MLB Salary Floor

[eddie83]

5 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

I tend to doubt the floor number stays this high but I like the idea. 

I hope it sticks.

I’m fine with it over a period of time, not one season.  

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, eddie83 said:

I want my team to win. That’s what I would want. 
 

 

So you would be more likely to tune in if the other team is really poor?

Interesting.

I wasn't expecting that response.

[eddie83]

Just now, Can_of_corn said:

So you would be more likely to tune in if the other team is really poor?

Interesting.

I wasn't expecting that response.

On a local level I want my team to win. 

 

I have never not watched an Orioles game in my life because of how bad the competition is.  
 

 

If the Ravens are up 30 with 6 minutes left would I flip to another game, yes. That’s also not a regional sport. It’s once a week. 

[eddie83]

The Rays are better then the Yankees. 
 

Yet the Yankees have a payroll of $130M more than Tampa.

 

How is this possible if players are paid what they are worth?

 

[Can_of_corn]

20 minutes ago, eddie83 said:

I’m fine with it over a period of time, not one season.  

I don't think a new plan is going to require the Orioles to drop an additional 50M in payroll in a year.

[Sports Guy]

The thing that sucks about the floor is it is forced spending in a market that is wasteful to spend money in…the free agency market.

[Aristotelian]

2 minutes ago, eddie83 said:

The Rays are better then the Yankees. 
 

Yet the Yankees have a payroll of $130M more than Tampa.

 

How is this possible if players are paid what they are worth?

 

No one says it is impossible to compete, but it is a lot harder. Being able to go to $300M instead of $200M is a massive advantage. The current system forces rebuilding teams to go to more extreme lengths. So I see the problem although I am not sure what the solution is. 

[Can_of_corn]

Just now, Sports Guy said:

The thing that sucks about the floor is it is forced spending in a market that is wasteful to spend money in…the free agency market.

Teams could choose to spend that money on extending players already under contract.

I will agree that the inevitable inflation in the salaries of marginal players isn't ideal but neither is the current system.  I don't think a perfect fix exists.

[Can_of_corn]

2 minutes ago, Aristotelian said:

No one says it is impossible to compete, but it is a lot harder. Being able to go to $300M instead of $200M is a massive advantage. The current system forces rebuilding teams to go to more extreme lengths. So I see the problem although I am not sure what the solution is. 

It doesn't force teams.  The Brewers for instance.  No one is going to accuse them of being a large market franchise and they have become competitive without a total teardown.

[Sports Guy]

3 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Teams could choose to spend that money on extending players already under contract.

I will agree that the inevitable inflation in the salaries of marginal players isn't ideal but neither is the current system.  I don't think a perfect fix exists.

Yes, this does encourage teams to spend on their own, which is great.  Of course the players have to be willing to sign those deals and many of those deals don’t start getting expensive right away, so you will have to supplement the roster with expensive FA.

I do think if you do this, you have to put something in place that encourages players to stay with their teams..IE they get paid more if they re-sign or something like that..similar to the NBA.

But yes, I think the good outweighs the bad and I agree that there is no perfect system.

 

[Sports Guy]

7 minutes ago, Aristotelian said:

No one says it is impossible to compete, but it is a lot harder. Being able to go to $300M instead of $200M is a massive advantage. The current system forces rebuilding teams to go to more extreme lengths. So I see the problem although I am not sure what the solution is. 

The current system doesn’t force anything.  That’s bs and something people keep saying but it’s made up.

[Can_of_corn]

Just now, Sports Guy said:

The current system doesn’t force anything.  That’s bs and something people keep saying but it’s made up.

What it is is smart marketing by the tanking teams.

The O's should buy the 76's ownership a nice steak dinner.

[vab]

The perfect system , at least in terms of promoting competitiveness, is the NFL but obviously baseball doesn't have the type of national TV deal that can be shared in that way and the players will never go for the kind of cap the NFL has. I don't think, even if this salary floor happens, a team like the Orioles who are so far below $100 million will be forced to get there in a year so this will not force Elias to abandon his plan. At least not completely. 

[Sports Guy]

10 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

What it is is smart marketing by the tanking teams.

The O's should buy the 76's ownership a nice steak dinner.

Oh yea…teams have led fans down this path of believing this isn’t fair and this is what we have to do.

Its all bs but people really believe this stuff.

[Mooreisbetter27]

Wouldn't the players union jump all over something like this?

It would theoretically mean that players would be making more money, even the more mediocre ones.  Teams may feel obligated to pay certain bit players more money just to make sure they get over whatever threshold (in this case 100M) that they need to.  

Feel like it may even be a bargaining chip for players like Bryant to hold out for more money.