TNtwins85

The problem is really that MLB and the owners are trying to force a problem-reaction-solution down the players and fans’ throats when in all actuality what they are trying to accomplish is more money in their pockets which is what a salary cap does whether people realize it or not. The players have a union which is gonna fight to keep or gain more of that pie but MLB is gonna try to pigeon hole them into a floor with a cap. This just like everything else in the corporate world leaves the consumer holding the bag. The game could be improved without the different avenues of sharing money. Parity could be achieved with a few simple rule changes in the form of carrots and sticks instead of dollars. One needs to look no further than a Forbes list of the most valuable franchises. It’s dominated by NFL and NBA teams. Why? Because they have caps and floors. It’s just one avenue to fix a not so big problem but for sure benefits MLB, the owners and to a lower extent the players. At the end of that list is the fans/consumers.

Logically it doesn’t make sense but who knows. Running it through AI a 94 equivalent work stoppage would amount to somewhere between 7-10 billion dollars lost between the owners and players not to mention the hit they take year over year after. I just don’t see that happening even if it’s half as bad as 94. I could be wrong.

The question is, are the owners prepared to lose billions of dollars in order to get a salary cap? It sure seems like the players union is. Not to mention the hit to future revenue and growth from the owners perspective. The union has already dug in it seems with comments from several players.

I was hoping for a better argument but I guess you’re going with if there weren’t owners there wouldn’t be players. Gotcha.

The reason he is an icon in New York is because he didn’t leave when he could have. The Yankees chose him in the draft. In return he chose the Yankees. In return he chose to stay in New York. That’s why he’s an icon. I don’t believe the reductionist vision of “if there were no owners there wouldn’t be players.” There’s only 30 of these things and it’s not as if they’re dying on the vine. The Padres just sold for $3.9 billion. These valuations grow beyond inflation year over year. Owners are making money in terms of asset growth. No question. The proposals by the league are trying to turn baseball into every other sport and specifically the NFL. But baseball is great despite the NFL. Jerry Jones has turned the Dallas Cowboys into a 13 billion dollar cash cow how? Not because he’s won a bunch of championships but because he’s marketed and branded the best in a large market. It’s not based on the one thing sports should be about, winning. Why? Because when you cap spending the team pockets that money. These teams are fine. They make money. These salaries don’t hurt the teams because the players making those salaries are the reason fans come to the games. The players are fine. The owners are fine. The problem is they want more. That’s the real problem and they mask and propagandize that problem as they want more parity in the game. Just like every other corporate entity they’re trying to hoodwink you again while behind a veil of making the game better and more fair when there’s plenty of ways to do that not involving a cap on spending or a floor on spending. But that’s the narrative. They've already created and fixed the problem. One just takes longer to fulfill than the other.

Three year deals aren’t endearing to fans though. Fans want to see their favorite players with their favorite teams. Not continually jumping to better deals or to go win a championship on some super team. That’s why I stopped watching all the other major sports decades ago. What makes fans love guys like Jeter or Mauer? Or Michael Jordan and Kobe Bryant. The fact that they don’t jump ship and are faces of a franchise. I don’t think the long contracts are bad for the game. I do think deferments are. A player should be paid to play baseball. It also caters to big market teams as the brewers can’t afford to pay a guy into his 60’s. It would make more sense to ban deferments than to implement a cap/floor system as far as improving parity in the game. But that’s not what they’re trying to accomplish as I stated in other comments on this thread.

Exactly, this whole thing around a cap has been portrayed as the fix all simply because that’s what the other leagues have done. Is there anything in the world simply fixed by one idea. One will never know because the other ways to fix something were never done so you will never know. This is baseballs chance to get it right for the game, the fans, and the players. Sadly because the way this negotiation has been staged for years and propagandized it won’t accomplish a lasting solution that’s better for the fans and young players in the game. It will instead focus purely on money in owners and top players hands. Old owners and old players when the game should be driven by young fans and young exciting players. If a cap/floor system is adopted do the ticket and concession prices go down making it more affordable to put young eyes on the game? Does it help a young player get better faster to help his team? Does it help an overlooked player get better to realize his dream? Does it help a bad team find and develop more talent to turn things around? The answer sadly is no. It sounds good as a facade which is why people parrot it as a solution cause that’s what they’ve been fed. It does not fix anything in a meaningful, creative and thoughtful way though.

A salary cap also caps the bottom 95% in your scenario as well. It’s just not as direct as the top 5%. In all actuality a cap hurts the game and does not help fans or teams to gain a competitive balance as it’s intended. A floor/cap system is all about money. Not competitive balance as it’s propagandized to. If baseball truly cared about competitive balance in regards to fans and the game itself it would go about this in a totally different way. Young talent is the top commodity of the game. Incentivize that and you grow the game by leaps and bounds rather than a cap( more money in the owners pockets) or a floor( more money in the players pockets). Force teams that receive shared revenue to allocate a certain amount of that money to drafting, scouting and player development. Institute an international draft. Base the amateur player draft order based on not only record but on market size, team revenue and add penalties to teams that spent less on drafting, scouting and development and reward teams that spent more on those things incentivizing teams to develop and find young talent. There’s more things that could be tweaked to make that better but simply focusing on a cap/floor to improve the game and create parity maybe does it through rose colored glasses but really doesn’t accomplish that as it’s just the path of least resistance based on money for owners and players. Just like any corporate endeavor it’s based on pure money and not pure logic.