While I could see the benefit of a salary floor (although I'm NOT sold on that), I'll never support a salary cap. All it does is transfer money from the players to the owners.
Printable View
While I could see the benefit of a salary floor (although I'm NOT sold on that), I'll never support a salary cap. All it does is transfer money from the players to the owners.
And what exactly does everyone think the benefit of forcing some owners to spend a little more is?Quote:
Originally Posted by KowboyKoop
One thread everyone says Boras is the devil because he tries to get his player paid, then in the next thread the owners are the devil because they don't spend.
If there was any kind of payroll floor, all it would do is cause salaries to escalate further. Instead of paying Joe Schmoe $8 million a season, now they have to pay him $15 mil a season so they can reach the salary floor? What's the use in that?
Suppose you are the Florida Marlins. You have your roster and the payroll comes out to $40 million. Do you have to look for a player to give $10 million to? A guy that you didn't even anticipate being on the roster? Do you give all your players a $10 million/25 player raise? What's the thinking?
Yeah, that's giving me reservations about actually "supporting" a payroll floor. Honestly, I'm in favor of just leaving the market open. Let the owners decide how they want to spend their own money. Yes, it will result in some cheapskates like Loria in Florida and some "go-all-out" guys like Steinbrenner in New York, but all-in-all, I think it's better than forcing teams to spend money, or forcing them to keep their money, resulting in bloated wallets for the owners and less money for the players.
There's also the option of letting the fan keep it...just for the recordQuote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
The fan has that option.Quote:
Originally Posted by filihok
As well as the owners and the players
The players don't. The owners do, sure, but what kind of business owner willingly gets less than he can?Quote:
Originally Posted by filihok
Quote:
Originally Posted by defense
That's nine players. They've clearly spent the last 5-6 years or so just going after all the biggest names no matter what..and it hasn't worked. There's a reason they haven't won a WS in nearly a decade now..which is just an embarrassment given their resources. They are doing things a little better now..but going out and just spending a ton of money on three or four FAs could be a pretty significant mistake. If their farm system is as good as some say it is..they should lean on that a little more. Back during their dynasty of the late 90s.....it seemed like it was a lot of their homegrown guys that led the way...lately they seem to have gotten away from that. Perhaps they are going back to what worked for them in the past.
Quote:
Originally Posted by filihok
It would prevent really cheap owners from even being in the league. You do have a good point about a salary floor though...no, a team shouldn't be forced to get certain expensive players. Perhaps a better idea would be an overall financial floor. Like..the combines cost of scouting, farm system, front office, payroll..etc. etc. should be at a minimum and maximum. Perhaps that would work better. Regardless.....the gap between the richest teams and poorest teams can't just keep growing. Again, I don't think the way things are now are that bad....but it could be a problem at some point if the gap were to keep increasing. If ten years from now the Yanks have a 300+ million dollar payroll along with their overwhelming resources in international markets and scouting and everything else, while the Rays are sitting at 40 million and can't come close to keeping up in other areas of building the organization..that's a problem that hurts the sport.
Also..I don't claim Boras to be the devil. He does his job.
I think people forget exactly how those teams were made up.Quote:
Originally Posted by KowboyKoop
Here's a hint: Homegrown players + trades/free agents.
Look at the 1998 team. Main guys...Posada, Martinez, Knoblauch, Brosius, Jeter, Curtis, Williams, O'Neill, Strawberry, Raines, Pettitte, Cone, Wells, Irabu, El Duque, Rivera, Mendoza.
Homegrown: Posada, Jeter, Williams, Pettitte, Rivera, Mendoza
Traded for: Martinez, Knoblauch, Brosius, Curtis, O'Neill, Irabu
Free Agency: Strawberry, Raines, Cone (acquired in a trade but resigned as FA), Wells.
Hernandez was signed as a free agent, but was technically homegrown.
They were getting major production from players acquired in a variety of ways. It wasn't solely, or even mostly, any one type of player.
Luxury tax and revenue sharing are ways to combat this without restricting the market.Quote:
Originally Posted by KowboyKoop
Quote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
Okay..so all the homegrown players plus I'd be willing to be that most of the players they traded for were traded for players from their farm system. Seems to me like they've depended on the FA market a lot more this decade than last decade..and it's hurt them.
Again, I'm not saying they shouldn't spend any money on the FA market...especially given their resources...but I think that if they go overboard...which seems to be a good possibility, it could be a mistake. For other teams..the FA market should be even less on a way to build a team. Use FAs to supplement..not depend on, I think that's the direction a lot of teams are trying to go.
They have made things better than they used to be. I still think it could be a little better. I don't know what the numbers would be, but I wouldn't want to set a floor that would cause a ton of teams to spend a lot more money than they are now...and for a cap..it wouldn't be so low that a lot of teams would be significantly affected. It would just be something to prevent things from getting out of hand either way. Obviously there's a lot more to it than anything I can come up with while posting in a forum...but I think the general idea would be good if executed well. A big reason for this is the growing trend of getting players from Japan and other countries.....there's no draft, it's just a matter of whoever has the most money plucking all the best talent. When Dice-K was posted, there was on way 80% of the league could even dream of even TRYING to sign him. That's just not fair and not good for the sport. That's something that could happen more and more in the next twenty years as the Japan leagues improve..which they are.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
With the world economy the way it is I don't see anyone besides New York getting CC.
Boston maybe Texiera, but most likely I bet he stays in Los Angeles .
Definitely not an embarrassment... We've also been to the playoffs every year the last decade, with the exception of last season. The Red Sox went 86 years as a large market team and not winning a WS, the Cubs haven't won the WS in like a century, it's been a while for the Mets, and Dodgers too.Quote:
Originally Posted by KowboyKoop
Well, when you tend to rely on your farm system, your results will tend to be poor. (See: Cincy, Tampa other than this year, KC, Pit, etc...) Cashman has just recently started putting money into the farm system and developing it. I think in the next few years when Brackman, Jackson, Betances, Hughes, Melancon, Cox, Montero, Horne, Bleich, Sanchez, etc... all come up to the majors (not to mention Hughes, Kennedy, Melky, Gardner), we shall see the results of what Cashman has done recently.