings, That's 10, almost one-third of all the teams in the NFL

 

-- Only 14 teams have won the Super Bowl over the last 30 years.

-- Only 14 different men have won Wimbledon over the last 30 years.

-- Only 13 teams have won the Stanley Cup over the last 30 years.

-- Only nine teams have won an NBA title over the last 30 years.

[pinstripezac]

another way the cap hurts the smaller teams and what makes BB different than the other sports

 

is july 31

[ydeologi]

The Yankees spending hasn't translated to championships, and the luxury tax and revenue sharing have put plenty of money into the coffers of other teams... so who cares about a cap?

 

MLB has enjoyed great parity in the last decade. How many small market teams have made the playoffs, or at least been competitive? Oakland, Minnesota, Tampa Bay, Milwaukee, Florida... the system works.

[ORS]

The idea that there is parity just because you have unexpected playoff participants, and even winners, demonstrates a deficiency in one's ability to appreciate the very nature of the game. Baseball's best teams typically win 60-62% of their games on a yearly basis. This is the lowest, by far, of any of the major sports used for comparison. The fact that there has been some variety speaks more about the sport than the level of fairness.

 

No, spending hasn't resulted in championships. Again, this due to the nature of the game. Ever heard the phrase, "The postseason is a crap shoot?" Sure you have, that's because it is. In a sport in which streaks play such a large role and teamwork is at a minimum, the better team from the regular season loses regularly to the team riding a few streaky players at the right time.

 

What spending has resulted in is opportunities. Spending gets you to the dance far more regularly than not. Over the last 10 years, 75% of the playoff participants came from teams that spent more money than the league average.

[TheKilo]

 

What spending has resulted in is opportunities. Spending gets you to the dance far more regularly than not. Over the last 10 years, 75% of the playoff participants came from teams that spent more money than the league average.

 

Exactly. This isn't like the NFL, where teams like the Patriots, Steelers, and Colts consistently make the playoffs thanks to smart team management and roster construction. The Yankees have made the playoffs more often than not in large part thanks to outspending other teams, not because of smart management - and this is where there is some validity to the payroll argument.

[porterhouse]

but if there is a salary cap then the the baseball world would change dramatically. I think its fair to say that a salary cap is necessary to separate the good teams and the elite teams.