Is baseball broken?

[calsnowskier]

Not sure you'd need more than 4 tiers:

Tier 1. Players the team drafted and developed: no or relatively small cap hit (10%-20%).

Tier 2. Players the team traded for: 50% cap hit.

Tier 3. Relatively unknown/no star level players that the team signed and developed. 75% cap hit I can't remember if he was traded for or was an FA, but someone like Max Muncy or Justin Turner with the Dodgers.

Tier 4. Star level FA's: 100% cap hit. Guys like Ohtani.

Another question would be, how do you treat international FA's? Guys like Yamamoto and Sasaki...stars in the Japanese league but have zero MLB experience? Maybe that would be the 5th tier?

I think any player who makes their MLB debut with a team would qualify as a Tier 1 player. Further, I would allow for a cushion here as well. Something like 150 PAs and/or 50 IP. Basically, a player is a tier 1 until they lose their rookie status. This will allow for journeymen level players to get multiple shots without limiting their future $$ making potential.

I am also of the opinion that the international FA market (Sasaki more so, not so much Yamamoto or Nomo or Ohtani, or…) should be placed into the June Draft. If a player is an amateur, they go in the draft. Period.

Or a total brainstorm idea…

Treat the minors like the G League or amateur hockey where players can play professionally, but they can play on unaffiliated teams. MLB teams can then use their amateur draft capital to pick from this pool as well. This may require that teams are only allowed to own the rights to X number of non-40 players. All other players play in these “M Leagues” as paid professionals without losing their amateur status.

 

[wilwhite]

Since I used to really love baseball and haven’t even watched for the past several years, yes.

I think it’s a dying sport no matter what. Average age of a fan is late 50s. It won’t survive as a major league to the next century.

Too bad. It’s a beautiful sport. I’ll still happily stop and watch a high school game if I happen by, even though I hate the clink of the bat.

 

[Stakesarehigh]

Obviously this has been discussed in multiple threads, just wanted to have a dedicated thread

I think there's arguments both ways

Pro: the Dodgers (and Mets and a few others) have obviously ramped up this discussion lately. There have always been big spenders and small market cheap teams but there have been periods where it was more glaring and this is one of those. Yes occasionally a small spender will sneak into the playoffs and even more rarely they win a title. But let's face it unless you are a fan of the 5-6 teams that get all the free agents you're probably pretty disgusted by the situation. Deferred contracts at least should not be allowed, they just add fuel to the fire.

Con: while TV ratings are declining (some of that is people moving from using TV to watch to the internet), or at least far behind football and basketball, overall revenues keep growing, TV contracts keep growing, salaries keep growing, franchise values keep growing. Until that all stops it's hard to argue the sport is "broken" and the owners and players have very little incentive to change it. Players are not fans, they don't care about competitive balance.

All of this

 

[msgkings322]

Skill and a properly structured organization is part of the competitive environment that SHOULD separate the haves and the have nots. As much as it pains my soul to say this, the doggies are an incredibly well run organization. And they have been for generations (with a short bad period around McCort).

But they are able to cash in on advantages that other teams simply do not have access to, and THAT is the concerning part to me. Outbidding other teams is frustrating, but any team can do that (within reason). But not every team can offer elbow rubbing with Hollywood superstars while offering beautiful homes and perfect weather and global marketing opportunities.

I think we found who set the fires in LA...

 

[calsnowskier]

I think we found who set the fires in LA...

Hush…

I still have those photos, and I am not scared of using them…

 

[shopson67]

American sports just isn’t a thing in Miami. I lived in Miami in the mid-‘90s. The Dolphins owned the market, but that was just an NFL thing. The Panthers, Heat and Marlins had no base fanbase and were trying to convert Yankee, Ranger and Knick fans (the few that existed). Sure today is 30 years later, but Miami was, is, and will be for the foreseeable future, “Manhattan South”.

Not Cuba North?

A lot of Florida is transplants from the north, not sure about Miami though?

 

[shopson67]

If a team has a cap-incentive to keep their own players, then that would ALSO create a disincentive for teams to acquire other team’s players. And it rewards teams for drafting well.

Treating a FA equal to a home grown player is the core of the problem, imho.

...and condemn rebuilds to take far longer

 

[calsnowskier]

...and condemn rebuilds to take far longer

Nope. Reward teams for DRAFTING well. FA should be used to fill a critical hole or accent the homegrown core. Not BE the core. If a team can’t draft well, fuck them.

 

[shopson67]

Nope. Reward teams for DRAFTING well. FA should be used to fill a critical hole or accent the homegrown core. Not BE the core. If a team can’t draft well, fuck them.

Don't see it happening. Far more complicated than it needs to be. I don't see any chance of the league going from no salary cap to a convoluted one directly.

 

[calsnowskier]

Don't see it happening. Far more complicated than it needs to be. I don't see any chance of the league going from no salary cap to a convoluted one directly.

I never claimed it had a snowballs chance. But it addresses many concerns. It doesn’t force teams to sell off their own assets due to cap concerns, it handcuffs teams from buying championships, but it still allows for flexibility in roster management.

But it puts restraints on owners doing what they want and places forces to retard salaries of the economy tier stud players (non-face-of-the-franchise, but still all star level). I doubt this woukd get support by either the owners or the players. But it would address many fans’ concerns.

 

[shopson67]

Nobody is forced to sell off assets due to cap concerns now. They sell off assets either out of being cheapskates or to turn those assets into different assets. I don't see the point in dissuading trades and free agency. Just get ownership that wants more out of their franchise than ROI.

 

[calsnowskier]

Nobody is forced to sell off assets due to cap concerns now. They sell off assets either out of being cheapskates or to turn those assets into different assets. I don't see the point in dissuading trades and free agency. Just get ownership that wants more out of their franchise than ROI.

Of course. But if you introduce a more rigorous cap system, then you need an escape valve to be able to keep your own players. You can’t look at one single aspect of a larger proposal and attack it because it wouldn’t make sense as a stand-alone rule.

 

[shopson67]

Of course. But if you introduce a more rigorous cap system, then you need an escape valve to be able to keep your own players. You can’t look at one single aspect of a larger proposal and attack it because it wouldn’t make sense as a stand-alone rule.

I can and did lol. I think simply borrowing what works from the NBA plan makes sense (a little lighter on the 1st and 2nd apron penalties though). I don't see any need to differentiate between players due to who drafted them.

 

[Shanemansj13]

All the hand-wringing about the Dodgers' spending this offseason is silly. It's just Sasaki jealousy. He's not even making much, as a posting free agent he only gets a standard rookie contract with the only variable being the signing bonus (which comes out of the team's international money). Dodgers made trades to be able to give him a $6.5M signing bonus, others offered more. His signing isn't about money, just the lure of the franchise currently and playing with other Japanese players.

We all know the complaining isn't about Tanner Scott and Kirby Yates. Before these moves, the Dodgers weren't even the top payroll (Phillies) and not far ahead of the Yankees and Mets. Approximately half the league is spending $150M+, which probably should be the floor (and is approximately the average as well). $150M being the average means there are teams just as problematic that aren't spending any money. Miami being at $43M should be relegatable.

Jealous of a guy on a rookie contract chose the richest team in baseball? It was pretty much a conclusion before he picked so I’m not sure how that is possible. Lower market teams basically had 0% chance of landing him.

All the talk about lower market teams not spending bc they CHOOSE not to…sure to an extent but like I said still a huge difference.

For example LA’s revenue was triple of Oakland’s revenue in 2023. The valuation of their franchise about 5 times the amount. All owners are rich but it helps being absolutely filthy rich in a HUGE market where FA’s want to play.
What if lower market teams want to spend but they have little chance to acquire FA’s without VASTLY overpaying? Vastly overpaying does not help them, it hurts them especially since they can’t afford it like a filthy rich owner in a huge market.
Installing a floor is obvious but installing some sort of ceiling where teams get taxed and then a hard cap could definitely even things out.
Some lower market teams can compete now but it’s bc they have to scout at an extremely high level, develop and make great trades with return like Cleveland or Tampa Bay but there are very few franchises that can couple all these things and do it consistently. They only have one route while some of these filthy rich owners can just spend, spend and spend with no drawbacks other than eating a huge contract if it doesn’t workout. Small market teams cannot do this. The Dodgers literally bought their entire core. This wasn’t a case like the 90’s Yankees where they actually drafted and developed. Mets have been trying to do the same.

The main point. It kills the sport. Why is this the only sport where there are no repercussions for making bad draft choices, not good developing or scouting, etc.

 

[calsnowskier]

Jealous of a guy on a rookie contract chose the richest team in baseball? It was pretty much a conclusion before he picked so I’m not sure how that is possible. Lower market teams basically had 0% chance of landing him.

All the talk about lower market teams not spending bc they CHOOSE not to…sure to an extent but like I said still a huge difference.

For example LA’s revenue was triple of Oakland’s revenue in 2023. The valuation of their franchise about 5 times the amount. All owners are rich but it helps being absolutely filthy rich in a HUGE market where FA’s want to play.
What if lower market teams want to spend but they have little chance to acquire FA’s without VASTLY overpaying? Vastly overpaying does not help them, it hurts them especially since they can’t afford it like a filthy rich owner in a huge market.
Installing a floor is obvious but installing some sort of ceiling where teams get taxed and then a hard cap could definitely even things out.
Some lower market teams can compete now but it’s bc they have to scout at an extremely high level, develop and make great trades with return like Cleveland or Tampa Bay but there are very few franchises that can couple all these things and do it consistently. They only have one route while some of these filthy rich owners can just spend, spend and spend with no drawbacks other than eating a huge contract if it doesn’t workout. Small market teams cannot do this. The Dodgers literally bought their entire core. This wasn’t a case like the 90’s Yankees where they actually drafted and developed. Mets have been trying to do the same.

It kills the sport. Why is this the only sport where there are no repercussions for making bad draft choices, not good developing or scouting, etc.

The As’ revenue was a direct result of them not giving the fans any reason to show up.

If you don’t build it, they won’t come.


And the As owner is actually one of if not the richest owner in the MLB.

 

[shopson67]

Jealous of a guy on a rookie contract chose the richest team in baseball? It was pretty much a conclusion before he picked so I’m not sure how that is possible. Lower market teams basically had 0% chance of landing him.

All the talk about lower market teams not spending bc they CHOOSE not to…sure to an extent but like I said still a huge difference.

For example LA’s revenue was triple of Oakland’s revenue in 2023. The valuation of their franchise about 5 times the amount. All owners are rich but it helps being absolutely filthy rich in a HUGE market where FA’s want to play.
What if lower market teams want to spend but they have little chance to acquire FA’s without VASTLY overpaying? Vastly overpaying does not help them, it hurts them especially since they can’t afford it like a filthy rich owner in a huge market.
Installing a floor is obvious but installing some sort of ceiling where teams get taxed and then a hard cap could definitely even things out.
Some lower market teams can compete now but it’s bc they have to scout at an extremely high level, develop and make great trades with return like Cleveland or Tampa Bay but there are very few franchises that can couple all these things and do it consistently. They only have one route while some of these filthy rich owners can just spend, spend and spend with no drawbacks other than eating a huge contract if it doesn’t workout. Small market teams cannot do this. The Dodgers literally bought their entire core. This wasn’t a case like the 90’s Yankees where they actually drafted and developed. Mets have been trying to do the same.

The main point. It kills the sport. Why is this the only sport where there are no repercussions for making bad draft choices, not good developing or scouting, etc.

The problem is, the complaints this season are about players that are easily affordable by anyone. Complaining about payroll when the key prize is paid like a minor leaguer with a decent signing bonus is moving the goal posts.

The A's are their own worst enemy. The Oakland/SF metro area is NOT a small market. However, that franchise has nickel/dimed their way through the last 20 years, which isn't going to draw fans to the ballpark or have them buy merch. They refuse to upgrade their stadium, thus the potential move to Vegas.

For all the supposed league destroying the Dodgers are doing, they have two championships in the past 36 years. How can anyone else compete with that, lol?

 

[fknhippie]

Looking at the local product, I'd have to say its broken.

 

[calsnowskier]

The problem is, the complaints this season are about players that are easily affordable by anyone. Complaining about payroll when the key prize is paid like a minor leaguer with a decent signing bonus is moving the goal posts.

The A's are their own worst enemy. The Oakland/SF metro area is NOT a small market. However, that franchise has nickel/dimed their way through the last 20 years, which isn't going to draw fans to the ballpark or have them buy merch. They refuse to upgrade their stadium, thus the potential move to Vegas.

For all the supposed league destroying the Dodgers are doing, they have two championships in the past 36 years. How can anyone else compete with that, lol?

2 legit banners since the mid-70s.

 

[shopson67]

2 legit banners since the mid-70s.

LOL at legit. All are legit.

 

[calsnowskier]

LOL at legit. All are legit.

81 legit?

20 legit?

Whatever let’s you sleep at night.