Does Major League Baseball need a salary cap?

Question

Or is the current system good enough for the national pastime?

Answer 1

No.

And realize there would be only two practical effects: guaranteeing profits for the owners (profits are good, but should be EARNED, not guaranteed), and prohibiting most teams from ever becoming truly great. This leaves us with a lot of mediocre teams, and 90-win teams becoming rare. Now, this is Selig's personal favorite fantasy dream, but that doesn't mean it is a good or desirable thing.

Ticket prices would NOT come down. Why should they? Current price points are proven sellers. Team income and team payroll are far less linked than most people think they are. Prices are set by sales demand, not expense requirements.

Answer 2

Absolutely not. First of all you morons who think the Yankees and Sox buy World Series shouldn't even be allowed to talk baseball ever. The people you should be complaining about is every other team in the league that has the money to spend and spends it poorly or doesn't spend it at all. A few years ago there was an interview with an owner from a team and they were asked if it was frustrating not to be able to compete with the yankees because George has more money. The owner's response: "George doesn't have more money, he's just willing to spend it."

How about the teams like the Orioles who spent so much money on Tejada that they couldn't afford any protection for him nor could they afford the pitching necessary to compete in the division. And when they do go for pitchers they buy out-of-shape mediocre pitchers who can't get the job done. A revamped bullpen costing $14 million and they are among the worst bullpens in the league.

Kansas City is investing a ton of money to redo their ball park. Where is the big time free agent? Gil Meche was an excellent pick up for them but was still overpaid. Maybe teams should build better ball parks for pitching than hitting and their teams would win a few mroe games. Texas' offense has been great the past few years but look at the size of the park, NOBODY can pitch there. It's the same deal in Philly, Cincy, Baltimore. Look at the teams with the great pitching staffs and the size of their ball parks.

Can you really tell me that the yankees bought their rings when a team as young as Detroit knocked them out last year? Or how about the past few years when the UNDERDOGS won with lower salaries. Adding a salary cap would just cause for another strike from the Players Association. The sport cannot take another hit like that, we have enough controversy with Steroids right now.

Like it or not all sports are businesses, and like any business you need to invest money to make money. The yankees are the most successful because they invest the most, is anybody really surprised? Salary cap will have no effect on ticket prices. The yankees sell out almost all of their games in one of the biggest stadiums and they are the most expensive tickets. So why exactly would a team lower the price?

I agree that a salary cap would level the playing field. But that hasn't worked out in the NFL either. The Patriots have been dominant in the recent past. And the biggest problem with NFL contracts are hold outs for more money. Is that something you want to see in baseball? Can you see a pitcher refusing to sit in the bullpen because he wants more money?

The revenue sharing is a great idea and it is working. That's why teams like Kansas City have a bright future if they hang on to the right young players they have. It's also why Milwaukee is having the best years of their national league life. Florida has 2 rings in 7 years and thats after demolishing the franchise after the 1st ring. The problem isn't the salary's its performing up to the salaries. A-rod should be the highest paid player and Clemens should be the highest paid pitcher; they've EARNED it.

Answer 3

Baseball is having serious problems with money. It may not be apparent to the average fan but the MLB is sliding down a slippery slope. Without a serious salary cap, the haves and the have nots are growing farther and farther apart. The teams with the higher salaries are winning (please omit the Yankees from this discussion for a moment) and the teams in the lower half are not. This will only get worse. There are some players now that are making more then entire starting lineups on other teams. ARod is expected to make 30+ million dollars next season.

To put that into perspective, in the NFL, by far the most successful and profitable sport overall, the highest paid player will make approximately one third of that.

What this ends up meaning is that the Royals could never hope to afford the players it would need to compete with the Red Sox.

With a proper Salary Cap and Profit Sharing program, MLB could create a more well rounded league where everyone's team has a chance.

To finally get back to the Yankees, if any other team in baseball were to have that amount for their payroll, they would still be undefeated. The Yankees are run by morons who only value the players name not their skill.

Answer 4

Yes, baseball needs a salary cap.

The maximum team salary should be no more than 100 million, however, there should also be a salary floor of let's say 40 million.

That way teams like the Red Sox and Yankees can't continue to just buy good teams, and it also forces teams like the Marlins or Twins to keep a few higher priced players to keep the fans more interested.

To accomplish this however, there needs to be a serious change in the MLB player's union and it won't happen. The guaranteed contracts in Hockey, Basketball and Baseball have allowed players to "sit back and enjoy" their money even though their skills have diminshed.

Remove the guaranteed contracts and impose a Salary Cap and MLB will start becomming "America's Pastime" again and will overtake the NFL in popularity.

Answer 5

Listen to Chipmaker, he is very smart. I only wish I could dish out more than one "thumbs up." I would be satisfied at 5.

No, the only salary cap I would embrace is a minimum. It's not the Yankees and Red Sox fault that the Devil Rays and Pirates and other teams like it sit back and get fat on the profit sharing while other teams really try to field the team they need to get it done. Owners are taking advantage of the system and that is the injustice, not the Yanks buying up all the stars. If an owner wants to lose money to try to win, or take up a strategy that goes beyond just the gate and tv for big chunks of revenue then I applaud it, don't feel they should be punnished. If you're team isn't spending the money, or isn't spending it wisely, then blame your owner and blame your team's office.

I'm an Angel fan, and I feel they do it right. They spend some money and they generate their own talent. They have balance and appear to be very fiscally responsible, and for their business model they are successful. You don't have to be the Yankees or Sox, but I feel the problem is more with the Devil Rays, Pirates, Royals, and Marlins than with them.

And yes, why would they pass along any savings? They know we'll pay so why give that up?

Answer 6

Yes, they do. Unfortunately, the owners are still making money and so are the players. The money though is coming from the fans and we have no representation.

Going to edit my answer here a bit.
I think what baseball needs is to limit the ability for a single team to offer an outrageous contract, while still rewarding them for generating income.
(although, I do like the idea of non-guarenteed contracts, if you can't guarentee production, why should the team guarentee salary)

I think there should be 4 levels of contracts, league minimum, $1, $2 and $3 Million per year.

The teams all agree on what constitutes revenue and their books are done by an independent auditor.

After the season has ended, revenue and profit are determined and the team determines how much they have paid out, a fixed portion of revenue (say 60% for arguments sake) minus salary already paid goes back to the players.
But the players actually get to determine for themselves how much of the pie they get, much like World Series shares for players that were traded away.

This would allow an amazing season from a rookie a big payday, a really poor season from a (formerly) fat contract player to get paid as he should have and it will stop some teams from trying to attract all the big names.

I believe it would do the latter because if you had to choose between getting a piece of a big pie, knowing that you have to share it with Rodriquez, Jeter, Posada, Abreu, Matsui, Mussina, Rivera, Clemens, etc or a bigger piece of a pie that you need only share with Miguel Cabrera, it may make you think twice.

I agree with Chipmaker though in the fact that if spending were limited, it wouldn't go back to the fans, it would go in the owners pockets.
Again, the fans, who pay the bills, have no representation.

Answer 7

The obvious answer is yes, in theory, putting a salary cap on baseball would make things a heck of a lot more interesting.

However, I say that baseball does not need a salary cap, because it has something so much better, the luxury tax. Teams like the Yankees, Red Sox and Mets, that have a lot of money can go out and spend it as they please. But, as they spend more they are also forced to give more money to teams that aren't spending as much money. Its why, which the exception of Teixeira, there weren't any big name players traded, Cincinatti can afford to keep Dunn, and so on.

Heck, there really isn't even a down-side to the average fan. We aren't paying anymore. Personally, I can drive down to Baltimore and watch about 10 Orioles games for the same price as just 1 Ravens game. Which when you figure that hypothetically, the O's play 10x as many home games as the Ravens, it really works out to the same price. Though, in my mind I'm having fun for 10 nights instead of one afternoon, so I feel like I'm getting a much better deal with baseball.

Answer 8

It would be make the field a more playing field but the MBLPA will never go for it. Also if you have a cap for salaries shouldn't teams be required to have a minimum of spending required as well?

Answer 9

All sports need to be capped as regards salaries and it should be based on a percentage of the gate receipts, and also the TV sponsorship.

Anything outside of that should come from image rights.

Answer 10

No. I wouldn't want one for my business, so their business shouldn't have one either. It may be a game, but it is a business first. NY and Boston may have the highest salaries, but they have won 1 WS between them the last 6 years, and before that the overall salaries weren't as skewed.