Comments on: Salary Cap? No Way. http://fullcountpitch.com/2008/12/30/salary-cap-no-way/ For the Serious Baseball Fan Wed, 21 Jul 2010 14:02:48 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: MLB Baseball Odds http://fullcountpitch.com/2008/12/30/salary-cap-no-way/comment-page-1/#comment-2690 MLB Baseball Odds Fri, 27 Nov 2009 09:37:06 +0000 http://fullcountpitch.com/?p=1286#comment-2690 The salary structure should have been eye candy. Tho8gh there are some artificial salary but they should have some fixed salary. The salary structure should have been eye candy. Tho8gh there are some artificial salary but they should have some fixed salary.

]]> By: mike sutton http://fullcountpitch.com/2008/12/30/salary-cap-no-way/comment-page-1/#comment-2470 mike sutton Sat, 10 Oct 2009 02:46:07 +0000 http://fullcountpitch.com/?p=1286#comment-2470 A salary cap is needed in MLB. I cannot believe it has gone this long, without resolve. It does not take a genius to figure out the sorry fact, that the team with the most money wins the most world series. Do you think for one minute that the Yankees would be in the playoffs every year if they did not buy all of the best players from every team. I dont even know how anyone could in good conscious could call themselves a Yankee fan!!! I understand the mindset that winning takes care of everything, however, we as intelligent citizens need to draw a line somewhere. A salary cap is needed in MLB. I cannot believe it has gone this long, without resolve. It does not take a genius to figure out the sorry fact, that the team with the most money wins the most world series. Do you think for one minute that the Yankees would be in the playoffs every year if they did not buy all of the best players from every team. I dont even know how anyone could in good conscious could call themselves a Yankee fan!!! I understand the mindset that winning takes care of everything, however, we as intelligent citizens need to draw a line somewhere.

]]> By: Joe http://fullcountpitch.com/2008/12/30/salary-cap-no-way/comment-page-1/#comment-1679 Joe Wed, 14 Jan 2009 00:44:05 +0000 http://fullcountpitch.com/?p=1286#comment-1679 as far as a salary floor there already is an artificial salary floor. it is called the minimum salary that a player can earn. Raise the minimum and you raise the floor. as far as a salary floor there already is an artificial salary floor. it is called the minimum salary that a player can earn. Raise the minimum and you raise the floor.

]]> By: Joe http://fullcountpitch.com/2008/12/30/salary-cap-no-way/comment-page-1/#comment-1678 Joe Wed, 14 Jan 2009 00:42:03 +0000 http://fullcountpitch.com/?p=1286#comment-1678 There is a gross misconception here about the salary cap. Specifically no team in MLB receives one cent of that money. •The first $5m is held in reserve, to pay for possible luxury tax refunds. Once it is clear that there are no refunds to be issued, this money is then earmarked for the Industry Growth Fund (IGF). •50% of the remaining money is used to fund player benefits. •25% is used to fund baseball programs in developing countries with no high-school baseball. •25% is put into the Industry Growth Fund (IGF). The money the poor revenue teams get are as follows: A: Revenue Sharing: 1. Net transfer of revenue sharing plan will be the same as the old ($326 million in 2006). Net transfer amounts will continue to grow with revenue and changes in disparity. 2. Marginal tax rates for all recipients are reduced significantly through the use of a new central fund redistribution mechanism. Rates reduced to 31% from 40% (high revenue Clubs) and 48% (low revenue Clubs) under old agreement. 3. All Clubs face the same marginal rate for the first time. 4. Commissioner’s Discretionary Fund will continue at $10 million per year, with a cap of $3 million per Club per year. 5. Provision requiring revenue sharing recipients to spend receipts to improve on-field performance to be retained with modifications simply put the temas with the highest local net revenues give and the teams with the lowest net local revenues get. then the other funds that all teams receive is from the Central Fund which is from MLB's national revenues. Presently this is about 30 mil to 35 mil per team. There is a gross misconception here about the salary cap. Specifically no team in MLB receives one cent of that money.
•The first $5m is held in reserve, to pay for possible luxury tax refunds. Once it is clear that there are no refunds to be issued, this money is then earmarked for the Industry Growth Fund (IGF).
•50% of the remaining money is used to fund player benefits.
•25% is used to fund baseball programs in developing countries with no high-school baseball.
•25% is put into the Industry Growth Fund (IGF).
The money the poor revenue teams get are as follows:
A: Revenue Sharing:
1. Net transfer of revenue sharing plan will be the same as the old ($326 million in 2006). Net transfer amounts will continue to grow with revenue and changes in disparity.
2. Marginal tax rates for all recipients are reduced significantly through the use of a new central fund redistribution mechanism. Rates reduced to 31% from 40% (high revenue Clubs) and 48% (low revenue Clubs) under old agreement.
3. All Clubs face the same marginal rate for the first time.
4. Commissioner’s Discretionary Fund will continue at $10 million per year, with a cap of $3 million per Club per year.
5. Provision requiring revenue sharing recipients to spend receipts to improve on-field performance to be retained with modifications

simply put the temas with the highest local net revenues give and the teams with the lowest net local revenues get.
then the other funds that all teams receive is from the Central Fund which is from MLB’s national revenues. Presently this is about 30 mil to 35 mil per team.

]]> By: Rudy http://fullcountpitch.com/2008/12/30/salary-cap-no-way/comment-page-1/#comment-1637 Rudy Wed, 31 Dec 2008 21:04:31 +0000 http://fullcountpitch.com/?p=1286#comment-1637 You can't mention the term salary cap without talking about revenue sharing. The NFL agrees to share a lot of it's revenue with each team getting an equal piece of the pie. That's impossible to do now in baseball. Each team is worth so much money and there is a huge disparity from the best to the worst. To institute a radically new revenue sharing agreement would drastically reduce the value of the Yankees and I would think MLB would have to re-imburse them if that were to happen. It's simply impossible to do this now even if you wanted to. Second, I agree with a salary floor. I think there should be minimum spending as some teams make MLB look like a joke. Quite frankly, I like a floor of at least $40 million and a luxury tax on the big spenders the way it is. If you can't afford to spend $40 million, then MLB should contract the team. Like you said, when the Yankees were winning titles, it was with homegrown talent and not overpaid free agents. Third, no matter what anyone says, the more money you can spend, the better you will be. It may not guarantee you championships and well managed, lower payroll teams like the Twins can still succeed but there is really no argument that says payroll doesn't matter. It does. Drafting well and developing talent is still key but having money is a positive nobody can deny. Let me just say that I like the cap in football. I think it works well to establish competitive balance. However, parity isn't necessarily a good thing. I think the quality of NFL football has fallen. Furthermore, people do love dynasties. I like watching the big teams, love 'em or hate em, which is why I don't care there is no cap in baseball. I like seeing the Yankees and the Red Sox in the playoffs (almost) every year. So do most people. People love to theoretically root for the underdog but they don't put their money where their mouth is. Yeah!! Go Tampa Bay! Go Philly! I just won't bother to watch which is why the ratings sucked. Dynasties are good for sports and entertainment - parity is not in some cases. Maybe we should celebrate not having a cap and not having a truly even playing field. You can’t mention the term salary cap without talking about revenue sharing. The NFL agrees to share a lot of it’s revenue with each team getting an equal piece of the pie. That’s impossible to do now in baseball. Each team is worth so much money and there is a huge disparity from the best to the worst. To institute a radically new revenue sharing agreement would drastically reduce the value of the Yankees and I would think MLB would have to re-imburse them if that were to happen. It’s simply impossible to do this now even if you wanted to.

Second, I agree with a salary floor. I think there should be minimum spending as some teams make MLB look like a joke. Quite frankly, I like a floor of at least $40 million and a luxury tax on the big spenders the way it is. If you can’t afford to spend $40 million, then MLB should contract the team. Like you said, when the Yankees were winning titles, it was with homegrown talent and not overpaid free agents.

Third, no matter what anyone says, the more money you can spend, the better you will be. It may not guarantee you championships and well managed, lower payroll teams like the Twins can still succeed but there is really no argument that says payroll doesn’t matter. It does. Drafting well and developing talent is still key but having money is a positive nobody can deny.

Let me just say that I like the cap in football. I think it works well to establish competitive balance. However, parity isn’t necessarily a good thing. I think the quality of NFL football has fallen. Furthermore, people do love dynasties. I like watching the big teams, love ‘em or hate em, which is why I don’t care there is no cap in baseball. I like seeing the Yankees and the Red Sox in the playoffs (almost) every year. So do most people. People love to theoretically root for the underdog but they don’t put their money where their mouth is. Yeah!! Go Tampa Bay! Go Philly! I just won’t bother to watch which is why the ratings sucked. Dynasties are good for sports and entertainment – parity is not in some cases. Maybe we should celebrate not having a cap and not having a truly even playing field.

]]> By: Gary Sr http://fullcountpitch.com/2008/12/30/salary-cap-no-way/comment-page-1/#comment-1635 Gary Sr Tue, 30 Dec 2008 21:35:35 +0000 http://fullcountpitch.com/?p=1286#comment-1635 I have two major issues with a salary cap. First where will all the revenue above the salary cap figure, generated by teams go? With cable deals, merchandise sales and stadium sell outs, the owners are going to be pocketing most of the money generated by the talents of their players. Second, if a cap is imposed, then a basement would have to be imposed as well, so the small market teams are forced to spend money and not hoard it the way they do now with the luxury tax money they receive from the big market teams. I wonder why a salary cap isn't mentioned when a "big market" law firm generating millions in revenue consistently outbids smaller firms for the services of the #1 Harvard Law School graduate? I have two major issues with a salary cap. First where will all the revenue above the salary cap figure, generated by teams go? With cable deals, merchandise sales and stadium sell outs, the owners are going to be pocketing most of the money generated by the talents of their players.
Second, if a cap is imposed, then a basement would have to be imposed as well, so the small market teams are forced to spend money and not hoard it the way they do now with the luxury tax money they receive from the big market teams.
I wonder why a salary cap isn’t mentioned when a “big market” law firm generating millions in revenue consistently outbids smaller firms for the services of the #1 Harvard Law School graduate?

]]> By: cpass http://fullcountpitch.com/2008/12/30/salary-cap-no-way/comment-page-1/#comment-1634 cpass Tue, 30 Dec 2008 16:37:27 +0000 http://fullcountpitch.com/?p=1286#comment-1634 Your comment that "poor management has stunted the growth of the Royals, Orioles, and Nationals. They simply do not draft well nor do they sign the proper players during free agency" presupposes that those "proper players" you think they should be signing would actually join those teams. The Nats made the highest offer for Mark Teixeira, but where did Tex sign? The Royals made a substantial run at Torii Hunter in 2007, but he selected the Angels instead. That's just two examples. I won't deny that there has been some mismanagement involved with those teams, but it doesn't tell the whole story. Your comment that “poor management has stunted the growth of the Royals, Orioles, and Nationals. They simply do not draft well nor do they sign the proper players during free agency” presupposes that those “proper players” you think they should be signing would actually join those teams. The Nats made the highest offer for Mark Teixeira, but where did Tex sign? The Royals made a substantial run at Torii Hunter in 2007, but he selected the Angels instead. That’s just two examples. I won’t deny that there has been some mismanagement involved with those teams, but it doesn’t tell the whole story.

]]>