Cleveland GM speaks out

[bretto12]

The general manager of the Cleveland Guardians, Mike Chernoff, has sparked a conversation in the MLB by stating that it's 'impossible' for his team to sign big free agents. In a landscape where small-market teams struggle to compete with giants like the Los Angeles Dodgers and the New York Mets, Chernoff's words highlight an economic reality that could shift the course of labor negotiations in baseball.

The Guardians find themselves in a tough spot. With a luxury tax payroll barely reaching $94.7 million, they rank second to last in the MLB, just above the Miami Marlins. This budget adjustment, which has seen a cut of over $30 million since 2022, reflects the constraints of a team that must be creative to stay competitive.

Meanwhile, the Los Angeles Dodgers and the New York Mets operate with budgets exceeding $350 million, a staggering difference that leaves small-market teams at a disadvantage. However, the Guardians have carved their own path to success, relying on impeccable scouting and internal player development, a strategy that has allowed them to reach the postseason in seven of the last ten seasons.

With the current labor agreement expiring on December 1, 2026, MLB faces a potential labor stoppage in 2027. Team owners are clamoring for a salary cap, while the Players Association is staunchly opposed. These negotiations promise to be intense and could define the economic future of baseball.

Chernoff's words not only reflect the reality of the Guardians but also highlight the economic tensions that could change the MLB landscape. In a sport where money can make the difference between success and failure, small-market teams will need to keep finding innovative ways to compete.

[cardstatman]

I don't understand how a salary cap fixes anything for Cleveland.

Their revenue remains the same and they say they can only spend $100M on payroll now.

The answer is more revenue sharing. If the revenue was more equal, then the salary cap would not be necessary.

A salary cap just forces the Yankees/Dodgers/Cubs owners to pocket a lot of money or invest huge dollars in something other than payroll. The Yankees and Cubs owners are already voluntarily doing just that.

[sdaltons]

I don't understand how a salary cap fixes anything for Cleveland.

Their revenue remains the same and they say they can only spend $100M on payroll now.

The answer is more revenue sharing. If the revenue was more equal, then the salary cap would not be necessary.

A salary cap just forces the Yankees/Dodgers/Cubs owners to pocket a lot of money or invest huge dollars in something other than payroll. The Yankees and Cubs owners are already voluntarily doing just that.

Maybe because if all the payrolls were lower, their $100 million might be more competitive? And because individual contracts couldn't be so high in a salary cap environment which might give them the chance to lure an attractive free agent when other teams have already hit the cap?

[bfib]

I don't understand how a salary cap fixes anything for Cleveland.

Their revenue remains the same and they say they can only spend $100M on payroll now.

The answer is more revenue sharing. If the revenue was more equal, then the salary cap would not be necessary.

A salary cap just forces the Yankees/Dodgers/Cubs owners to pocket a lot of money or invest huge dollars in something other than payroll. The Yankees and Cubs owners are already voluntarily doing just that.

A cap obviously comes with full rev share. It’s the only way it’s viable, obviously

[peterman'srealitytour]

Amen to a cap, a floor and some form of revenue sharing. Whatever it takes to restore competitive balance.

[CCard]

The general manager of the Cleveland Guardians, Mike Chernoff, has sparked a conversation in the MLB by stating that it's 'impossible' for his team to sign big free agents. In a landscape where small-market teams struggle to compete with giants like the Los Angeles Dodgers and the New York Mets, Chernoff's words highlight an economic reality that could shift the course of labor negotiations in baseball.

The Guardians find themselves in a tough spot. With a luxury tax payroll barely reaching $94.7 million, they rank second to last in the MLB, just above the Miami Marlins. This budget adjustment, which has seen a cut of over $30 million since 2022, reflects the constraints of a team that must be creative to stay competitive.

Meanwhile, the Los Angeles Dodgers and the New York Mets operate with budgets exceeding $350 million, a staggering difference that leaves small-market teams at a disadvantage. However, the Guardians have carved their own path to success, relying on impeccable scouting and internal player development, a strategy that has allowed them to reach the postseason in seven of the last ten seasons.

With the current labor agreement expiring on December 1, 2026, MLB faces a potential labor stoppage in 2027. Team owners are clamoring for a salary cap, while the Players Association is staunchly opposed. These negotiations promise to be intense and could define the economic future of baseball.

Chernoff's words not only reflect the reality of the Guardians but also highlight the economic tensions that could change the MLB landscape. In a sport where money can make the difference between success and failure, small-market teams will need to keep finding innovative ways to compete.

Doesn't hurt that they reside in the American League Central. It would be a lot harder to win the Eastern or Western. It speaks to the weakness in baseball that small market teams can even reach the playoffs.

[ScotchMIrish]

I don't understand how a salary cap fixes anything for Cleveland.

Their revenue remains the same and they say they can only spend $100M on payroll now.

The answer is more revenue sharing. If the revenue was more equal, then the salary cap would not be necessary.

A salary cap just forces the Yankees/Dodgers/Cubs owners to pocket a lot of money or invest huge dollars in something other than payroll. The Yankees and Cubs owners are already voluntarily doing just that.

Kansas City won the super bowl 3 times in 5 years. They win the world series once every 40 years. That's what a payroll cap does for a sport.

[Jatalk]

I fully support a cap, floor and more revenue sharing but Cleveland is a poor example to base this on.

First off, let Cleveland open their books and show us they can’t afford more payroll.

Secondly if they are that strapped on the revenue side then it’s clear the Cleveland market can’t support a team. Sell or move the franchise.

[mattmitchl44]

I don't understand how a salary cap fixes anything for Cleveland.

Their revenue remains the same and they say they can only spend $100M on payroll now.

The answer is more revenue sharing. If the revenue was more equal, then the salary cap would not be necessary.

A salary cap just forces the Yankees/Dodgers/Cubs owners to pocket a lot of money or invest huge dollars in something other than payroll. The Yankees and Cubs owners are already voluntarily doing just that.

It's all of the above - a cap, a floor, and more revenue sharing to make teams meeting the floor feasible.

I've done the math before, relative to the $5.28 billion in player salaries in 2025, a cap of $250 million (with all teams above it coming down to exactly the cap), a floor of $125 million (with all teams below it coming up to exactly the floor), and the teams between the cap and floor not changing would also equal $5.28 billion in player salaries. So, in the aggregate the owners don't "pocket" any more money and keep it from the players.

And you'd end up with a league where the top and bottom rosters were only separated by a factor of 2 in payroll, as opposed to factors of three, four, or even five now. That improves competitiveness top to bottom. If you cap the Dodgers, Yankees, etc. at ~$250 million, it provides a "light at the end of the tunnel" for even teams that can't spend to the cap - it gives them reason to perhaps find another $10 million or $20 million to add to whatever they might otherwise spend because they aren't already at an overwhelming deficit to the biggest teams.

You could make it a $260 million cap/$130 million floor and result in the players getting closer to $5.45 billion, a 3% increase over 2025.

[mattmitchl44]

Secondly if they are that strapped on the revenue side then it’s clear the Cleveland market can’t support a team. Sell or move the franchise.

There aren't 30 markets, or 30 owners in those markets, who can/will compete monetarily with the likes of the Dodgers, Yankees, etc. without imposed restraints.

[amaram]

At this rate all the teams should just be sold to LA and NY. Where the money owners are.

[RamFan08NY]

I don't understand how a salary cap fixes anything for Cleveland.

Their revenue remains the same and they say they can only spend $100M on payroll now.

The answer is more revenue sharing. If the revenue was more equal, then the salary cap would not be necessary.

A salary cap just forces the Yankees/Dodgers/Cubs owners to pocket a lot of money or invest huge dollars in something other than payroll. The Yankees and Cubs owners are already voluntarily doing just that.

Maybe because if all the payrolls were lower, their $100 million might be more competitive? And because individual contracts couldn't be so high in a salary cap environment which might give them the chance to lure an attractive free agent when other teams have already hit the cap?

Exactly. In a salary cap world , the Dodgers, or no other team is going to make Kyle Tuvker the 2nd highest player in the history of baseball.

The Dodgers aren't playing with their money, so they dont care how much they spend.

Thats how it is in NFL. The best of the best get the big bucks, and then the next have to take what they can get, where they can get it. By default, each team is able to get at least some of them.

[Jatalk]

Secondly if they are that strapped on the revenue side then it’s clear the Cleveland market can’t support a team. Sell or move the franchise.

There aren't 30 markets, or 30 owners in those markets, who can/will compete monetarily with the likes of the Dodgers, Yankees, etc. without imposed restraints.

True but that’s not my main point. If Cleveland can only afford a $95 million payroll that market can’t support never support a franchise. Time to face facts some of these markets cannot support teams. Either that are owners a not being honest. Understand this only applies to the bottom few teams.

Again I am for salary restraints but not for propping up losing markets.

[gpe13579]

There won't be a salary cap without revenue sharing.

To do that the owners would have to determine what constitutes revenue that will be shared. Historically they have resisted "opening the books".

For me personally, baseball is a lot less enjoyable in the current climate.

There are a few reasons I watch games still:

1. In the summer there isn't much else going on and as a sports junkie I watch by default of there be limited other options.

2. Gambling. To include fantasy baseball. Personally, I enjoy both, so it gives me something to have interest in. I understand others may not enjoy this aspect, but I do.

When it's talked about teams like Cleveland making the playoffs 7 out of 8 years or whatever it is, I find that to be more a byproduct of the league creating divisions of equal spending teams and 3 wild cards. They have done all the superficial stuff available to give the appearance of fairness and keep as many teams in the playoff race as possible. There is nothing left to do other than a cap.

When an iconic franchise like the St. Louis Cardinal cannot come close to being on equal footing from a spending standpoint it seems to me there is a serious problem.

I am a million miles away from being an economist, but I do have my reasons for not enjoying the game as much as in the past. Others may disagree but I'm entitled to my reasons.

[woofy25]

I believe we’re going to be hearing a lot of this over the next year from small market teams

[TXCardsFanX]

Secondly if they are that strapped on the revenue side then it’s clear the Cleveland market can’t support a team. Sell or move the franchise.

There aren't 30 markets, or 30 owners in those markets, who can/will compete monetarily with the likes of the Dodgers, Yankees, etc. without imposed restraints.

True but that’s not my main point. If Cleveland can only afford a $95 million payroll that market can’t support never support a franchise. Time to face facts some of these markets cannot support teams. Either that are owners a not being honest. Understand this only applies to the bottom few teams.

Again I am for salary restraints but not for propping up losing markets.

Yes, I don't understand why teams like Cleveland, Pittsburg and Miami are so poor.
The Florida cities are massive and yet they are the poorest teams.
I would say this - Cleveland is the 3rd largest metropolitan city in Ohio AND it's been shriking in population