Photo

BaltimoreBaseball.com: Orioles owner David Rubenstein favors a salary cap


  • Please log in to reply
59 replies to this topic

#1 BSLRoseKatz

BSLRoseKatz

    BSL Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,413 posts
  • LocationColumbia, MD

Posted 24 January 2025 - 09:56 AM

https://www.baltimor...ors-salary-cap/

 

Pretty decent amount of interesting quotes in here



#2 weird-O

weird-O

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,537 posts
  • LocationI'm here from downtown, I'm here from Mitch and Murray.

Posted 24 January 2025 - 10:13 AM

It's interesting that he thinks MLB will eventually have a salary cap. I suppose they're moving in that direction, but it's at a glacial pace.


Good news! I saw a dog today.


#3 mdrunning

mdrunning

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,267 posts

Posted 24 January 2025 - 10:23 AM

Good luck getting the players to agree to it.



#4 Ravens2006

Ravens2006

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,812 posts

Posted 24 January 2025 - 10:30 AM

I assume getting to a salary cap in baseball will require a massive labor stoppage unlike maybe any we've ever seen.  Unless the cap is set well above even current max roster salaries with provisions guaranteeing that it basically never becomes a limiter, regardless of inflation.

 

The owners would have to stay in formation no matter what, and the players would eventually cave to some degree.

 

I've always been of the mindset that the owners really have the ultimate control, just depends on how much they are willing to sacrifice in the short term for the long term.  And if the players don't like it, and they stick together en masse, they can start their own "player's league" where they own stakes in the teams and maximize profits that they keep almost all of (aside from some player personnel type overhead roles).

 

Reality is, I think, none of that will ever actually happen.  MLB will continue rolling down the path it's been on for many decades ahead...



#5 mdrunning

mdrunning

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,267 posts

Posted 24 January 2025 - 10:37 AM

The owners will never stay in formation during a protracted work stoppage because they don't have an equal stake in the fight. The players do. The smaller market teams might see a labor fight as the only way to get their franchises on equal economic footing, but the larger markets are always more pragmatic. They know they can thrive no matter what kind of compensation system is in place, and the only thing that could truly hurt them would be no games being played.



#6 BSLSteveBirrer

BSLSteveBirrer

    Soccer Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,976 posts
  • LocationMS and ID

Posted 24 January 2025 - 10:56 AM

Well I said many many years ago that baseball was headed down of path that it couldn't sustain itself. Without a cap and some legit shot at parity baseball was going to die a slow death.

 

Unfortunately I was wrong. Their doesn't seem to be any impetus toward a reasonable parity at all. The gap is getting huge and I guess nobody cares. The lower market teams win just often enough to keep their fans happy. Shoot the O's are projected to win what? I looked at 3 different sites and they are projected between 86 (that site has them missing the playoffs) and 91. The worst of those three sites had the Dodgers at 98 wins. So the Dodgers are projected around 10-15 wins better than the O's. And yes the O's could still win the WS.

 

But what happens in 3 years from now? Its not unlikely that the O's projections will drop a bunch when Henderson and Rutschman are gone. But where will the Dodgers be? I'd bet they'd still be over 95.  The owners still make a bunch of money. The players are getting gross dollars for playing a game. And there's isn't anything fans can do about it short of just not watching baseball anymore. And thats just not too likely for most, me for sure.



#7 BSLMikeLowe

BSLMikeLowe

    CFB Analyst

  • Moderators
  • 20,898 posts
  • LocationPortland, Oregon

Posted 24 January 2025 - 11:03 AM

I’ve flown from Tokyo to Los Angeles. That was a long ass flight. Not something I’d do just to catch a weekend baseball series.



#8 mdrunning

mdrunning

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,267 posts

Posted 24 January 2025 - 11:15 AM

Well I said many many years ago that baseball was headed down of path that it couldn't sustain itself. Without a cap and some legit shot at parity baseball was going to die a slow death.

 

Unfortunately I was wrong. Their doesn't seem to be any impetus toward a reasonable parity at all. The gap is getting huge and I guess nobody cares. The lower market teams win just often enough to keep their fans happy. Shoot the O's are projected to win what? I looked at 3 different sites and they are projected between 86 (that site has them missing the playoffs) and 91. The worst of those three sites had the Dodgers at 98 wins. So the Dodgers are projected around 10-15 wins better than the O's. And yes the O's could still win the WS.

 

But what happens in 3 years from now? Its not unlikely that the O's projections will drop a bunch when Henderson and Rutschman are gone. But where will the Dodgers be? I'd bet they'd still be over 95.  The owners still make a bunch of money. The players are getting gross dollars for playing a game. And there's isn't anything fans can do about it short of just not watching baseball anymore. And thats just not too likely for most, me for sure.

A cap isn't the only remedy, however. Without a more comprehensive system of revenue sharing (like the NFL), nothing will really change. If MLB could eventually nationalize the broadcast rights for all of its teams in the coming years, that would be a huge step toward getting all of its teams on more equal footing.

 

The biggest markets, however, may be far less willing to split local media rights evenly. Without them, any package would be far less appealing to potential broadcasters. There's still a lot of heavy lifting to be done in this regard. Don't hold your breath.



#9 Ravens2006

Ravens2006

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,812 posts

Posted 24 January 2025 - 11:27 AM

Rehashing a long-held peeve of mine... Rubenstein says this:  "...We don’t have as much wealth in Baltimore, so we wouldn’t do something like the Yankees or Mets have done or the Dodgers, but we can do some things that are good, and I think we’ll see a lot of improvements that will take about two more years to get done..."

 

Yes, I get that "BALTIMORE" is not New York. Not in terms of population or wealth inside city limits. But what constantly gets glossed over is the fact that Baltimore for 30-or-whatever years basically controlled the DC market.  And actually all territory down to like the Carolinas, when it came to baseball "market".  It still has significant financial stake in the market, despite the presence of the Nationals. If you look at the annual list of top 50 / top 100 median household income by COUNTY in the U.S. is HEAVY on Maryland and Virginia.  There is a TON of money in the area that the Orioles still have a lion's share of control over, and if marketed cleverly as "Your NL team is DC and your AL team is BAL" over time could continue profiting greatly from a domain that extends WELL beyond "Baltimore".  3 of the top 5 richest (by household) counties in the country are northern VA.  Howard County is 6th.  

 

10 of the top 100 are in Maryland.  18 of the top 100 are in Virginia.  That's 28% of the top 100 wealthiest population areas, in the entire U.S., that fall in the domain that the Orioles can directly or indirectly profit from.  Practically every major tech company that's popped up in the last 30 years has a HQ or large office in the region.  They could have / should have been profiting from this giant goldmine for decades and decades, be it traditional merchandise sales and cable TV revenues, advertising and marketing partnerships, etc.  Though I know the Angelos family did very well and Johnny raked in many many generations of wealth at the end.

 

Put Baltimore in the middle of Montana, and I'll buy more in to the market size / revenue potential storyline.  But look at is as the lone AL franchise between New York and Tampa, located in the nations 3rd largest megamarket and among if not THE richest per capita megamarket in the country... and the excuses used for so long don't carry all the weight they pretended to.


  • BSLChrisStoner, weird-O and BSLRoseKatz like this

#10 Slidemaster

Slidemaster

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,531 posts

Posted 24 January 2025 - 11:55 AM

I don't even know how they would implement a salary cap.

What does a team do with existing contracts if they are over the cap number already?

Do you give like a 10 year warning before it goes into effect?

#11 BSLSteveBirrer

BSLSteveBirrer

    Soccer Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,976 posts
  • LocationMS and ID

Posted 24 January 2025 - 12:04 PM

I don't even know how they would implement a salary cap.

What does a team do with existing contracts if they are over the cap number already?

Do you give like a 10 year warning before it goes into effect?

I am sure it wouldn't be that hard to figure out a grandfather clause. But won't matter cause they ain't gonna do it.



#12 weird-O

weird-O

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,537 posts
  • LocationI'm here from downtown, I'm here from Mitch and Murray.

Posted 24 January 2025 - 12:14 PM

I hate any talk about small vs big market. If you can afford to spend $1.725 to buy a team, you should certainly be able to afford to field a team that can compete. It's not the Haves vs the Have nots. It's the Want tos vs the Don't want tos. Yes, some teams can afford more than others, but they can all afford to compete.

 

To Ravens2006's point, the Angelos family squandered the opportunity to maximize their territory. The old adage that you have to spend money to make money is true. The Angelos group just had no interest in spending the money to make the mid-atlantic region, specifically the Carolinas, Orioles Country. 


  • BSLRoseKatz likes this

Good news! I saw a dog today.


#13 TwentyThirtyFive

TwentyThirtyFive

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 30,692 posts

Posted 24 January 2025 - 12:36 PM

Not really. Ill say it again, the mega market teams get 90% of the FAs they really covet. When you throw in the secondary big market teams like the Phillies, Red Sox, Cubs when they all chose to invest and any other team trying to compete for elite FAs is just up crap creek. You can compete if you have a core in place and can invest in guys in the 2nd or 3rd tier of FAs which can still raise the payroll quite a bit. Again, look at the Astros who have had a higher end payroll but have never given out a FA deal over 100 mil. Having that internal core is crucial though. Most of these teams have no shot of buildig a winning team that isnt significantly homegrown. I wish there was a way for more teams to lock up more of their homegrown talent. It has gotten a bit better recently but still could improve. Obviously, having a hard cap plays a role but look at how ogten all NFL teams are able to retain their top players that they draft.



#14 BSLRoseKatz

BSLRoseKatz

    BSL Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,413 posts
  • LocationColumbia, MD

Posted 24 January 2025 - 12:48 PM

Obviously it's not apples to apples but the NBA having a salary cap that didn't stop the team with Lebron from making the NBA Finals eight times in a row and there's been what, 2 AFC title games since 2001 that didn't include Brady or Mahomes? 



#15 weird-O

weird-O

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,537 posts
  • LocationI'm here from downtown, I'm here from Mitch and Murray.

Posted 24 January 2025 - 01:08 PM

Not really. Ill say it again, the mega market teams get 90% of the FAs they really covet. When you throw in the secondary big market teams like the Phillies, Red Sox, Cubs when they all chose to invest and any other team trying to compete for elite FAs is just up crap creek. You can compete if you have a core in place and can invest in guys in the 2nd or 3rd tier of FAs which can still raise the payroll quite a bit. Again, look at the Astros who have had a higher end payroll but have never given out a FA deal over 100 mil. Having that internal core is crucial though. Most of these teams have no shot of buildig a winning team that isnt significantly homegrown. I wish there was a way for more teams to lock up more of their homegrown talent. It has gotten a bit better recently but still could improve. Obviously, having a hard cap plays a role but look at how ogten all NFL teams are able to retain their top players that they draft.

The Nationals are a fantastic example to dispel your hypothesis. They receive the same media revenue as the O's. They're in the same market as the O's. They own a smaller percentage of MASN than the O's. Their stadium has a lesser seating capacity. Yet they have consistently outspent and outperformed the O's. Sometimes by a great margin, all while competing in an equally wealthy and competitive division as the O's. And they had a parade 5 years ago.   


Good news! I saw a dog today.


#16 TwentyThirtyFive

TwentyThirtyFive

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 30,692 posts

Posted 24 January 2025 - 01:19 PM

They drafted and developed their core. Things have also changed in the last 10-15 years. LA and the Mets in particular have just gone nuclear. I dont think Scherzer would be signing with Was in todays market unless one of the super elites didnt want him. Theyve also slashed payroll over the last 3 or 4 years. I expect Hou to do the same at some point despite being a top dog for the longest time. Hell, Philly had slashed payroll a good bit in the mid 2010s. Ive said numerous times now I think the Os can be the Astros or the Nats if you want to use that example. Build up to having a  top 10 payroll for a  4-5 year stretch. But you have to expect it to end at some point. They cant and shouldnt try and throw money at winning 80 games when you dont have a core in place.



#17 TwentyThirtyFive

TwentyThirtyFive

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 30,692 posts

Posted 24 January 2025 - 01:22 PM

And again it is the  haves and the have nots when it comes to giving out 700 mil contracts. TO say otherwise is ridiculous. Cohen would have gone to any number he needed to get Soto. Dodgers would have gone to any number they needed to get Ohtani. Who those teams really want they get unless there is some outlier circumstance.



#18 ivanbalt

ivanbalt

    All Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,799 posts

Posted 24 January 2025 - 01:39 PM

Obviously it's not apples to apples but the NBA having a salary cap that didn't stop the team with Lebron from making the NBA Finals eight times in a row and there's been what, 2 AFC title games since 2001 that didn't include Brady or Mahomes? 


NBA is a special type of mess with the soft cap and the fact that at least 50% of the league is off limits for star free agents.

 

While the NFL has dynasties competing for and winning a lot of championships, there's still a lot of parity (sort of) and teams regularly go from the bottom to the playoffs in a season or two.  A good draft can immediately turn a team around and with the cap big market teams can't scoop up all the free agents.

 

Then there's MLB where it takes years to rebuild and big time draft picks take 3-4 years to get to the majors.  Couple that with the ability of the large market teams to sign anyone they want with enough money.  And now the latest crap with the Dodgers deferring over a billion dollars over the past two years.

 

At the end of the day, MLB needs a floor and a cap.  Will never happen so clowns like Manfred will continue with golden ball ideas as interest wanes.



#19 BaltBird 24

BaltBird 24

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 27,109 posts

Posted 24 January 2025 - 01:43 PM

Obviously it's not apples to apples but the NBA having a salary cap that didn't stop the team with Lebron from making the NBA Finals eight times in a row and there's been what, 2 AFC title games since 2001 that didn't include Brady or Mahomes?


Goes to show that having a salary cap means a smart team (or lucky, however you want to spell it) can dominate a sport. No one will consider Kansas City a major market team. They've dominated the sport for almost a decade.

How have the NY teams been lately?

#20 weird-O

weird-O

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,537 posts
  • LocationI'm here from downtown, I'm here from Mitch and Murray.

Posted 24 January 2025 - 01:55 PM

They drafted and developed their core. Things have also changed in the last 10-15 years. LA and the Mets in particular have just gone nuclear. I dont think Scherzer would be signing with Was in todays market unless one of the super elites didnt want him. Theyve also slashed payroll over the last 3 or 4 years. I expect Hou to do the same at some point despite being a top dog for the longest time. Hell, Philly had slashed payroll a good bit in the mid 2010s. Ive said numerous times now I think the Os can be the Astros or the Nats if you want to use that example. Build up to having a  top 10 payroll for a  4-5 year stretch. But you have to expect it to end at some point. They cant and shouldnt try and throw money at winning 80 games when you dont have a core in place.

True, the Nats have slashed payroll. But only because they are retooling. But that's all teams, even the mighty ones. That doesn't negate my point, that they have consistently out spent the O's. Why because they chose to chase a WS, and the Angelos group didn't. They didn't just get there with homegrown talent. Furthermore, they made real efforts to keep most (if not all) their homegrown players. Some stayed, others didn't. 

The Dodgers are setting themselves up for a big fall. It won't happen for awhile, but the bill for deferred money will come due. But to the broader point, you're using extreme examples to argue the point that some teams can't afford to compete. As I mentioned, some teams can afford to spend more than others. But every team can afford to field a competitive team. That's why my Nationals example works so perfectly. Two team with the same revenue stream, yet only one used their for on the field talent.     


  • CantonJester likes this

Good news! I saw a dog today.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users


Our Sponsors