2026 MLB Thread

[The Sultan]

I get what you're saying in both of your posts, but it's not about swaying you or anyone else.

The players simply aren't gonna accept a salary cap IMHO. They will let ballparks go dark for multiple seasons rather than accept a salary cap. The owners will cave first.

A salary cap harms those at the very top end. A cap combined with a floor is a better deal than losing multiple seasons during their prime earning years for most of the players. 

Edit to add that if the owners were willing to give up a year or two of control in return for a cap/floor, that also benefits the middle class.

[MU82]

A salary cap harms those at the very top end. A cap combined with a floor is a better deal than losing multiple seasons during their prime earning years for most of the players. 

Edit to add that if the owners were willing to give up a year or two of control in return for a cap/floor, that also benefits the middle class.

I just don't see the players giving in to a salary cap, regardless of how the owners try to sweeten it. But as TAMU said, we'll see.

[Pakuni]

I don't know that the players would never accept a cap under any circumstances. But I can't see any way they accept a cap that requires teams to reduce payroll, some by 20% or more.

[WhiteTrash]

I don't know that the players would never accept a cap under any circumstances. But I can't see any way they accept a cap that requires teams to reduce payroll, some by 20% or more.

The deal gives more money to the players.

[Pakuni]

The deal gives more money to the players.

So would the MLBPA proposal. And it doesn't matter. The players won't accept a deal that forces teams to significantly reduce payroll next year.

[WhiteTrash]

So would the MLBPA proposal. And it doesn't matter. The players won't accept a deal that forces teams to significantly reduce payroll next year

Then it would appear that they will end up extending the current deal. The players get the exclusion of the hard cap and the owners will save money.

 

[MU82]

Then it would appear that they will end up extending the current deal. The players get the exclusion of the hard cap and the owners will save money.

The players would gladly accept a renewal of status quo. The owners absolutely will not - or at least that's what they've been suggesting. They seem willing to blow up next season in pursuit of a plan to save them from themselves.

[WhiteTrash]

The players would gladly accept a renewal of status quo. The owners absolutely will not - or at least that's what they've been suggesting. They seem willing to blow up next season in pursuit of a plan to save them from themselves.

Honest question. With a guarantee of higher payroll expenses, how are the players saving the owners from themselves?

I feel like I'm missing part of the equation. The owners have been disciplined in spending for a long time. Clearly their offer is not cost cutting.

[Pakuni]

Then it would appear that they will end up extending the current deal. The players get the exclusion of the hard cap and the owners will save money.

 

"The owners will save money without a salary cap" is the wildest take yet.

[WhiteTrash]

"The owners will save money without a salary cap" is the wildest take yet.

DO NOT take my word for it. Go read any article on this.

[Pakuni]

DO NOT take my word for it. Go read any article on this.

You're making assumptions.
You're also ignoring calculations of player benefits and the addition of an escrow system (ask NBA players how that can turn out).

[WhiteTrash]

You're making assumptions.
You're also ignoring calculations of player benefits and the addition of an escrow system (ask NBA players how that can turn out).

I'm not here to negotiate the CBA. My only interest is avoiding a work stoppage. IMO, the owners' opening offer was fair and something the MLBPA possibly can negotiate to acceptable terms. And as a fan, if salary floors/caps don't contribute to completive balance, then IMO leave everything the same. MLB has already fallen to 3rd in revenue and I don't think the CBA is going to help them catch the NBA much less NFL.
 

 

[tower912]

Detroit was 18-17.  4-21 since. 

[WhiteTrash]

Detroit was 18-17.  4-21 since. 

Brutal. It's the offense, right?

[tower912]

Offense.  Not hitting for average or power. Relief pitching.


With all of the injuries, you root for the rest to adopt the next man up mentality.   Sadly, the next man up also strikes out.

[MU82]

Honest question. With a guarantee of higher payroll expenses, how are the players saving the owners from themselves?

I feel like I'm missing part of the equation. The owners have been disciplined in spending for a long time. Clearly their offer is not cost cutting.

There are a half-dozen(ish) owners willing and able to spend huge, primarily because their local broadcast deals give them tons more money than the others have (though they enjoy other advantages, too).

The owners who are unwilling and/or unable to spend like that definitely do not think the Richie Riches "have been disciplined." They see the contracts given to the likes of Tucker and Soto and Guerrero as extremely UNdisciplined, and horrible for the game.

The Relatively Poors also haven't been able to convince the Riches to share their riches. So they insist they need the players to save them in the form of a salary cap. They also want a cap because they are convinced it would drive up the value of MLB franchises (and they're probably right about that).

Anyhoo, my man, this conversation is fun ... but for the umpteenth tine, a salary cap ain't happening.

[WhiteTrash]

Anyhoo, my man, this conversation is fun ... but for the umpteenth tine, a salary cap ain't happening.

Then I hope the owners drop the request and keep playing. They can plow their savings into AI stock and everyone can be happy.

[Jockey]

Miz is clearly the NL Pitcher of the month. IMO, he has almost no chance to win.

[Jockey]

The owners have been disciplined in spending for a long time. Clearly their offer is not cost cutting.

That is your craziest take yet. The owners lack of discipline is why they want a cap.

[Pakuni]

That is your craziest take yet. The owners lack of discipline is why they want a cap.

Owners want a hard cap because it:

1. Artificially depresses wages.
2. Greatly reduces their financial exposure (Down year for revenues? Just take some of the players' money from escrow).
3. Provides cost certainty, which enhances franchise values.
4. Provides the illusion of competitive balance.




67. Actually creates competitive balance.

[WhiteTrash]

That is your craziest take yet. The owners lack of discipline is why they want a cap.

Then why are they offering a raise? There is zero proof for your crazy take. MLB payrolls are right in line with the NFL and NBA without a cap.

I'm talking about MLB as a whole, so spare me your Dodgers and Mets examples. The CBA covers all teams and players.

[WhiteTrash]

Owners want a hard cap because it:

1. Artificially depresses wages.
2. Greatly reduces their financial exposure (Down year for revenues? Just take some of the players' money from escrow).
3. Provides cost certainty, which enhances franchise values.
4. Provides the illusion of competitive balance.




67. Actually creates competitive balance.

The idiot NFL and NBA players along with their flunky attorneys fell for it.

Why the NFLPA doesn't hire Scoopers to negotiate is a mystery. Oh, wait, I know, they're dumb jocks.

[Pakuni]

Then why are they offering a raise? There is zero proof for your crazy take. MLB payrolls are right in line with the NFL and NBA without a cap.

MLB payrolls are right in line with NFL and NBA, whose annual revenues are, respectively, $9 billion and $2 billion higher?
Huh.

[WhiteTrash]

MLB payrolls are right in line with NFL and NBA, whose annual revenues are, respectively, $9 billion and $2 billion higher?
Huh.

By percent of revenue, yes they are.

[MU82]

The idiot NFL and NBA players along with their flunky attorneys fell for it.

Why the NFLPA doesn't hire Scoopers to negotiate is a mystery. Oh, wait, I know, they're dumb jocks.

The NFLPA was infamously poorly run and its leadership was famously clubby with ownership. And the players themselves lacked the resolve to hold out long enough. They actually accepted (and still play by a system) in which contracts aren't even guaranteed for the vast majority of players. Had the NFLPA been run by the MLBPA's leaders, the players would be much better off.

The NBA was in serious financial distress, with more than half the teams losing money. Unlike MLB, the NBA needed a salary cap to survive.

So you're comparing apples, kumquats and trombones.