Salary Caps Are A Bad Idea

[HoustonGM]

Agreed...the whole concept of a salary floor ABOVE current minimum payrolls is rediculous considering teams aren't turning profits even with their payrolls under this floor. The idea loses all credibility.

I agree with this, but these teams ARE turning profits...

I understand the arguement that teams get rev. sharing and don't put it into their team, but the argument can easily be made that long term its better to bank that money or put it into your farm system.

It's better to put it into the farm system, yes. For the team, it's not better to just simply put it into the owner's pocket.

Some owners refuse to operate at a loss even though it 'may' build the fan base long term. This is really off the wall, but why not have MLB make a clause that teams MUST win X amount of games over a 5 or 10 year cycle? If they don't win X amount of games in 5 years, they lose a percentage of revenue sharing, and if they don't win X amount of games during the 10 year period, MLB takes possession of the team and sells it to the best qualified suiter. Of course all the money earned in the sale goes to the previous owner, but he's out of the game at that point? The embarrassment alone would make owners put at least a half-way respectable product on the field.

I don't like that idea.

[dickay]

It's better to put it into the farm system, yes. For the team, it's not better to just simply put it into the owner's pocket.

Owners pocket....aka roster salary piggy bank. Once the kids progress (tampa), the team can use those funds to increase payroll (Burrell for ex.). Sure teams revenues will improve as the kids progress, but its hard to forecast how much....to be competitive small markets do need to piggy bank for their run. Problem is, prospects are unpredictable and often don't progress to the point where one is comfortably competitive enough to spend the money. I can see how its easy to get caught in what seems like a never-ending rebuilding mode (Pitt).

Maybe some owners do pocket the money without intent to put it into the team. Hard to prove.....hard to say it just isn't mismanagement and bad luck.

I don't like that idea.

I'm not sure I do either.

[Arctic Blast]

I'm sort of switching over to the idea of 'owners standards' more than a cap as a way to try and maintain a little bit more competitiveness (and try and give the few remaining fans of team like Florida a reason to actually buy tickets).

[HoustonGM]

Maybe some owners do pocket the money without intent to put it into the team. Hard to prove.....hard to say it just isn't mismanagement and bad luck.

In some cases, it's crystal clear....like Jeffrey Loria in Florida.

[filihok]

It is his business...he should try and make profit

[HoustonGM]

It is his business...he should try and make profit

There's a difference between "trying to make a profit" and "putting making a profit above and beyond fielding a winning baseball team."

When you cut Joe Nelson for Scott Proctor to save $300K, there's a problem. When you're spending less on payroll than you receive in revenue sharing, there's a problem.

This is a guy that whines about not being able to be competitive because he has a low payroll and needs a new stadium (which he wants the taxpayers to pay for), while his team is posting profits and he's pocketing revenue sharing money. He's a greedy ******* that does not care for the well-being of his team, but rather the well-being of his wallet.

[JayC]

Neal Huntington's long-term strategy would have been sabotaged, since the team would have had to sign a number of veterans just to meet the minimum payroll.

No, there'd be no reason under that scenario that he couldn't keep exactly the same roster he wanted... he would just have to pay more to at least some of the players on it.

[dickay]

There's a difference between "trying to make a profit" and "putting making a profit above and beyond fielding a winning baseball team."

When you cut Joe Nelson for Scott Proctor to save $300K, there's a problem. When you're spending less on payroll than you receive in revenue sharing, there's a problem.

This is a guy that whines about not being able to be competitive because he has a low payroll and needs a new stadium (which he wants the taxpayers to pay for), while his team is posting profits and he's pocketing revenue sharing money. He's a greedy ******* that does not care for the well-being of his team, but rather the well-being of his wallet.

How do you know he doesn't one day hope to use that revenue sharing money thats been banked? How do you know he's not investing it into scouting, farm system, etc? I don't know much about Luria except for all the horrific things people post about him....but the team draws poor and doesn't have the infrastructure to be profitable (w/o revenue sharing & very low payroll). Putting money away for when its most useful isn't a horrible idea.

[KowboyKoop]

I refuse to see how a 75 win team in the AL, a team that has gotten better each of the past three seasons and has improved it's farm system over that span and in the last draft outspent every team in baseball is "hopeless."

[gRYFYN1]

I fully agree that a salary cap for MLB is not the answer. So the idea of a salary floor is pretty much moot, as a floor is tied to the cap (like in the NFL and NHL)

MLB revenues are too fractous escially compare to something like the NFL where teams get around 70% of revenue from TV contracts. (about 3.7 billion this year)

People can say the Steinbrenners are spending monry on the Yankees above what they make, but they are not losing money - YES network covers all that. While some owners, like Lurie are leeches, poepl can't honestly blame a business man (that why these guys have billions of dollars) for not losing money on his team. Bash Pohlad all you want, but the Twins stay competeive on their budget, if dosen't want to toss mass money in and risk losing millions on the team then good (again, that's why these guys have billions of dollars).

[haveacigar]

How do you know he doesn't one day hope to use that revenue sharing money thats been banked? How do you know he's not investing it into scouting, farm system, etc? I don't know much about Luria except for all the horrific things people post about him....but the team draws poor and doesn't have the infrastructure to be profitable (w/o revenue sharing & very low payroll). Putting money away for when its most useful isn't a horrible idea.

Uhhh, dude, there's a reason we all rip on Loria. There's absolutely no indication that he plans to do any of this. But, there's lots of indication that he's a greedy SOB.

[haveacigar]

When teams talk about operating profits, it's almost always a simple calculation of (ticket revenue + concessions + parking) / (total organizational salary + assorted maintenence costs) I don't believe for a second that any owner is actually losing money when factoring in naming rights, advertising revenue, and TV deals. Even if they are losing some money, it's a small amount considering every MLB owner is a multi-billionaire. Look at the Mets owner, he just got half a bil wiped out in that Madoff scheme and he still found some money to throw at K-rod and court Derek Lowe. If he can afford to run his business as usual after just flushing 500 mil down the toilet, he can afford to have an "operating deficit" and most owners are in a similar financial situation (and in their cases, have an extra 500 mil they didn't get swindled out of).

Can baseball do a few more things that would be positive for the game? Sure. I'd like to see rookie bonuses be reigned in a little bit (the current "slotting" system is one of the most laughable and worthless things ever devised). I'd like the NFL to do the same thing. Point is: you're a sucker if you actually believe any of these owners are losing money or too poor to compete with the big bad Yankees.

[grasshopper]

Hey all, been a while. Was taking some time off from playing the game and trying to make some money. UGH! This economy sucks.

You wouldnt know it though the way the Yankees are spending, right?

I would say no to the salary cap big time. Except for very small markets, it would be a penalty to winning teams who have made an effort over the last 40 years to win, build a strong following, and invest in their teams.

In defense of the Yankees, as of today, their payroll is actually lower than 2008 since they took so many salaries off the books. Believe it or not, minus Giambi, Andy P, Pavano, Mussina and others, they are still paying less after the 3 big signings. I think it is like 15M less as it stands now. If Pettite signs, then it would be about equal to last year.

When George took over the Yanks in the 70s, he made every effort to put a winning team on the field. Starting with Reggie, he has figured out that spending money = more wins= more money. Pretty simple. The problem with teams that want as salary cap/ share the wealth situation is that they dont spend. Loria! He has a payroll of 23M or so. He received 40M in sharing last year. Where did it go? In his pocket. There are many owners like this.

It sucks to live in a baseball market that has a crap owner, but dont blame everyone else for that.

Go Giants