tupac003
Supporter
- Jan 18, 2006
- 47,723
- 57,774
So broke teams need even more money...smh
2026 MLB Season Thread
- Thread in 'Sports & Training' Thread starter Started by CP1708,
- Start date
- Mar 16, 2010
- 183,830
- 253,042
DeadsetAce
Supporter
- May 31, 2004
- 111,961
- 58,784
stop once they go slow mo if you're squeamish
tupac003
Supporter
- Jan 18, 2006
- 47,723
- 57,774
Man...that was terrible.
- Jul 27, 2012
- 12,550
- 21,809
I’m tired of the small market cheap owner whining at this point. It’s just disingenuous entitled behavior from multi billionaire owners who want the playing field leveled to accommodate their frugality.
Like hypothetically speaking, if there was a salary cap, are some of these small market owners willing to pay market value to retain their top guys, and are they willing to actively pursue top free agents in a salary cap MLB?
I say this from the context that there’s NBA players making $70 million annually in a salary cap league. There’s NFL qb’s making $50-60 million annually in a salary cap league. In both those leagues teams are willing to invest a large portion of their respective cap to lock down their superstar players.
Salary cap or no salary cap, the superstar players in professional sports leagues are going to command and have teams willing to pay top dollar for their services. You’ll have teams position themselves to have the necessary cap space to make a run at signing top guys to max contracts if it’s a loaded free agent market. Are the Pirates willing to pony up and pay Paul Skenes a max contract when he hits free agency in a salary cap MLB?
- Aug 28, 2021
- 2,794
- 1,985
You guys think Bobby Whitt jr finishes his career on KC ?
- May 10, 2013
- 30,369
- 42,083
- May 10, 2013
- 30,369
- 42,083
- Mar 16, 2010
- 183,830
- 253,042
- Feb 12, 2005
- 60,638
- 32,346
I agree with ownership of some of these franchises...Im a fan of one, but what the Dodgers are doing still isn't good for the MLB as a whole. Theyre doing things the Yankees won't even do with money, so you know its a rogue franchise. Overall, there's really only 7 or 8 teams actually willing to spend so even if we gripe about cheap owners, the competitive balance is heavily skewed. You can't ask and hope 20+ teams change ownership. Someone still will always be willing to spend more anyway.
- Oct 14, 2015
- 8,645
- 12,030
MFs want a salary cap just as the Mets finally got an owner not named Wilpon. Ain’t this a *****.
- Jul 27, 2012
- 12,550
- 21,809
I’m not necessarily opposed to a salary cap in theory. I’ve been seeing stuff floating around suggesting a $160 million floor paired with a $250 million cap. Only problem is some of these owners are going to say $160 million is way too high of a floor.
I’m open to the idea of a cap if a solid argument is made for one. But owners like Bob Nutting, John Fisher, Jerry Reinsdorf, and the Rockies owner have done absolutely nothing on their end to make a compelling case for one. There’s been no good faith effort to compete. No good faith effort to invest in stuff like scouting and international presence which is stuff you can prioritize on a limited payroll. They’ve done nothing to indicate that even if a cap was implemented that they’re suddenly going to be making effort to pursue talented players via free agency and to retain their top guys.
It’s going to be interesting to see the infighting amongst the owners once the cba expires as I think that’s something that people are overlooking. I’m expecting different factions of ownership groups and some owners being able to yield more power over their peers so it’ll be interesting to see how that plays out. But I don’t think all 30 owners are a unified front here.
I’m open to the idea of a cap if a solid argument is made for one. But owners like Bob Nutting, John Fisher, Jerry Reinsdorf, and the Rockies owner have done absolutely nothing on their end to make a compelling case for one. There’s been no good faith effort to compete. No good faith effort to invest in stuff like scouting and international presence which is stuff you can prioritize on a limited payroll. They’ve done nothing to indicate that even if a cap was implemented that they’re suddenly going to be making effort to pursue talented players via free agency and to retain their top guys.
It’s going to be interesting to see the infighting amongst the owners once the cba expires as I think that’s something that people are overlooking. I’m expecting different factions of ownership groups and some owners being able to yield more power over their peers so it’ll be interesting to see how that plays out. But I don’t think all 30 owners are a unified front here.
- May 10, 2013
- 30,369
- 42,083
If there’s going to be a floor, those owners would have too.
- Dec 14, 2004
- 61,462
- 52,846
Dodgers probably weren’t a top 5 team in the regular season last year. Age and injuries. It kills me to say it but Toronto should have won and blew it. Spending the most doesn’t mean you’re going to win. Boston, LA and NY didn’t win for mad seasons they led the league in money spent.
Other teams can defer money, choose not to. No clue why the Yankees don’t do it. They’re idiots. More teams should do it. Pirates might trade a top 3 pitcher in baseball thats still a ****in kid cause they’re cheap. Detroit doesn’t want to pay a top 3 pitcher who just won back to back Cy’s. These owners don’t care about winning and don’t want to spend. **** em all and let the Dodgers keep embarrassing them.
- May 10, 2013
- 30,369
- 42,083
That deferring is going to catch up at some point. They can’t keep spending big on big names while still paying for guys not on the roster years down the line.
- Feb 24, 2009
- 12,614
- 8,185
I never did understand why in any sports the owners of these historically bad franchises just choose to sit on these teams. It must just be for bragging rights to say that they own a pro team.
They obviously don’t care about winning and I don’t know how they can even be profitable after so many years. I’m sure some are operating at a loss. Why not just take what you would’ve made in losses and invest it in turning the team around?
They obviously don’t care about winning and I don’t know how they can even be profitable after so many years. I’m sure some are operating at a loss. Why not just take what you would’ve made in losses and invest it in turning the team around?
tupac003
Supporter
- Jan 18, 2006
- 47,723
- 57,774
Come 2035 it's gonna be hard to be a Dodgers fan.
- Dec 14, 2004
- 61,462
- 52,846
A lot of sports owners in every league don’t care about winning. They’re just making hundreds of millions a year and like the status of it.
Berzerker
Supporter
- Dec 30, 2025
- 967
- 1,274
Walters and group will probably unload the franchise by then. Team will probably fetch 12 billion in 9-10 years.
- Apr 4, 2008
- 75,430
- 24,835
End deferrals and make all tv income equal. No cap, no floors.
- Feb 24, 2009
- 12,614
- 8,185
My question is are they actually turning a profit? Are local tv rights and ticket sales at the stadium enough to not be in the negative? Without national merch sales and international demand for the club is it just the owner pumping money?
- Dec 14, 2004
- 61,462
- 52,846
I know every MLB team makes 250+ I’m guessing the owners of the lowest team are pocketing 100 mil of that, probably more.
lovehateself
Supporter
- Feb 5, 2013
- 44,970
- 50,931
Either choose a bunk tv rights deal with a network that could go belly up like Bally’s
Or go direct to customer streaming
I think the angels just went that route
Or go direct to customer streaming
I think the angels just went that route
tupac003
Supporter
- Jan 18, 2006
- 47,723
- 57,774
The MLB just can't help but be a mess
Nike Jordan
Supporter
- Jun 27, 2002
- 38,088
- 93,583
