No, I hate this small market BS. All these teams are owned by multi millionares. The Royals are owned by the Glass Family... any idea who they are? Former CEO of Wal Mart, they are worth billions. Carl Pohlad owns the Twins.. that clown invented the little ATM fee. Sure these teams are at a disadvantage with FA's but with good managemnet they can build a solid farm system and compete for the playoffs. If teams suck it's because of shitty management, the Royals make more off luxuray tax from high dollar teams then they spend on payroll... fuck that.
I wanted one in the late 1990s/early 2000s, but that was then. MLB has fixed some things now with the luxury tax and various machinations with the draft. I can't bother with the small market excuse as much these days. The Kansas City owner is one of the weathliest owners in baseball, if not the wealthiest, and that team has good fans. That franchise can certainly buy some big name free agents. Missouri is baseball rich. That state can support two teams. What I don't get are the Marlins. They just had another fire sale yesterday. I understand Jacob Turner is a top prospect, but the team essentially gave up on this season in July and it is their first season in a new ballpark! How about showing some patience and some fight? They weakened their major league club by trading Infante and Sanchez.
Carl Pohlad is dead. As for the cap, the NFL's model is the best. It forces teams to stay in a certain range. Teams can't spend only $20 million on salaries, but they also are limited at the top end. I wouldn't call it a fire sale. It was very strange though. Why would they go out and trade for Carlos Lee and then soon after trade away their second baseman and one of their top starters?
While it could be true that the some of the wealthiest franchise owners have teams that continuously have poor seasons, I think it would still be more fair to fans if the MLB just set a spending limit on players. It's obvious certain owners don't care how good their team is and would rather make money on stadium features and events, but it's not good for baseball as a whole that it goes on like this. Bottom line is if you give an owner a certain budget on players, he can make the best of it. Management will be more defined and it will be easier to narrow the bad decisions made with a salary cap, like football. If a team is mismanaged, it shows and that coach is often fired. With baseball, it gets blamed on the owner and the coaches can't really control that spending, but I don't know the details on that so that's all I'll say. So if the little man gets more control of the spending then it's more competitive for all teams. I see baseball as a dictatorship, hence the evil empire.
Eh I wouldn't mind seeing one but not sure how they would implement it to be fair. Does the MLB have a salary floor where teams have to spend a certain amount? That might help them more than a cap
Would it help? Yes. Is it by any means necessary? No. But forcing teams to spend a minimum amount is problematic without a luxury tax.
There is a salary cap in baseball and that is why you will see the Yankees under 189 million in another 2 years. There is absolutely no way they won't be. The fact they call it a luxury tax or whatever makes no difference. It is a cap.
