Since the Yankees won their 27th World Series Championship earlier this month, the debate about a salary cap has started all over again. My take on the whole thing: if you’re going to put a cap on, you need to establish a floor as well.
If there was any year to make the argument about the Yankees buying a World Championship, this would be the one. The Yankees bought up all three of this year’s top free-agents. They got CC, Teixeira and Burnett, all on their way to victory. Now, I’m not going so far as to say the Yankees didn’t earn it – they won hard fought games all year long – but the argument is definitely there. The Yankees spend way more money on salaries than any other team.
There were nine teams in 2009 with salaries over $100 million. The Mets were the second most at $135 million. The Yankees? Their payroll exceeded $200 million. A $65 million gap just isn’t going to create parity in the long run. Sure, teams at the bottom of the payroll mountain make their runs and win championships, sometimes downing titans like the Yankees in the process. The Marlins for example (last in 2009 payroll at $36.8 million), who rose up and took the crown from the Yanks in 2003.
Winning a World Series is no easy task, like having lightning strike twice. But the Yankees have the funds and the will to buy up all the precious metals they can get their hands on, and they are standing alone in the middle of an electric storm.
If you’re going to try to inhibit teams like the Yankees and Red Sox by capping salaries, you have to also create a floor. Several teams are happy coasting in cheap mediocrity. A cap will drive down the salaries of the best players on the best teams, but a salary floor will force mediocre teams to re-invest in their talent, giving fans the type of quality team they deserve to have.
Filed in: MLB.
Ripken Baseball represents the endeavors of Cal Ripken, Jr. and his brother Bill Ripken since they retired from playing baseball professionally. The Baltimore-based company is on a mission to grow the game of baseball worldwide, the Ripken Way.
Luxury taxes do not solve the problem of a team buying top free agents, as the Yankees proved this year. Give the Yankees credit for spending what they do, and more so, give the credit to the fans who are willing to pay the outrageous ticket prices at Yankee Stadium.
The Yankees buy a lot of stars, but they also have a good business model. A lot of great players (like Jeter) came up through their system.
The way to solve the problem is not to knock down what the Yankees can spend but to bring in more competition…like putting a team in North Jersey or Brooklyn. Unfortunately, the Yankees can put up roadblocks or otherwise cripple them…like our friend Angelos did to the Nationals, if I have my baseball history right…and that is what baseball needs to address. Not likely.
Free agency has destroyed baseball. Billy – your brother Cal stayed with the Orioles, and I imagine you would have as well if a contract had been offered. There is no team loyalty anymore, and the “go to the highest bidder” seems to be the consensus of most players. With today’s outrageous salaries, I have to ask, how much is enough? It is becoming increasingly difficult for the average fan to afford and enjoy a game. To me the huge issue is not that the Yankees bought a championship, but along the way they have left many fans behind who should be who they are playing for in the first place.
Does baseball really need a salary floor, or would it be more feasible to require that $X of revenue sharing be put towards player salaries? It seems like the major issue is that crummy teams with small payrolls sit back and pocket the revenue sharing dollars. Seems to me that teams it would be better to require a team to spend revenue sharing dollars on salaries and a limited amount on certain other improvements (stadium, fan experience) or they have to forfeit that money.
The problem that I see with a revenue floor is that it forces teams to pay (or overpay) for players just to meet that limit, even if the players don’t help turn the team into a contender, and potentially damage a franchise working to rebuild or build a high-quality team organically.
I’m not sure about the need for a salary floor. The average Major League Baseball player’s salary is more than $3 million. Think of it — an AVERAGE player, meaning someone who probably is a halfway-decent fielder, bats around .260 and drives in 50 or 60 runs. That’s the guy making $3 million or more. Now, do I begrudge him that salary? No, I don’t. He’s probably struggled and worked hard to get to the big leagues. He deserves to be well-compensated (although so does my kid’s teacher, who makes about 2 percent of that amount). So I’m not sure I agree with Bill that people on the low end are really losing out here, although I’d certainly be curious to know what dollar amount he has in mind for such a “floor.”
That’s a really interesting idea. I never thought about floors. Is it doable for all of the teams? Would it make any of them go bankrupt if they couldn’t make the floor? I think it’s an intriguing idea and worth some consideration…