When Will The Mlb Finally Get A Salary Cap?

Look at hockey and Football, it has made the sport better across the board. maybe not in football as much as in hockey. but I bet that baseball would be a better game over all if the put a hard cap such as maybe 100 million out there. but I geuss that you can have 250 million in salary and still be about as good as a team whose payroll is a Quarter of that.


  1. Chipmake wrote
    at 22:19 - 2nd Luty 2010 Permalink

    Baseball doesn’t need it.
    All a salary cap does is guarantee profits for the owners, and while there is nothing wrong with making a profit, there is no justification for guaranteeing it. Profits should be earned.
    Me, when I go to a game, I’m there to watch the players play and not watch the owner own. So I don’t care how much the players make, and what could be more American than making a buck?
    (There are better, more detailed reasons as well, but no one really wants to hear them. This sort of question is only ever posed for purposes of chest-beating, Yankees bashing, and/or Royals/Marlins whining. None of which are either new nor interesting.)

  2. Reva P wrote
    at 1:29 - 3rd Luty 2010 Permalink

    First, you’re not even comparing apples and oranges. Your comparison is more along the lines of apples and okra.
    Second, you mean when will baseball join other sports and use a diaper. Yes, a diaper. A salary cap is nothing more than a diaper to contain the owners’ collective chequebook incontinence.
    And not until baseball has a proven track record of real revenue sharing. What they have now is a joke, particularly compared to the NFL.

  3. chief106 wrote
    at 4:57 - 3rd Luty 2010 Permalink

    Never…the salary cap is only an issue because smaller teams cant afford to keep their stars. The biggest payroll doesnt win you the world series. The larger payroll teams can buy their way out of their mistakes. The key to win MLB games is to develop your minor leagues and starting pitching. Negotiate with your players a few years before their contract is up and sign them at a discounted rate. Another problem is guaranteed contracts. Higher payroll teams can afford to take hits if players get injured (pavano—yankees). That is why smaller payroll teams dont want to pay big money for players. So yankees—high payroll—no SP—no minor leagues = losing record and they arent going to the playoffs. Teams following the plan, tigers, indians, A’s—what a surprise all these teams will make the playoffs….

  4. Shawn G wrote
    at 10:57 - 3rd Luty 2010 Permalink

    NEVER EVER….never ever.
    MLB Players Union is the strongest in sports. They will never vote for a cap to constrict their high salaries.
    Add that in with the fact that all the owners are sissies and won’t lockout players to get a cap.
    Therefore–the sad fact is–No cap…ever.
    You need muscle-and the players union has all the muscle.

  5. Garret P wrote
    at 13:14 - 3rd Luty 2010 Permalink

    yea it would be hard to put a cap on the mlb because of the high payrolls for soo many ppl, **cough yanks cough**

  6. Ed wrote
    at 18:24 - 3rd Luty 2010 Permalink

    Probably never… it s different than football and hockey because both of those sports became big while teams don’t make as much money. In baseball, it has always been that the teams in big markets or teams owned by rich owners will always have an advantage. However, look at last year’s Marlins, they had a 14 million salary and they still made a run for the wildcard. Most times it has more to do with the quality of the minors and the success of the GMS.

  7. davidwdu wrote
    at 19:09 - 3rd Luty 2010 Permalink

    I hope there is never a salary cap. The guys should be able to make as much money as they possibly can. The only way baseball will ever learn is if the sport cannibalizes itself, and has to start anew to pay for its mistakes. I would love to see that happen someday, with a dozen or more teams folding, setting MLB back about a hundred years or so. I always try to be an optimist about these things.

  8. ryansray wrote
    at 19:42 - 3rd Luty 2010 Permalink

    as long as the yankees are around and have a $100000000000000000000000000000000000000? payroll. i dont think that there will ever be a salary cap.

  9. badotist wrote
    at 21:37 - 3rd Luty 2010 Permalink

    Not for a while. The players’ union is too strong in MLB. However, you should look at the fact that no team has won the World Series twice in a row since the Yankees did it in 1999 and 2000. Payroll isn’t everything. Look at the 97 Marlins, the 01 D’Backs the 02 Angels the 03 Marlins the 05 ChiSox and the 06 Cards. Payroll helps….but it isn’t everything.
    The salary cap has worked great in the NFL but it’s been terrible in the NBA. One bad contract in the NBA, and you are stuck with that player. You need contracts that are not guaranteed (like the NFL) to give teams a chance each year. In the NBA, if you get a bad GM (ummm…Isiah?) you can hamstring your team for years.

  10. L P wrote
    at 22:01 - 3rd Luty 2010 Permalink

    baseball probably wont get a salary cap and fopr those who complain that it isnt fair that the yankees get a high payroll, there is a rule that any team thats payroll exceeds a certain amount of money, then has to pay a luxury tax that goes to other teams. how those teams use that money is up to them. obviously some teams rather pocket the money than go after players that will help the team

  11. sgoldper wrote
    at 4:51 - 4th Luty 2010 Permalink

    They have a Salary Cap technically. It is what is referred to as a „soft” cap. You are asking about a „hard” cap. The difference is that MLB says spend as much as you want BUT after a certain point you will pay a luxury tax for spending so much. I see nothing wrong with their version. If you want to go by the fact that the playoffs are almost always the same group of teams then consider that there are only 4 teams in from each league. That means that the same group has a decent chance because it is the division winners. Just look at the payrolls of the teams that win and lose and you will see that it isn’t just about who has the most money wins all the games or something. If you want to make the sport exciting then cut down on the number of games.

  12. poopersc wrote
    at 10:30 - 4th Luty 2010 Permalink

    the only answer i can offer is…all too late.
    it becomes a compettition between players on who’s the highest paid. that would in theory make them the best player in best ball? that’s my take on it.

  13. I-am-ind wrote
    at 17:03 - 4th Luty 2010 Permalink

    When Bud Selig is gone, and the next Players union contract expires, maybe the owners can have a Lockout.

  14. ronald g wrote
    at 21:19 - 4th Luty 2010 Permalink

    Don’t even mention Hockey with Baseball. You believe that Hockey is a healthy sport then you need your head checked.

  15. thomas p wrote
    at 21:39 - 4th Luty 2010 Permalink

    Probably never. The reason MLB has no cap when the other leagues do is because the MLB Players Union has much more power than in the other 2 sports. The players realize that a salary cap means less money for them. For example, an upper eschelon MLB player makes $17-20 mil per year whereas the highest paid NFL QB makes only $8 mil per year. Other positions are much lower. The best CB in the league will be lucky to break $4 mil per year. As I said, the players in every sport understand that a cap means less money for them; the difference with the MLB is that the players actually have the power to prevent a cap. Don’t think for a minute that NBA and NFL Players Unions wouldn’t get rid of their cap if they could. Players don’t care about parity in their sport; they care about their own interests first and foremost.
    As much as a salary cap would help MLB, I think a salary minimum is a realistic goal that players and (most) owners should strive for. When you look at the NFL (although not the NBA), you can’t really find any team that is like the Devil Rays or the Marlins, where there is no visible interest in winning. Pretty much every NFL team is committed financially to being successful. I think that if every MLB owner was committed to actually fielding a competitive team each year, this would do as much for parity in the sport as a salary cap. Come on, guys! If you want to run a business, buy a Starbucks. If you’re running an MLB franchise, you have to think about it differently.

  16. soxx09 wrote
    at 3:57 - 5th Luty 2010 Permalink

    look at the 03 marlins, they beat the Yankees, with like 5 times the marlins salary. It isn’t needed. Young talent is enough

  17. georgibo wrote
    at 5:21 - 5th Luty 2010 Permalink

    Hopefully Never! I wanted it for football but now that football has one i wish I had never asked for it. It doesnt make bad teams more competitive by making them better. It makes them more competitive by making everyone else suck!

  18. NY Guido wrote
    at 10:33 - 5th Luty 2010 Permalink

    Soon, i hope. What people don’t realize is that the Yanks would still be as good as they’ve been over the years even with a salary cap, no one can prove that they would have worse. My only concern right now is Joe Torre, and winning games. Cuz ya see, once there’s a salary cap on baseball, all the Yankee haters and Sox fans’ only rap on the Yanks would be gone.

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked *