MLB Salary Cap (Or..just...something!) Redux of the Redux - Page 2

Goody · 10-17-2009, 03:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYY #23

Didn't A-Rod sign the largest contract ever with the Texas Rangers? And was later traded to the Yankees? Maybe the Rangers should take some responsibility for the signing that they made?? They helped escalate salaries for players with that deal, setting a new standard.

Yeah, the Mariners didn't want to lay down and kiss his butt as much as he wanted...so he followed the big $...all the way to the Yankees. What a feel good story to be proud of for baseball.

NYY #23 · 10-17-2009, 03:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Goody

Yeah, the Mariners didn't want to lay down and kiss his butt as much as he wanted...so he followed the big $...all the way to the Yankees. What a feel good story to be proud of for baseball.

Did I say it was a feel good story? No. Did A-Rod follow the money to Texas. Yes.

Would a cap have prevented him from getting the most possible money? Doubtful.

Vinny P. · 10-17-2009, 04:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Goody

Throw as many numbers at it as you want, that still seems like an outlandish statement.

I'm just suprised more people don't want it to be more fair.

Well, life isn't fair.

But seriously, would you REALLY want to be able to "even out" the teams in the MLB like your proposing? I mean, the cinderella stories are what we all love about sports so much. The USA beating the USSR in hockey in 1980. The Twins-Braves WS in 1991. the 2004 Boston win over NYY in the ALCS. Those are the kinds of stories we live for, and crave in sports. Especially in baseball.

The NFL is too much of a crap-shoot. And the NBA is even worse. Granted, I love watching football. I think this is why I like the college game the best. Never know who's going to win that big upset of a game from week to week.

NYY #23 · 10-17-2009, 04:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Goody

Throw as many numbers at it as you want, that still seems like an outlandish statement.

I'm just suprised more people don't want it to be more fair.

Is it better to use emotions to back it up than numbers?

Russ · 10-17-2009, 04:06 PM

If there was a salary cap in baseball, do you think the M's would have been able to keep A-Rod, Junior, Randy Johnson, Edgar, Tino, and Buhner together? They would have been cut to make cap space as soon as A-Rod and Junior needed contract extensions. Look at football and how many players are cut each June and the player movement in that league.

I think you're also overrating the salary cap's influence on parity in the NFL. The NFL season of 16 games is an exercise in small sample size. Anything can happen over that stretch.

Bryan Swartz · 10-17-2009, 04:11 PM

Jax, I think the NBA is a horrible example to use, simply because one great player has a far greater impact in the NBA than any other sport(save the possible exception of a goalie in hockey).

NYY #23 · 10-17-2009, 04:11 PM

I don't get why the NFL is some sort of nirvana of parity. Where the team with the highest payroll, the Raiders at $152 mil can put up a 5-11 season where the Ravens with the second lowest at $90 mil goes 11-5 and makes the playoffs. Is this because of the cap? Or because teams like the Ravens, Patriots, and Steelers know what it takes to win and run an organization well.

mlyons · 10-17-2009, 04:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Goody

Throw as many numbers at it as you want, that still seems like an outlandish statement.

I'm just suprised more people don't want it to be more fair.

What's fair about the Yankees turning over their revenue to the Pirates?

Le Grande Orange · 10-17-2009, 06:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Goody

Throw as many numbers at it as you want, that still seems like an outlandish statement.

I can't decide whether to laugh or do a facepalm.

If you're not going to acknowledge and accept actual hard data and numbers, then there's no point in continuing with the discussion as you would have demonstrated your issue is ideological in nature and not fact-based.

Le Grande Orange · 10-17-2009, 06:52 PM

In terms of the worry about a declining interest in baseball, I offer the following chart for discussion. It plots the MLB per game average attendance against the total population of the U.S. This allows one to see what relationship, if any, exists between the two.

For the purposes of the graph, I divided the national U.S. population figure by 10,000 for each year to put it on a similar scale as the per game attendance figure.

TribeFanInNC · 10-17-2009, 07:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Le Grande Orange

In terms of the worry about a declining interest in baseball, I offer the following chart for discussion. It plots the MLB per game average attendance against the total population of the U.S. This allows one to see what relationship, if any, exists between the two.

For the purposes of the graph, I divided the national U.S. population figure by 10,000 for each year to put it on a similar scale as the per game attendance figure.

Yeah, I decided not to go down the attendance route because I think it is a little bogus. Yes, clearly teams sell more tickets now than before. However, I think it is more corporate now with less 'fans' at the game. Sure, the people who use corporate seats might be fans. But I think they are there because they can be, not because they want to be. If there was a true attendance demand, ratings would be higher too.

Not totally bogus. But not exactly telling either.

mlyons · 10-17-2009, 07:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TribeFanInNC

Yeah, I decided not to go down the attendance route because I think it is a little bogus. Yes, clearly teams sell more tickets now than before. However, I think it is more corporate now with less 'fans' at the game. Sure, the people who use corporate seats might be fans. But I think they are there because they can be, not because they want to be. If there was a true attendance demand, ratings would be higher too.

Not totally bogus. But not exactly telling either.

Ratings aren't down, though. Sure, the nationally televised games have been down (having as much to do with awful broadcasters and matchups as anything else), but those make up a tiny percentage of the overall television pie. It's the local viewership on the regional networks that matter, and those have been doing just fine over the last couple of decades -- strong enough that whole stations have formed based on local baseball anchoring their schedules. YES was just the first of these; now almost every team has their own station or has become the major programming point for a regional sports station. Even those poor Cleveland Indians own their own station.

TribeFanInNC · 10-17-2009, 08:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mlyons

Ratings aren't down, though. Sure, the nationally televised games have been down (having as much to do with awful broadcasters and matchups as anything else), but those make up a tiny percentage of the overall television pie. It's the local viewership on the regional networks that matter, and those have been doing just fine over the last couple of decades -- strong enough that whole stations have formed based on local baseball anchoring their schedules. YES was just the first of these; now almost every team has their own station or has become the major programming point for a regional sports station. Even those poor Cleveland Indians own their own station.

Yes, I reckon that is true. There also is other stuff like MLB.TV and the Gameday Audio that probably doesn't count either.

darkcloud4579 · 10-17-2009, 08:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYY #23

Did I say it was a feel good story? No. Did A-Rod follow the money to Texas. Yes.

Would a cap have prevented him from getting the most possible money? Doubtful.

Yes. The NBA cap ensures players maximize what they make on the team they're currently on. Hence all of those sign and trade deals -- which honestly are good for the hot stove talk anyway -- and it's good for the sport.

NYY #23 · 10-17-2009, 09:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by darkcloud4579

Yes. The NBA cap ensures players maximize what they make on the team they're currently on. Hence all of those sign and trade deals -- which honestly are good for the hot stove talk anyway -- and it's good for the sport.

I really don't follow the NBA too closely anymore. I am not a fan of trading for contracts because someone who doesn't even play is more valuable than someone who does.

I read somewhere that the NBA is pushing to revenue sharing because the smaller market teams can't compete against the large market teams. This is with a cap. I just don't see how a cap solves problems with teams being competitive. Revenue sharing is a whole different animal though.

EMSoccerCoach · 10-17-2009, 09:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Goody

Yeah, the Mariners didn't want to lay down and kiss his butt as much as he wanted...so he followed the big $...all the way to the Yankees. What a feel good story to be proud of for baseball.

I agree with the gist of evening out discrepancies a bit, but I think your response here says volumes about where you're really coming from on the issue.

Goody · 10-17-2009, 09:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYY #23

Did I say it was a feel good story? No. Did A-Rod follow the money to Texas. Yes.

Would a cap have prevented him from getting the most possible money? Doubtful.

Do you think he'd be playing for the Yankees, with Derek Jeter?

Goody · 10-17-2009, 09:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYY #23

I don't get why the NFL is some sort of nirvana of parity. Where the team with the highest payroll, the Raiders at $152 mil can put up a 5-11 season where the Ravens with the second lowest at $90 mil goes 11-5 and makes the playoffs. Is this because of the cap? Or because teams like the Ravens, Patriots, and Steelers know what it takes to win and run an organization well.

All of the above.

It should be about teams and players that know how to win and run an organization well. NOT about how much you have to spend.

NYY #23 · 10-17-2009, 09:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Goody

Do you think he'd be playing for the Yankees, with Derek Jeter?

Are you just bitter that he spurned the Mariners? Or just against the Yankees?

There was no cap then and isn't now so it is impossible to tell. Of course different decisions would have been made with a cap in place, but it all depends on how high that cap is.

But would he have been making the same amount of money? Probably, since it was Texas that gave him the big deal, not the Yankees.

Goody · 10-17-2009, 09:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mlyons

having as much to do with awful broadcasters and matchups as anything else

Awful matchups?

Now how does that happen?

10-17-2009, 04:06 PM	#25 (permalink)
Russ All Star Starter Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Essex HON! Posts: 1,909 Blog Entries: 1 Thanks: 34 Thanked 48x in 42 posts Infractions: 0/1 (1)	If there was a salary cap in baseball, do you think the M's would have been able to keep A-Rod, Junior, Randy Johnson, Edgar, Tino, and Buhner together? They would have been cut to make cap space as soon as A-Rod and Junior needed contract extensions. Look at football and how many players are cut each June and the player movement in that league. I think you're also overrating the salary cap's influence on parity in the NFL. The NFL season of 16 games is an exercise in small sample size. Anything can happen over that stretch. __________________ If you don't love Russ, you don't love America. This post brought to you by Carl's Jr.

10-17-2009, 04:11 PM	#27 (permalink)
NYY #23 All Star Starter Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Philadelphia Posts: 1,786 Blog Entries: 17 Thanks: 221 Thanked 101x in 86 posts	I don't get why the NFL is some sort of nirvana of parity. Where the team with the highest payroll, the Raiders at $152 mil can put up a 5-11 season where the Ravens with the second lowest at $90 mil goes 11-5 and makes the playoffs. Is this because of the cap? Or because teams like the Ravens, Patriots, and Steelers know what it takes to win and run an organization well. __________________ My current dynasties: From Worst to First - A journey from last place to World Series championship with each MLB team. 300-500-3000 - A look at baseball 'magic numbers' through the years. A sequel of sort to The Home Run. American Baseball League - A mostly fictional league through the years.

10-17-2009, 06:52 PM	#30 (permalink)
Le Grande Orange Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Scheduleslovakia Posts: 9,840 Thanks: 2 Thanked 1,010x in 586 posts	In terms of the worry about a declining interest in baseball, I offer the following chart for discussion. It plots the MLB per game average attendance against the total population of the U.S. This allows one to see what relationship, if any, exists between the two. For the purposes of the graph, I divided the national U.S. population figure by 10,000 for each year to put it on a similar scale as the per game attendance figure. Attached Images __________________ . "We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things not because they are easy, but because they are hard. Because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our abilities and skills, because that challenge is one we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win." .

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

10-17-2009, 04:11 PM	#26 (permalink)
Bryan Swartz Major Leagues Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 421 Thanks: 0 Thanked 4x in 3 posts	Jax, I think the NBA is a horrible example to use, simply because one great player has a far greater impact in the NBA than any other sport(save the possible exception of a goalie in hockey).