Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueWire
I understand what you're saying but dollars dont always correlate to championships
|
Sure it does. All those teams are in the top half.
2006 Playoff teams
Yankees #1
Mets #5
Dodgers#6
Cardinals #11
Tigers #14
Padres #17
Twins #19
A's #21
2005 Playoff teams
Yankees #1
Red Sox #2
Angels #4
Cardinals #6
Braves #10
Astros #12
White Sox #13
Padres #16
2004 Playoff teams
Yankees #1
Red Sox #2
Angels #3
Dodgers #6
Braves #8
Cardinals #9
Astros #12
Twins #19
You show me the bottom 10 teams in payroll for 2007 and I give you 20:1 odds none of them even make it to the WS this year. In the last 3 years only 1 team out of 24 playoff teams between 2004-2006 finished in the bottom 1/3 of payroll and they were at the top of that list.
Fact is since 1995( the year after the players strike and the year payrolls really started to climb ) only one WS champ had a payroll in the bottom half of the league, 2003 Marlins.
Quote:
The other problem with a salary cap is where do you set it? The Yankees are off spending 200 million a year. Are you going to cap all the teams at 50 million and make the highest paid player drop from 25 mil/year to 8 mil/year? And lets say you DO make the drastic move of moving a cap down to 50 mil/year and after a 5 year strike the players finally go for it. If the top teams spend 50 mil then and the small markets only spend 20-35/mil like they do now.... isn't that still unfair?
Its just not possible
|
Yes it is. They did it in football. And it wouldn't be $50 mil and you know it. A salary cap in baseball would be closer to $80 mil. Also a lot of $25 mil salary in a signing bonus and like football, baseball could allow teams to spread the cap hit of a signing bonus over several years.
With a ceiling there also has to be a floor, a minimum a team has to spend.
By the way in 1988 the Yankees had the #1 payrol of $18.9 mil and the White Sox were last at a payroll of $5.9 mil