Does baseball need a salary cap?
News blogs, sports blogs, entertainment blogs, and more from Philly.com, The Philadelphia Inquirer and the Philadelphia Daily News.
Does baseball need a salary cap?
David Murphy, Daily News Staff Writer
First and foremost, Merry Christmas to everyone out there. Thought I'd throw one more thought out there for those of you still slaving away on this Christmas Eve.
Does baseball need a salary cap?
I ask this because Brewers owner Mark Attanasio pondered the idea in an interview with the Bloomberg News last night. The impetus for all this talk, of course, is the Yankees, who yesterday came from nowhere to sign free agent slugger Mark Texeira to an eight-year, $180 million deal, despite the fact that they had traded for first baseman Nick Swisher earlier in the offseason and had already locked up C.C. Sabathia and A.J. Burnett to long-term deals.
"At the rate the Yankees are going, I'm not sure anyone can compete with them," Attanasio told said via e-mail. "Frankly, the sport might need a salary cap."
It's an interesting thought, one that has always been a topic of conversation in baseball. I don't really have a personal opinion on it one way or the other, but I'd be interested to hear yours.
Comments (50)
lvironpigs.wordpress.com merry christmas— ironpigs- i dont think there will ever be a salary cap because of the players union. MLB lost its chance of getting one years ago. The sport is very healthy now and the players will never let that happen. My idea would be to let teams sign one major free agent. All free agents are typed....Type A Type B etc. Make it legal to only sign one Type A per year. The only exception would be to sign your own players that are Type A. that way teams like the yankees cant splurge on every single player out there. also, it doesnt limit spending on players because there isnt a cap on what you can spend on players. some players might call it a cap but something has to be done to prevent teams like the yankees and red sox from paying players the sums of money that they do— lpb1225
- Spending all the money you want is not going to guarantee a championship. The Phillies won with a payroll in the middle of the pack. Look at this years playoffs. Chicago with a high payroll folded. So did Boston. Minnestoa is competitive every year. The Marlins manage to compete with the lowest payroll. Bottom line is that the players still have to play.....and play together as a team. It's more about having the right mix than the most expensive players. The Yankees obviously don't think they can get the right players out of their farm system so they buy them. It seems that building from within gives teams longer success mixed with a free agent or two. Let the Yankees spend. Maybe they will win once in a while but in my opinion, the odds are against them.— Bill S
- Y-E-S. 100% YES.— OppoJack
- $90M should be the cap. We don't need to see Selig try to continue the Robin Hood act of stealing from the rich and giving to the poor. The poor should stop lining their pockets with that money and use it on what it takes to build a good team. There should be a cap and it should be a hard cap although I am intrigued with the "$7M Max" plan listed above.— cg
- Fire Bud Lite and install Jeff Gross as Commish. His ideas hit the spot. Merry Christmas to all and thanks Murph for doing such a good job.— mick314
I think a better idea would be a system to provide salary help to teams so that they can keep their young stars. Rather than revenue being shared with teams, with some owners pocketing that money, it should help fund salaries for players like Hanley Ramirez, or Cole Hamels so that they can stay on their teams longer. Aside from the money going directly to players salaries what good would revenue sharing do?— fuss77- We've seen with the Marlins and Rays that small market, low payroll teams can compete and win. Is that an anomaly? Maybe but it seems to be more about team chemistry than slapping together alot of high priced players together and expecting a championship. aybe there should be some changes but nothing is guaranteed because your payroll is 3-4 times higher than another teams payroll. You better have a good farm system however.— carlton
Comment removed.- are you guys serious? we're all baseball fans - i've been in the game for over 50 years. but do you really think that the player's union would allow a salary cap? no way! a cap would diminish their market value as well as their ability to extract their salaries from the team owners. even though no one puts the proverbial gun to the heads of ownership, as a group, many of them (read: big-market teams) still have both the ability and desire to overpay for the services of the elite players. NY, Boston, LA, etc will always have the ability to pay more for a player's services than their smaller-market counterparts. as fans, we all know that high individual or team salaries don't usually equate to winning championships. what it does do, in effect, is prevent the smaller guys from signing marque type players. those are the superstars that put fans in the seats, sell more team merchandise, increase the value of the franchise, etc. so - in effect - the huge payrolls of the big-market teams virtually assure their status as big market guys. until the player's union and baseball ownership can work a NBA or NFL like cap system into their salary structure, the ability of the Yankees, etc to overpay a player by a factor of 2 or 3 will always exist. Here's another question for the group: Why doesn't anyone complain about what ownership pays Selig?— JohnnySak
- Is Fuss77 a Socialist ? Just askin.— mick314
- HELL NO! the game without a clock has to remain the game without a cap. if it ain't broke, don't fix it. and this ain't broke. if the yanks want to overspend for the 7th or 8th best offensive firstbaseman, to hell with 'em. all that cash dosen't guarentee a date for the big dance. what is attenasio talking about? a guys paycheck dosen't make him an unstoppable competitor. but consider the source, millwalkee isn't going anywhere soon.— scorpio27
- A higher tax will not work because a number of the small market teams will pocket the money and not spend it on payroll. If you set a salary cap, it needs to be for both the top and bottom of the scale. I would recommend a top cap of $150 million, and a minimum cap of $75 million. It is the survival of the fittest. If you can't meet the $75 million payroll, your team is either disbanded or sent to a AAA minor league. Something must be done, or MLB as we know it today will not be around 20 years from now.— PortCity
- zipster1...as far as the nfl goes, mediocrity masking as balence, would never fly in mlb. the season is too long, and baseball fans need a big story to follow through the summer. imagine 26 weeks of 30 teams, all around the .500 mark. and those teams in a postseason. who would care?— scorpio27
- port city, i don't see your plan working. it would force teams to overpay bums to meet the minimum. think of the talent on the rosters of pittsburgh, or k.c., or washington. can you see any of those rosters worth 75 mil in a free market environment like we have now. look at the raise those tomato cans would be getting.— scorpio27
Popular Posts
About this blog
High Cheese is your place for the best Phillies coverage from the Daily News.
David Murphy
Daily News Staff Writer
Ryan Lawrence
Daily News Staff Writer
Search this blog:
Classifieds:
Site Services:
Partners:
Powered By:
