Bryce Harper
-
@PriorFir4383355_XBL said in Bryce Harper:
Take a look at it from how many small market teams won the WS since 2000. That list was and remains one team -- Kansas City and that was back in 2015. Since then, the closest WS champion to a small market was Houston and that's not a small market as Houston is one of the largest markets in the nation.
Number of teams in US Top 10 Markets:
Area---MLB---NFL---NBA
NYC 2 2 2
LA 2 2 2
CHI 2 1 1
DFW 1 1 1
PHI 1 1 1
HOU 1 1 1
ATL 1 1 1
DC 2 1 1
BOS 1 1 1
SF 2 1 1Total 15 12 12
NFL and NBA have more smaller markets winning because they have more smaller market teams.
-
@SaveFarris_PSN I’ve spent considerable amounts of time on this. I suggest you do the same. What are you afraid of with a cap?
-
@SaveFarris_PSN said in Bryce Harper:
@PriorFir4383355_XBL said in Bryce Harper:
Take a look at it from how many small market teams won the WS since 2000. That list was and remains one team -- Kansas City and that was back in 2015. Since then, the closest WS champion to a small market was Houston and that's not a small market as Houston is one of the largest markets in the nation.
Number of teams in US Top 10 Markets:
Area---MLB---NFL---NBA
NYC 2 2 2
LA 2 2 2
CHI 2 1 1
DFW 1 1 1
PHI 1 1 1
HOU 1 1 1
ATL 1 1 1
DC 2 1 1
BOS 1 1 1
SF 2 1 1Total 15 12 12
NFL and NBA have more smaller markets winning because they have more smaller market teams.
Easier to define. No team not in the top quarter of payroll has won a World Series in 25+ years.
-
I think it's all an indictment of the world we live in. Be it sports, politics, or day to day life, class, morals, values, and civility are just absent. As far as a salary cap goes I'm so tired of owners crying poverty then overpaying for players. I'm old, I've seen plenry of strikes and lockouts in all my sports.....millionaires fighting with billionaires but one thing they have in common are owners crying the blues and a year or two after a strike the stupid contracts start again. As a Met fan I know it all to well as I just celebrated Bobby Bonilla Day recently.
-
@markemark_NSW said in Bryce Harper:
I wonder if the same ones taking the owners side are the same ones who always defend SDS devs.
Have a look at my posts and answer that question for yourself! LOL!!!
-
@SaveFarris_PSN said in Bryce Harper:
@PriorFir4383355_XBL said in Bryce Harper:
Take a look at it from how many small market teams won the WS since 2000. That list was and remains one team -- Kansas City and that was back in 2015. Since then, the closest WS champion to a small market was Houston and that's not a small market as Houston is one of the largest markets in the nation.
Number of teams in US Top 10 Markets:
Area---MLB---NFL---NBA
NYC 2 2 2
LA 2 2 2
CHI 2 1 1
DFW 1 1 1
PHI 1 1 1
HOU 1 1 1
ATL 1 1 1
DC 2 1 1
BOS 1 1 1
SF 2 1 1Total 15 12 12
NFL and NBA have more smaller markets winning because they have more smaller market teams.
Yes, that take is accurate, and the MLB owners and their analysts will quickly tell you that skew in MLB to having multiple teams in large markets and fewer in the smaller markets is a big reason why popularity for MLB is sharply down compared to NFL, NBA, and even NHL, all three of them seeing a rise in popularity and attendance numbers, while MLB is struggling mightily in relative terms.
This is precisely why Manfred's top priority is MLB expansion. He wants to see MLB's footprint expand to smaller markets, and the only way to make the playing field competitive for the smaller market teams is a salary cap/floor.
-
@PriorFir4383355_XBL it has nothing to do with the fact that you can’t keep (young) people’s attention for 162 games with half of them smack dab in the middle of tourist season? You think people who only consume 15 seconds clips on Tik Tok are intrigued by a hit and run? Baseball, as much as I love it, is an anachronism.
-
@SaveFarris_PSN, I'm not exactly a proponent of a salary cap, but the fact that many different MLB teams have been represented in championships since 2000 is by no means proof that things are on par with other major sports. Nor is the fact that many "small market" teams have been represented.
The difference is this: if you aren't among the top payrolls in the game, you're going to need something of a miracle to win.
Yes, many different teams have won a world championship, but nearly all of those teams spent [censored] tons of money to do it. Since 1995 (wild card era), 26 of 29 world champions ranked in the top half of payrolls on opening day; 20 of those 29 ranked in the top 10. Of the three outside of that group of 26 to win championships in this era ('17 Astros, '15 Royals, '03 Marlins), two of them (Astros & Royals) made mid-season trades that put them into the top half of payroll by season's end.
Sure, small market teams can overspend and take a shot at glory, and then they have to tear down and remain in dismal straits for years... but they can't do it without entering that upper echelon of spending.
I don't think a cap is a panacea, but there's an argument for it that can't be discounted by listing how many different teams have won. Payroll rank is a better way of looking at that...
Consider that since the NFL implemented the cap, champions through 2023 broke down thusly (I didn't have easy access to the last 2 years and didn't care to spend the time): 12 champions ranked in the top 10 in cap spending, 9 champions were in the middle 10, and 8 winners were in the bottom 10.
That's very different than modern baseball.
-
@yankblan_PSN said in Bryce Harper:
@PriorFir4383355_XBL it has nothing to do with the fact that you can’t keep (young) people’s attention for 162 games with half of them smack dab in the middle of tourist season? You think people who only consume 15 seconds clips on Tik Tok are intrigued by a hit and run? Baseball, as much as I love it, is an anachronism.
This makes me sad, but I think it's true.
I used to think that one of the most beautiful things to see while watching a baseball game was how, during a mound visit, the players would break in unison and return to position when the umpire was just feet from the mound... those little things are gone or going, and the inability of younger generations to sit through anything uncompressed (let alone sit still at all without reaching for their phones) may just be the death knell for baseball as we know it before too long...
And, yes, I yell at the clouds a lot.
-
@LHUBison58_XBL said in Bryce Harper:
@SaveFarris_PSN I’ve spent considerable amounts of time on this.
I can almost guarantee I’ve spent more time on it than you.
What are you afraid of with a cap?
It incentivizes owners & GMs to not spend on their teams. Instead of the current system which incentivizes payroll investment.
-
@The_Joneser_PSN said in Bryce Harper:
The difference is this: if you aren't among the top payrolls in the game, you're going to need something of a miracle to win.
Probably not the best time to make this argument, what with 2 of the best records in baseball currently siting in the Bottom 12 of payrolls (Mil, DET)
Sure, small market teams can overspend and take a shot at glory, and then they have to tear down and remain in dismal straits for years... but they can't do it without entering that upper echelon of spending.
Oh no, we’ve incentivized teams to spend money and try. THE HORROR!!
The owners are multi-billionaires. Every single owner can afford to put together a playoff roster every single year. If they don’t, they are [bodily function]-ing on the fans.
And if they really truly can’t afford a roster? They should be forced to sell to someone who will.
Consider that since the NFL implemented the cap, champions through 2023 broke down thusly (I didn't have easy access to the last 2 years and didn't care to spend the time): 12 champions ranked in the top 10 in cap spending, 9 champions were in the middle 10, and 8 winners were in the bottom 10.
The delta between top and bottom payrolls in the NFL is next to nothing and thus irrelevant to MLB.
-
SDS should take Harper's advice. No salary cap on cards in 2026. LS Ohtani will open up the year at 15 million stubs.
-
@SaveFarris_PSN why is the delta in the NFL next to nothing? Because of the greater revenue sharing, and a tightly managed floor and ceiling.
You still haven’t answered, why do you hate the cap? I really want to know.
-
@SaveFarris_PSN said in Bryce Harper:
@The_Joneser_PSN said in Bryce Harper:
Probably not the best time to make this argument, what with 2 of the best records in baseball currently siting in the Bottom 12 of payrolls (Mil, DET)
Yeah? And who's on top? All are top 10 payroll teams, save the Tigers... but every team in their division spends less.
Oh no, we’ve incentivized teams to spend money and try. THE HORROR!!
The owners are multi-billionaires. Every single owner can afford to put together a playoff roster every single year. If they don’t, they are [bodily function]-ing on the fans.
And if they really truly can’t afford a roster? They should be forced to sell to someone who will.Is that the real problem, though? If you own a professional sports franchise, are your really obligated to spend yourself into oblivion when the major franchises can simply keep spending more? Wouldn't fans be less likely to be [censored] on if teams actually had to make decisions and the richest of the rich couldn't simply dump cash into the player market?
The delta between top and bottom payrolls in the NFL is next to nothing and thus irrelevant to MLB.
And why, do you suppose, is that?
As I said before, I'm not even necessarily a proponent of a salary cap; this is a complicated issue and no one in this forum is well versed enough to have an opinion that holds any weight. I was simply pointing out that your lists weren't exactly relevant to the matter at hand, and not at all the mic drop that you thought they were... unless you're really into straw man arguments.
Sorry that upsets you, little guy.
-
@SaveFarris_PSN said in Bryce Harper:
@The_Joneser_PSN said in Bryce Harper:
The difference is this: if you aren't among the top payrolls in the game, you're going to need something of a miracle to win.
Probably not the best time to make this argument, what with 2 of the best records in baseball currently siting in the Bottom 12 of payrolls (Mil, DET)
Sure, small market teams can overspend and take a shot at glory, and then they have to tear down and remain in dismal straits for years... but they can't do it without entering that upper echelon of spending.
Oh no, we’ve incentivized teams to spend money and try. THE HORROR!!
The owners are multi-billionaires. Every single owner can afford to put together a playoff roster every single year. If they don’t, they are [bodily function]-ing on the fans.
And if they really truly can’t afford a roster? They should be forced to sell to someone who will.
Consider that since the NFL implemented the cap, champions through 2023 broke down thusly (I didn't have easy access to the last 2 years and didn't care to spend the time): 12 champions ranked in the top 10 in cap spending, 9 champions were in the middle 10, and 8 winners were in the bottom 10.
The delta between top and bottom payrolls in the NFL is next to nothing and thus irrelevant to MLB.
OK, your hard views are your own, but points to ponder.
First, Detroit is by no means a small market team. It is one of the largest markets in the United States. If the Tigers are near the bottom of payroll, it is only because the owners want it that way. See my earlier point about the owner of the A's pocketing the luxury tax money that MLB pays his team, vice use it to sign free agents. The A's owner isn't alone, but he is likely the single worst offender and that has most owners livid at him. A salary floor solves that problem -- something the MLBPA needs to comprehend!
Second, the comparison between the NFL and MLB is precisely relevant, and to discount it simply means you are not wiling to read the spreadsheet.
Third, your point about being forced to sell the team if they cannot afford to swim with the big market teams like the Mets, Dodgers, Yankees, Cubs, and Angels truly captures the point of view of the player agents and the players and this is precisely why the owners are going to play hardball like never before seen -- just to break MLB of that self-destructive mindset. Again, the owners appear willing to negotiate a salary floor to ensure smaller market teams can compete, but also mandates that they try to.
Fourth, again the luxury tax incentivizes some owners to pocket the MLB money and keep it for themselves. You want to incentivize all MLB teams to pay to put the best possible teams on the field each and every season, then the salary floor is the ticket to make that happen. I am sure the players could get the owners to agree to make the floor close to the cap, and make the punishment for any owner who fails to at least meet the floor so huge that no owner would dare do it. My view would be any owner whose player payroll failed to meet the floor would be suspended from running his team, seeing MLB take the team's operation over and put the team up for sale!
-
@SaveFarris_PSN lol. That’s an extremely lazy pro-union answer. You obviously are a big market fan, if they go through this CBA without fixing it this mess, the Dodgers are going to simply destroy the rest of the league due to economic disparity. Do you know how much revenue they generate a year in parking? None of which is shared. Do you know how much the Pirates generate in revenue in parking?
I’m a pirates fan, yes I know our owner is cheap, yes I agree with a lot of those points. However, there is zero chance of Pittsburgh consistently being able to field a winning team in this system. Maybe that’s cool if you are on one of the coasts but for the rest of us all hope is typically gone by the 4th of July. Again, why are you afraid of a salary cap? Seems like you have nothing to be afraid of if you’re a big market team fan. Or is the fear of losing the inherent advantages that you exploit that great?
-
@The_Joneser_PSN said in Bryce Harper:
@SaveFarris_PSN said in Bryce Harper:
@The_Joneser_PSN said in Bryce Harper:
Probably not the best time to make this argument, what with 2 of the best records in baseball currently siting in the Bottom 12 of payrolls (Mil, DET)
Yeah? And who's on top? All are top 10 payroll teams, save the Tigers... but every team in their division spends less.
The Brewers are a Top 10 Payroll team? You sure?!?
Is that the real problem, though? If you own a professional sports franchise, are your really obligated to spend yourself into oblivion when the major franchises can simply keep spending more? Wouldn't fans be less likely to be [censored] on if teams actually had to make decisions and the richest of the rich couldn't simply dump cash into the player market?
Yes. If you're an owner and you can't afford to field a competitive team, you shouldn't be an owner.
-
@PriorFir4383355_XBL said in Bryce Harper:
@SaveFarris_PSN said in Bryce Harper:
@The_Joneser_PSN said in Bryce Harper:
The difference is this: if you aren't among the top payrolls in the game, you're going to need something of a miracle to win.
Probably not the best time to make this argument, what with 2 of the best records in baseball currently siting in the Bottom 12 of payrolls (Mil, DET)
Sure, small market teams can overspend and take a shot at glory, and then they have to tear down and remain in dismal straits for years... but they can't do it without entering that upper echelon of spending.
Oh no, we’ve incentivized teams to spend money and try. THE HORROR!!
The owners are multi-billionaires. Every single owner can afford to put together a playoff roster every single year. If they don’t, they are [bodily function]-ing on the fans.
And if they really truly can’t afford a roster? They should be forced to sell to someone who will.
Consider that since the NFL implemented the cap, champions through 2023 broke down thusly (I didn't have easy access to the last 2 years and didn't care to spend the time): 12 champions ranked in the top 10 in cap spending, 9 champions were in the middle 10, and 8 winners were in the bottom 10.
The delta between top and bottom payrolls in the NFL is next to nothing and thus irrelevant to MLB.
OK, your hard views are your own, but points to ponder.
First, Detroit is by no means a small market team. It is one of the largest markets in the United States.
It's definitely one of the Top 30 markets! But one of the largest markets in MLB, it is not.If the Tigers are near the bottom of payroll, it is only because the owners want it that way.
Yes. That's my point. They have the capacity to spend. They don't. A salary cap wouldn't force the Tigers to spend more. It'd only force other teams to spend less. Spread the misery, as it were.
See my earlier point about the owner of the A's pocketing the luxury tax money that MLB pays his team, vice use it to sign free agents. The A's owner isn't alone, but he is likely the single worst offender and that has most owners livid at him. A salary floor solves that problem -- something the MLBPA needs to comprehend!
Does it though? What is more likely? Under a salary cap, the A's of the world...
A. actually compete for top-tier free agents.
B. load up on high-priced low-ceiling free agents (just enough Luis Severinos and Miguel Andujars to hit the floor)Second, the comparison between the NFL and MLB is precisely relevant, and to discount it simply means you are not wiling to read the spreadsheet.
Compare the difference between a Tier 1 and Tier 3 NFL team (about $50 million) and a Tier I and Tier 3 MLB team ($130 million). You can't compare winning %s across the tiers because the lower MLB tiers aren't playing.
Third, your point about being forced to sell the team if they cannot afford to swim with the big market teams like the Mets, Dodgers, Yankees, Cubs, and Angels truly captures the point of view of the player agents and the players and this is precisely why the owners are going to play hardball like never before seen -- just to break MLB of that self-destructive mindset. Again, the owners appear willing to negotiate a salary floor to ensure smaller market teams can compete, but also mandates that they try to.
Just like they did in 1994, and 1989, and 1982 ...
Owners will never accept a hard floor regardless of whether it comes with a cap. And even if a soft floor is passed, there's enough ways around it.
Teams that don't want to invest in players won't. And those teams, not the ones that spend, are what's hurting MLB.
-
@LHUBison58_XBL said in Bryce Harper:
I’m a pirates fan, yes I know our owner is cheap, yes I agree with a lot of those points. However, there is zero chance of Pittsburgh consistently being able to field a winning team in this system.
The Pirates owner is richer than the Steeler's owner. And if you can't make money with PNC Park, you need to get out of the money making business.
-
Here is a basic explanation of how a 51/49 players/owners cap would work
Element
Value
Player Revenue Share
49% of BRR
Cap Ceiling (est.)
~$196 million
Cap Floor
~$147 million (75% of cap)
Max Player Salary
~$39.2 million (20%)
Contract Limits
5–7 years, AAV = cap hit
Service Time Reform
FA at 5 yrs, arb at 2 yrs
Hard Cap
Yes, no exceptions
Penalties
Picks, fines, revenueAnd there will always be teams looking to pick up contracts to reach the floor. But the NHL has shown for two decades that these are rare and typically don’t last long. I do thing the A’s of he world would compete for players under a cap system. Do you think Sid Crosby and Evgeni Malkin could ever remain in Pittsburgh without a cap?
