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

[Goody]

Lots of salary cap complaining's scattered around here. Mostly started by me, yes. But I haven't been the only one.

What I really can't understand is why, as a fan, you would argue against it. You're not a player trying to make more money. You're not the Yankees threatening legal action against the league for even thinking about a salary cap (after Milwaukee and Boston were campaining for it).

So let's really take a look at this. I found a great article to get us started

As Evidence Mounts, MLB Needs a Salary Cap | Bleacher Report

Little League enrollment has been steadily declining (by 1 percent per year) since 1996

· A Harris Poll from 2008 shows that among American’s who follow one or more sports, Football is still the most popular at 30 percent , up six points since 1985. Meanwhile baseball has dropped six points from 23 percent to 15 percent since 1985 (The Harris Poll No. 13, February 5, 2008)

· All-Star Game Ratings Decline: The TV ratings for the MLB All-Star game have steadily declined since 1967. From 1967 (25.6 rating) to 1980 (26.8), the ratings remained similar. The trend shifted however. In 1990 the rating was 16.2. It fell to 10.1 in 2000, and was a mere 9.3 in 2008, down nearly 18 full points (a point per year) since 1990. (Baseball Almanac)

· World Series Ratings Decline: More importantly, World Series ratings have also been waning for baseball. 40 years ago, the World Series had a 22.8 rating. In 1973, the rating was 30.7 and peaked in 1980 at 32.8. The decline began soon after. 1990 saw a 20.8 rating, followed by a 12.4 rating in 2000, and down to an 8.4 rating in 2008, the lowest by far. (Baseball Almanac)

· 1988: The New York Yankees topped the league with an $18.9 million annual payroll, while the lowest payroll team was the Chicago White Sox at $5.9Million - a $13 million difference (320 percent ) top to bottom

· 1998: Baltimore led the league with a $70.4 million payroll while Montreal was last in spending at only $9.2 Million - a $61.2 million (765 percent ) difference top to bottom.

· 2008: The Yankees had a payroll of $209 million (more than double their spending 8 years prior) as compared to the Marlins at $21.8 million—an enormous $187 million difference (959 percent).

Teams ranked top 10 in Payroll (payroll rank 1-10) – 57 playoff appearances – 59 percent

· Teams in the Middle 10 in Payroll (payroll rank 11-20) – 27 playoff appearances – 28 percent

· Teams in the Bottom 10 in Payroll (payroll rank 21 and lower) – 12 playoff appearances – 13 percent

Top 5 in Payroll (payroll rank 1-5) – 34 appearances – 35 percent

· Rank 6-10 in Payroll – 23 appearances – 24 percent

· Rank 11-15 in Payroll – 18 appearances – 19 percent

· Rank 16-20 in Payroll – 9 appearances – 9 percent

· Rank 21-25 in Payroll – 6 appearances, 6 percent

· Rank 26-30 in Payroll – 6 appearances, 6 percent

Summary

The past decade has exacerbated the need for a Salary Cap in baseball. The spending deltas are disparate and growing (doubling every nine to 10 years). The evidence is there that spending affects who goes to the playoffs. A disproportionate number of the Haves go to the playoffs vs. the Have Nots.

One of the notable issues discussed throughout the media and the public is the effect that the maldistribution of power has on the fan’s sense of the fairness of the game. The debate about having a salary cap in baseball isn’t new. But evidence continues to pile up pointing to the obvious—Baseball is broken.

Baseball doesn’t offer a fair playing field between large and small markets. The notion of parity in Baseball isn’t a reality as much as it is in the NFL or the NHL. Baseball is suffering. And Baseball is in denial. At a minimum, fixing the parity issue in baseball is possible and there is asolution out there called the salary cap. It works in other leagues.

If the problems (even beyond the maldistribution of power) in the game aren’t addressed, will we see a Five-TV Rating for the World Series this year? How long will it be before the NHL overtakes MLB in popularity? How long will it be before foreign-born talent represents the majority of players in the game as more and more American kids stop playing it?

For MLB’s sake, I hope they wake up and realize these aren’t benign issues, they are malignant and spreading. One thing we know for sure, most of the problems, while having been diagnosed, aren’t being treated. Shame on MLB.

[TribeFanInNC]

Two quick points:

1) Because it doesn't matter how much they spend, the top 10 will still be the top 10. The Royals and Nationals and Pirates are still only going to spend $50mil (or less) no matter what. The Players Union will never allow the cap to be so low to bring the rest of the field into play (I'm not all that sure they would agree to any cap).

2) I think some of the ratings are misleading. The World Series' over the last five years have been not been compelling matchups. No Game 6s since 2003. The last good matchup was probably Yankees-DBacks in 2001. Also any comparison using pre and post 1994 data is invalid; it was obvious MLB shot themselves in the foot then. There is no question MLB popularity is probably down and far less than NFL.

[Goody]

Originally Posted by TribeFanInNC

1) Because it doesn't matter how much they spend, the top 10 will still be the top 10. The Royals and Nationals and Pirates are still only going to spend $50mil (or less) no matter what. The Players Union will never allow the cap to be so low to bring the rest of the field into play (I'm not all that sure they would agree to any cap).

The NFL also has a cap floor, a minimum salary cap. Both the floor and ceiling are determined by a complex formula which evaluate overall league revenue.

2) I think some of the ratings are misleading. The World Series' over the last five years have been not been compelling matchups. No Game 6s since 2003. The last good matchup was probably Yankees-DBacks in 2001. Also any comparison using pre and post 1994 data is invalid; it was obvious MLB shot themselves in the foot then. There is no question MLB popularity is probably down and far less than NFL.

How do you explain the little league numbers going down? And the All-Star game ratings roughly on par with the WS games declining.

I can see it in real life at my job. I'm sure everyone can unless they live in Boston or New York or similar. Heck, I'm in the army, where the demographics (Aged 18 to 45 year old males) should contain a ton of baseball fans. But most could care less they days about baseball.

But I work with people from all over the states. The people from NY, Boston, Chicago, Atlanta and Philly are usually pretty interested in baseball. These are all huge markets. But overall, when a baseball game is on the tube at work its likely to get a majority of people pleading to change the channel. Not so with other sports.

[Goody]

The Players Union will never allow the cap to be so low to bring the rest of the field into play (I'm not all that sure they would agree to any cap).

They'll have to agree to it eventually if the ratings keep falling at the rate they are. By then it could be too late. Maybe they'll just eventually have like an 8 team league with all the powerhouse markets. That would be more exciting than watching the same teams get beat up all year and hand off their amazing players to the highest bidder at the trade deadline...year after year after year....

[mlyons]

Originally Posted by Goody

They'll have to agree to it eventually if the ratings keep falling at the rate they are. By then it could be too late. Maybe they'll just eventually have like an 8 team league with all the powerhouse markets. That would be more exciting than watching the same teams get beat up all year and hand off their amazing players to the highest bidder at the trade deadline...year after year after year....

World Series and All-Star game ratings have been declining, but regular season ratings (and attendance, which is far more important to baseball, as opposed to television-driven sports like football and basketball) have been going up.

You've been harping on the supposed decline in baseball's popularity for the last few weeks, but the fact still remains that baseball attendance has been skyrocketing over the last fifteen years, only dropping last year during the worst recession the country's seen since World War II. Even in this down year, baseball drew 75,000,000 fans. That's more than 20,000,000 more than came to see games in 1988, which you seem to see as a better time for baseball. You're trying to fix something that isn't broken.

[mlyons]

dola

Even those poor pathetic small market teams that you're worried are being driven out of business by salary disparity are doing better. The Pirates drew more than 1.4 million fans this season. In the entire decade of the 1980's, when they were still considered a competitive team, they only topped that mark twice. I doubt you'll find a single team in MLB that's drawn fewer fans this decade than they did in the 1980's.

[TribeFanInNC]

Originally Posted by Goody

The NFL also has a cap floor, a minimum salary cap. Both the floor and ceiling are determined by a complex formula which evaluate overall league revenue.

Sure. But I think the NFL has a lot more league revenue to share. The media pie is a lot bigger here. MLB revenue is more individual I think (hence the disparity).

Originally Posted by Goody

How do you explain the little league numbers going down? And the All-Star game ratings roughly on par with the WS games declining.

I can see it in real life at my job. I'm sure everyone can unless they live in Boston or New York or similar. Heck, I'm in the army, where the demographics (Aged 18 to 45 year old males) should contain a ton of baseball fans. But most could care less they days about baseball.

But I work with people from all over the states. The people from NY, Boston, Chicago, Atlanta and Philly are usually pretty interested in baseball. These are all huge markets. But overall, when a baseball game is on the tube at work its likely to get a majority of people pleading to change the channel. Not so with other sports.

I don't disagree with your overall premise that MLB popularity is down. But I don't think it is because of the salary discrepancy. I think the '94 strike and steroids have really kick fans in the stomach. Basically, Barry Bonds showed us that by taking shots, we can turn baseball into an arcade game. It's not the same unfortunately. I hope the damage isn't irreversible.

What the Yankees do now is no different than what they did in the 50s and early 60s. Baseball was plenty popular then. I don't see how fixing salaries will make baseball more popular. I think we will just end up with more Milwaukee-Texas World Series matchups (no offense to Brewer or Rangers fans).

I would imagine a Dodger-Yankee World Series would be pretty popular.

[jaxmagicman]

I am a huge fan of sports. I don't like the salary cap. It does not work. Baseball has had the most different champions the last 20 years, 15 years, 10 years than any other sport. The sport with the worst parity as for champions, the NBA, which has a salary cap.

[Goody]

They got a nice new stadium.

Last year in 3 Rivers Stadium. 1,709,119

And then the attendance of the new stadium each year until now.

2,428,661
1,784,988
1,636,751
1,583,031
1,794,237
1,861,549
1,749,142
1,609,076

Ending with 1.4 you said?

[Goody]

Originally Posted by jaxmagicman

I am a huge fan of sports. I don't like the salary cap. It does not work. Baseball has had the most different champions the last 20 years, 15 years, 10 years than any other sport. The sport with the worst parity as for champions, the NBA, which has a salary cap.

Playoff appearances are a better gauge than championships. As others have said before me, the playoffs are basically a crapshoot.

[Goody]

Originally Posted by TribeFanInNC

I would imagine a Dodger-Yankee World Series would be pretty popular.

Not for me. I'd rather watch the Rangers and Brewers...both able to afford the same players as the Yankees and Dodgers. Then maybe A Rod wouldn't have left Texas to help the Yankees dominate every single year.

That they don't win 116 games a year with an AVERAGE player salary over 7 million is a failure for that team. That makes the league fun to watch???

[Goody]

Ok check this out. The Texas Rangers finished the year at 87-75.

They had a payroll of $68,178,798.

One hundred and thirty three million less than the Yankees payroll.

That's 133 million. No decimals in there.



Imagine the players that they could add with another 133 million. Let them go shopping and replace certain players on their lineup with any other player regardless of price..as long as the total fell below 133 million.

Seems like a dream situation. But it seems a bit ridiculous. And how could you take the league seriously if they did that.

Wait...

[Jason]

Originally Posted by Goody

Not for me. I'd rather watch the Rangers and Brewers...both able to afford the same players as the Yankees and Dodgers. Then maybe A Rod wouldn't have left Texas to help the Yankees dominate every single year.

That they don't win 116 games a year with an AVERAGE player salary over 7 million is a failure for that team. That makes the league fun to watch???

Even if they balance out salaries you will still have media market and local endorsements tipping the balance. A guy can make a lot more off the field in New York than he can in Milwaukee.

[mlyons]

Originally Posted by Goody

They got a nice new stadium.

Last year in 3 Rivers Stadium. 1,709,119

And then the attendance of the new stadium each year until now.

2,428,661
1,784,988
1,636,751
1,583,031
1,794,237
1,861,549
1,749,142
1,609,076

Ending with 1.4 you said?

Honestly, if you're going to exclude any team with a new ballpark since the 1980's, then you're only left with the teams that do really well financially -- and Oakland and Minnesota. So let's look at Oakland. Stuck in a miserable market with an armpit of a stadium. They also drew 1.4 million this season. Only three times in the 1980's did they exceed that figure, and two of those times were during their heady Bash Brother dynasty days when they were the clearly the best team in the AL.

Minnesota, in their final season in the Metrodome, drew 2.4 million, a number they've only exceeded twice in their history (once the season after a World Series win and once during a World Series-winning season).

And that's it. There aren't any other small- or mid-market teams playing in the same stadium they were in the 1980's. One thing that says to me is that the era of salary imbalance has enabled all those poverty-stricken teams to pocket enough money to build new ballparks.

[NYY #23]

Baseball revenue passed $6 billion a couple of years ago, I'm not sure how much it dropped following the recession. There models of getting revenue are shifting, moves to regional sports networks, internet revenue, etc.

Looking at things like the All-Star game ratings just seem pointless. I love baseball, but can't remember the last time I watched an all-star game. It holds no interest to me whatsoever, but in no way does it reflect how much I like baseball, or how much revenue baseball is bringing in.

To me a salary cap is a choice between dividing up the money between the owners and the players. Things that effect me, ticket sales, etc are not going to change because of a cap. More money will shift into the owners pockets vs the player's pockets. It is supply and demand, and if people are willing to pay the money ticket prices will keep going up. Baseball will charge what it can.

There is already revenue sharing in baseball. The Yankees already pay out $100 million. I think you could look at the salary discrepancies, but there would be comparable revenue disparities. Don't we live in a free market economy? You make your money and you can spend it how you choose?

The Yankees pay their tax every year and teams like the Marlins have low payroll and pocket that money. A salary cap without a salary floor would be pointless. I've been to quite a few Marlins games where there were 2000 fans in the stands. I've also been to quite a few Marlins games where they were sellouts, or close to it. The reason, the Yankees, Red Sox, or Cubs were in town. The opposing team is a bigger draw than the home team so let's give the Marlins more money to fix the problem? How about getting a real owner?

As for World Series ratings, there could be other reasons for that. More choices on TV, the time of the games, etc.

[Skipaway]

Originally Posted by Goody

Lots of salary cap complaining's scattered around here. Mostly started by me, yes. But I haven't been the only one.

What I really can't understand is why, as a fan, you would argue against it. You're not a player trying to make more money. You're not the Yankees threatening legal action against the league for even thinking about a salary cap (after Milwaukee and Boston were campaining for it).

I think only fans of teams in small market would support the salary cap. That way their support of the team would have disproportionally bigger influence. With a salary cap, a team with 100m fans would be limited to spend on the level of a team with 20m fans.

I don't think fans of popular teams should support salary caps.

[NYY #23]

Originally Posted by Goody

Not for me. I'd rather watch the Rangers and Brewers...both able to afford the same players as the Yankees and Dodgers. Then maybe A Rod wouldn't have left Texas to help the Yankees dominate every single year.

That they don't win 116 games a year with an AVERAGE player salary over 7 million is a failure for that team. That makes the league fun to watch???

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.

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by Goody

Ok check this out. The Texas Rangers finished the year at 87-75.

They had a payroll of $68,178,798.

One hundred and thirty three million less than the Yankees payroll.

That's 133 million. No decimals in there.

The difference between the Rangers' and Yankees' payroll is not quite a fair comparison, since the Rangers are not directly competing against the Yankees for a division title. The Rangers are competing against the Angels, Athletics, and Mariners. So it is more appropriate to compare the Rangers' 2009 opening day payroll to those of its divisional rivals.

Angels: $113.7 million
Mariners: $98.9 million
Rangers: $68.6 million
Athletics: $62.3 million

The top team in the division has a payroll 1.82 times larger than that of the lowest payroll in the division. Numerically, it's a $51.4 million difference, equivalent to 15.8 players at the average opening day MLB player salary of $3.24 million.

In the AL in 1956, the highest team payroll was $492,000 for the Yankees; the lowest team payroll was $215,250 for the Senators. Between the teams competing for the AL title (remember, there were no divisons back then), the highest payroll was 2.286 times larger than the smallest payroll. Numerically, the difference was $276,750. That's the equivalent to 18.8 players at the then MLB average player salary of $14,708.

So, the situation in the AL West in 2009 was really not all that different from the situation in the AL as a whole in 1956.

[Vinny P.]

Not only all those points that people brought up, but you also have to consider the success of other sports. The reason why kids are not playing LL as much as they used to, is simply because football and soccer (AYSO, and Pop Warner) have gained tremendously in popularity. Which is actually a GOOD thing. Baseball, afterall, is only 1 sport, just 1 extra-curricular activity. Not to mention other non-sports-related activities kids participate on a mass level these days as well.

One of the biggest factors for the popularity of Pop Warner, high school, and other youth football among kids (and their parents!) is increased safety. The helmets and pads are constantly improving, reducing the potential for injury tremendously. Again, a net positive here.

Plus, these days, there is such a push for kids to be doing multiple sports and activities, and the push for increased education, and time spent on schoolwork/homework.

I remember a thread a while back, where people were lamenting the "old days" where kids would be out in the streets, and parks, playing pickup games of football, baseball, basketball, street hockey, tag, and so forth. I think the paragraph above this one is the biggest reason why kids are not playing pick-up games anymore. That, and combined with video games, and reality TV. Hell, I have a little 6 year old neice and nephew who are twins. My sister just signed them up to play soccer for the first time this year. The very first team they played against was full of a bunch of 8 year-olds. My neice was pushed, and my nephew was tripped, and the refs did nothing, while the other side cheered both times. I heard the father of one of the kids say "That's my boy!!!" after he tripped up my nephew.

Parents are living vicariously through their children, and pushing them to do things they otherwise wouldn't do. This isn't just sport, either. I have a good friend who happens to be a girl, while growing up. Her parents pushed and pushed her daughter to constantly take violin lessons. She is NOT a natural violin player. She's good, but only because her mother started having her take lessons starting at the age of four. But she is by no means, 20 years later, a professional violin player. a couple of hours a day, for 20 years was wasted on giving her these lesson, simply because her mother failed out of Juliard, and regrets it to this day.

I mean, I have no problem with introducing kids to different games and activities. But they should, by no means, be pushed into doing it if they really do not want to.

[Goody]

Originally Posted by Le Grande Orange

So, the situation in the AL West in 2009 was really not all that different from the situation in the AL as a whole in 1956.

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.