Sunday, August 1, 2010

If I Ruled the World...

there would be a salary cap.

Since the Rays and Yankees are going head to head again, I figured why not finally post this thought. The thought originated back on May 19th, while watching the Rays and Yankees game. Now that my drawing side has surfaced again, I was inspired to do a drawing to enhance my opinion. Of course living in NY, the game was broadcasted on the YES network - which I usually don't mind, actually I usually have it muted, too much Yankee propaganda is bad for the brain, but this time I was actually listening, and the commentators started saying that Crawford will not be resigning with the Rays, like its a forgone conclusion, and of course Pena will have to take a huge cut if he wants to stay and there is no way they will be able to afford Soriano if he continues what he is doing, well he is continuing to pitch very well. The good news is, not only did the Rays beat the Yanks but they only brought it up that one time. I really hope the Rays keep Crawford and sign him. Its good for baseball when there are legacy players, you know the players that are only associated with one team, ie Sandberg, Ripken, Gwynn, Biggio, etc.

Here are some random facts and my argument for a salary cap.

Based on the 2010 Salary Budget. There are eight teams over $100 million, that means there are twenty-two not yet spending $100 million or put another way, two-thirds of the MLB teams are spending less than $100 million. One team has a salary above $200 million. That one team is more than double two-thirds of the league, and triples twelve teams. Pretty easy to tell things are not balanced and favor only a few teams.

Now imagine if you were in a fantasy league where one owner had a budget that is twice as much as two-thirds of the owners and triples on-third of the league.

So if this was a 12 team fantasy league
  • 1 team has $200 budget
  • 3 teams have $110 budget
  • 4 teams have $90 budget
  • 4 teams have $65 budget
Would you play in this fantasy league?

I wouldn't.

It isn't set up for fair competition.

MLB needs a fair and balanced system and therefore should have a salary cap.

* data taken from cbssports
Current 2010 Salaries by division
AL East
New York Yankees $206,333,389
Boston Red Sox $162,747,333
Baltimore Orioles $81,612,500
Tampa Bay Rays $71,923,471
Toronto Blue Jays $62,689,357

AL Central
Detroit Tigers $122,864,929
Chicago White Sox $108,273,197
Minnesota Twins $97,559,167
Kansas City Royals $72,267,710
Cleveland Indians $61,203,967

AL West
Los Angeles Angels $105,013,667
Seattle Mariners $98,376,667
Texas Rangers $55,250,545
Oakland Athletics $51,654,900

NL East
Philadelphia Phillies $141,927,381
New York Mets $132,701,445
Atlanta Braves $84,423,667
Washington Nationals $61,425,000
Florida Marlins $55,641,500

NL Central
Chicago Cubs $146,859,000
St. Louis Cardinals $93,540,753
Houston Astros $92,355,500
Milwaukee Brewers $81,108,279
Cincinnati Reds $72,386,544
Pittsburgh Pirates $34,943,000

NL West
San Francisco Giants $97,828,833
Los Angeles Dodgers $94,945,517
Colorado Rockies $84,227,000
Arizona Diamondbacks $60,718,167
San Diego Padres $37,799,300


Joe S. said...

With a few exceptions (Rangers, Padres, and Dodgers), these teams have plenty of money to spend, it's just that their owners choose not to. I once heard that the Pirates, because of revenue sharing, START the season with approx. 60 million in the bank. That's not factoring in attendace, concessions, or anything else for the season.

The Twins owner is one of the richest people in the world.

Why should teams like the Yankees, Red Sox, and Angels be forced to spend less just because the majority of owners are unwilling to spend more?

The playing field is much more level than you'd think - the owners just sing their sad songs to the fans to mask how frugal they're being.

Put a better product on the field and the fans (and revenue) will come. It's like any other business - you've gotta make sacrifices first.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

I recently made an opposing argument on this very subject on the fan forum. Here's what I had to say...

Let me start this off with saying that I'm no Yankees fan. But I don't think you can fault a team with trying to improving their line-up in order to win the World Series. I mean...that's the entire point of trading, right? And when comes down to it, every team in the majors has the chance to do the same thing that the Yanks do. Some people say that "small-market" teams don't have that chance due to the lack of capitol from lower attendance records. I say that's an excuse for poor management.

The Yankees aren't doing anything illegal when they have the highest salary in the league. There's nothing stopping any other club from doing the same thing. Why do the Yankees get a bad rap for trying to win? If you're a Yankees fan, you better expect your team to do everything they can to get another Commissioner's Trophy. I know I expect it from my team. When the Cardinals signed Matt Holliday to a 7-year $120 million contract, I was happy.

The fact of the matter is that the Yankees are the signature team of Major League Baseball, and love them or hate them, there's no denying that fact. (Again, let me point out that I'm not a Yankees fan.) And as such, I don't have a problem with them signing or trading for high salary players. If other teams have a problem with that, then they need to take those high-salaried players before the Yanks gets them. That's why I was glad to see the Phillies get Oswalt instead of the Yankees.

If you ask me, there's nothing wrong with what the Yankees are doing. I think the problem is with the rest of the teams that allow the Yankees to get those players. A salary cap will not make things any more "fair" than what they already are.

chris OK said...

Great response, and thanks for the different angle, it really made me think and do some research.

I understand the point you make, owners are cheap, point taken, and I Agreed. Only I don't really care if owners are cheap, I want a fair and balanced league, just like a Fantasy Baseball league. That is the point of the right up. Owners are businessmen and if they are making money, that is enough for them and all they really care about, they worship the lovely sin of greed and there is never enough money for them. Integrity and love of the game are not a priority to them. It is the job of the commissioner and MLB officials to keep the integrity of the league as well as make the league fair and balanced.

Thanks for your response, the problem I have with Yankees bettering their team is that it takes away from the competitive balance of the whole league. Is it wrong what they are doing? No, but again if I ran things, it would be. I think the better meant of the entire league is more important than having a team that everyone has an opinion of. Also the way things are structured right now the Yankees essential buying off all the other teams to not compete, if the other teams keep their payroll down they still make money. The system is ridiculous and there must be a change to bring back some integrity to MLB. By putting a cap on the league, the teams become more balanced. NY, Boston, LA could still spend more by having (let's say a 140m cap), because I am sure, some teams would still spend around 40-70m, but no limit spending just justifies the owners being cheap, because they still make money. If there was a cap and no revenue sharing the other teams would be forced to compete to make money, or they would fold and new teams or owners would come to MLB. It would be a more competitive environment for teams that have lower payrolls to make a run for the title because it would be more about talent than how much money you spend.

Also you both failed to mention if you would join a fantasy league set up this way????