Page 2 of 5
Re: A Cap/Floor Proposal The Union Would Go For
Posted: 23 Feb 2026 14:37 pm
by 45s
Bubble4427 wrote: ↑23 Feb 2026 13:24 pm
Red7 wrote: ↑23 Feb 2026 13:04 pm
rockondlouie wrote: ↑23 Feb 2026 12:50 pm
That's crazy but I love the out of the box thinking RedBaron!
Can you imagine how quickly the Dodgers would buy up all of the Rockies cap space they could, the Mets the same w/the Marlins?
The fascinating thing would be if BDWJr would be a buyer or a seller?
Exactly. We would see exactly how much competitive balance actually means to the owners. The ability to sell cap space would allow teams to achieve the floor and still make a huge profit. It would allow the big spenders to continue to spend and the players to make their money. In essence, it’s still the CBT/revenue sharing, but the money goes directly to the smaller market teams. Baseball doesn’t have a spending problem. It has a revenue distribution problem. This solves that problem.
This won't work.
To cut it down to the very basics....the small market teams would all sell their cap and MLB would end up being in the same boat 3-5 years from now. The teams that have no interest in being competitive need to be punished..in other words, they need a reason to not suck.
How are you going to determine which teams are not interested in being competitive….and those that are simply inept at building an organization…
I submit the St. Louis cardinals as a club that wasted millions on lousy players…
So….were they not interested in winning….or just had no idea what they were doing?
Re: A Cap/Floor Proposal The Union Would Go For
Posted: 23 Feb 2026 14:43 pm
by Stlcardsblues
Red7 wrote: ↑23 Feb 2026 12:25 pm
First, eliminate the CBT. Cap ceiling $400 million. Cap floor $200 million. Teams can sell whatever cap space they have to teams wanting to exceed the cap. Example: Reds have met the $200 million floor. They can sell the remaining $200 million. There would be no limit to the amount a team could purchase or how many teams they can buy cap space from. That should make everyone happy.
Needs to be closer to cap of $250 and floor of $150 to work. There would be limits on cap space a team can retain when trading a player to a different team. It shouldn’t be unlimited.
Re: A Cap/Floor Proposal The Union Would Go For
Posted: 23 Feb 2026 15:08 pm
by Talkin' Baseball
45s wrote: ↑23 Feb 2026 14:37 pm
Bubble4427 wrote: ↑23 Feb 2026 13:24 pm
Red7 wrote: ↑23 Feb 2026 13:04 pm
rockondlouie wrote: ↑23 Feb 2026 12:50 pm
That's crazy but I love the out of the box thinking RedBaron!
Can you imagine how quickly the Dodgers would buy up all of the Rockies cap space they could, the Mets the same w/the Marlins?
The fascinating thing would be if BDWJr would be a buyer or a seller?
Exactly. We would see exactly how much competitive balance actually means to the owners. The ability to sell cap space would allow teams to achieve the floor and still make a huge profit. It would allow the big spenders to continue to spend and the players to make their money. In essence, it’s still the CBT/revenue sharing, but the money goes directly to the smaller market teams. Baseball doesn’t have a spending problem. It has a revenue distribution problem. This solves that problem.
This won't work.
To cut it down to the very basics....the small market teams would all sell their cap and MLB would end up being in the same boat 3-5 years from now. The teams that have no interest in being competitive need to be punished..in other words, they need a reason to not suck.
How are you going to determine which teams are not interested in being competitive….and those that are simply inept at building an organization…
I submit the St. Louis cardinals as a club that wasted millions on lousy players…
So….were they not interested in winning….or just had no idea what they were doing?
Do you really not know the answer to that?
Re: A Cap/Floor Proposal The Union Would Go For
Posted: 23 Feb 2026 15:15 pm
by TheJackBurton
Red7 wrote: ↑23 Feb 2026 12:25 pm
First, eliminate the CBT. Cap ceiling $400 million. Cap floor $200 million. Teams can sell whatever cap space they have to teams wanting to exceed the cap. Example: Reds have met the $200 million floor. They can sell the remaining $200 million. There would be no limit to the amount a team could purchase or how many teams they can buy cap space from. That should make everyone happy.
how does that solve anything? You are forcing teams to a floor they can't afford then allowing them to sell cap space so teams can exceed it?
No that's not how any of this work.
The whole idea of the floor is for it to be an amount a team should easily meet, 200 million isn't it.
Re: A Cap/Floor Proposal The Union Would Go For
Posted: 23 Feb 2026 15:45 pm
by 45s
Talkin' Baseball wrote: ↑23 Feb 2026 15:08 pm
45s wrote: ↑23 Feb 2026 14:37 pm
Bubble4427 wrote: ↑23 Feb 2026 13:24 pm
Red7 wrote: ↑23 Feb 2026 13:04 pm
rockondlouie wrote: ↑23 Feb 2026 12:50 pm
That's crazy but I love the out of the box thinking RedBaron!
Can you imagine how quickly the Dodgers would buy up all of the Rockies cap space they could, the Mets the same w/the Marlins?
The fascinating thing would be if BDWJr would be a buyer or a seller?
Exactly. We would see exactly how much competitive balance actually means to the owners. The ability to sell cap space would allow teams to achieve the floor and still make a huge profit. It would allow the big spenders to continue to spend and the players to make their money. In essence, it’s still the CBT/revenue sharing, but the money goes directly to the smaller market teams. Baseball doesn’t have a spending problem. It has a revenue distribution problem. This solves that problem.
This won't work.
To cut it down to the very basics....the small market teams would all sell their cap and MLB would end up being in the same boat 3-5 years from now. The teams that have no interest in being competitive need to be punished..in other words, they need a reason to not suck.
How are you going to determine which teams are not interested in being competitive….and those that are simply inept at building an organization…
I submit the St. Louis cardinals as a club that wasted millions on lousy players…
So….were they not interested in winning….or just had no idea what they were doing?
Do you really not know the answer to that?
I think I do…but…it was obvious they were not interested in winning……but they knew how to sell a bunch of tickets….
I just wonder who is going to determine when a club is inept….and will they be “punished “?
Generally we don’t punish the feeble minded in this country…
Re: A Cap/Floor Proposal The Union Would Go For
Posted: 23 Feb 2026 18:06 pm
by makesnosense
TheJackBurton wrote: ↑23 Feb 2026 15:15 pm
Red7 wrote: ↑23 Feb 2026 12:25 pm
First, eliminate the CBT. Cap ceiling $400 million. Cap floor $200 million. Teams can sell whatever cap space they have to teams wanting to exceed the cap. Example: Reds have met the $200 million floor. They can sell the remaining $200 million. There would be no limit to the amount a team could purchase or how many teams they can buy cap space from. That should make everyone happy.
how does that solve anything? You are forcing teams to a floor they can't afford then allowing them to sell cap space so teams can exceed it?
No that's not how any of this work.
The whole idea of the floor is for it to be an amount a team should easily meet, 200 million isn't it.
If 200 is decided on as the floor and you can't meet it, sell the team.
Re: A Cap/Floor Proposal The Union Would Go For
Posted: 23 Feb 2026 18:18 pm
by ScotchMIrish
Red7 wrote: ↑23 Feb 2026 12:25 pm
First, eliminate the CBT. Cap ceiling $400 million. Cap floor $200 million. Teams can sell whatever cap space they have to teams wanting to exceed the cap. Example: Reds have met the $200 million floor. They can sell the remaining $200 million. There would be no limit to the amount a team could purchase or how many teams they can buy cap space from. That should make everyone happy.
Union would love that but it wouldn't fix anything.
Re: A Cap/Floor Proposal The Union Would Go For
Posted: 23 Feb 2026 18:31 pm
by Bubble4427
45s wrote: ↑23 Feb 2026 14:37 pm
Bubble4427 wrote: ↑23 Feb 2026 13:24 pm
Red7 wrote: ↑23 Feb 2026 13:04 pm
rockondlouie wrote: ↑23 Feb 2026 12:50 pm
That's crazy but I love the out of the box thinking RedBaron!
Can you imagine how quickly the Dodgers would buy up all of the Rockies cap space they could, the Mets the same w/the Marlins?
The fascinating thing would be if BDWJr would be a buyer or a seller?
Exactly. We would see exactly how much competitive balance actually means to the owners. The ability to sell cap space would allow teams to achieve the floor and still make a huge profit. It would allow the big spenders to continue to spend and the players to make their money. In essence, it’s still the CBT/revenue sharing, but the money goes directly to the smaller market teams. Baseball doesn’t have a spending problem. It has a revenue distribution problem. This solves that problem.
This won't work.
To cut it down to the very basics....the small market teams would all sell their cap and MLB would end up being in the same boat 3-5 years from now. The teams that have no interest in being competitive need to be punished..in other words, they need a reason to not suck.
How are you going to determine which teams are not interested in being competitive….and those that are simply inept at building an organization…
I submit the St. Louis cardinals as a club that wasted millions on lousy players…
So….were they not interested in winning….or just had no idea what they were doing?
On the OPs idea……if the Pirates and Marlins sold their cap every year and still only spent the bear minimum…that is not trying.
If you finish in the bottom 3 in payroll or sell more of your cap then 3 teams, I think you should lose first round draft picks and international money.
Re: A Cap/Floor Proposal The Union Would Go For
Posted: 23 Feb 2026 19:22 pm
by ilcubuffs
So - when does the sale of cap space occur? Has to have a process or guidelines right?? Mid season trade deadline, off season winter meetings, or ?????
Could a player be added to the cap space transaction? Just as they send money with player trade?
Very nice concept - devil in the details.
Re: A Cap/Floor Proposal The Union Would Go For
Posted: 23 Feb 2026 19:52 pm
by Melville
Red7 wrote: ↑23 Feb 2026 12:25 pm
First, eliminate the CBT. Cap ceiling $400 million. Cap floor $200 million. Teams can sell whatever cap space they have to teams wanting to exceed the cap. Example: Reds have met the $200 million floor. They can sell the remaining $200 million. There would be no limit to the amount a team could purchase or how many teams they can buy cap space from. That should make everyone happy.
No team would sell its unspent payroll allocation to another.
It would be a suicide pact which would immediately destroy an already disillusioned fan base of small market teams.
Zero chance the union would go for it since it would limit even further the number of teams competing for FA talent.
And, of course, the majority of owners would vehemently oppose such a scheme.
Players would reject a ceiling; owners would reject a floor: you are advocating an idea based on requirements already known to be unacceptable.
It would, in fact, make everyone unhappy.
Your heart is in the right place - but not so your thinking.
Re: A Cap/Floor Proposal The Union Would Go For
Posted: 23 Feb 2026 19:54 pm
by Melville
TheJackBurton wrote: ↑23 Feb 2026 15:15 pm
Red7 wrote: ↑23 Feb 2026 12:25 pm
First, eliminate the CBT. Cap ceiling $400 million. Cap floor $200 million. Teams can sell whatever cap space they have to teams wanting to exceed the cap. Example: Reds have met the $200 million floor. They can sell the remaining $200 million. There would be no limit to the amount a team could purchase or how many teams they can buy cap space from. That should make everyone happy.
how does that solve anything? You are forcing teams to a floor they can't afford then allowing them to sell cap space so teams can exceed it?
No that's not how any of this work.
The whole idea of the floor is for it to be an amount a team should easily meet, 200 million isn't it.
And exactly how would the next owner do so, if the revenue and operating costs make the math unchanged and equally impossible?
Re: A Cap/Floor Proposal The Union Would Go For
Posted: 23 Feb 2026 20:22 pm
by Cardinals1964
Talkin' Baseball wrote: ↑23 Feb 2026 12:41 pm
mattmitchl44 wrote: ↑23 Feb 2026 12:39 pm
Red7 wrote: ↑23 Feb 2026 12:25 pm
Cap ceiling $400 million. Cap floor $200 million.
That is categorically insane, full stop.
Per Cot's, the total amount paid in player salaries in 2024 was $5.16 billion. In 2025, it was $5.28 billion, an increase of 2.3%.
Even if all 30 teams spent at the
FLOOR, that would be $6.0 billion, an increase of 13.6% over 2025!
The cap has to be in the range of $250-$275 million, and the floor in the range of $125-$137.5 million (50% of cap).
You're right- the numbers probably need adjusted, but if they were adjusted to more appropriate levels, what do you think of the general concept?
There would have to be so much adjustment that the OP plan is unrecognizable.
Using his numbers, I spend $200 million and sell $200 million. My team plays free.
What if I want to by some cap? I buy from Boston and not the Yankees? Everybody buys cap space from some teams and not others? Sounds like a disaster.
With the CBT, if you go over the cap it’s distributed equally amongst teams. The OP proposed a less workable CBT.
Re: A Cap/Floor Proposal The Union Would Go For
Posted: 23 Feb 2026 20:25 pm
by Cardinals1964
Melville wrote: ↑23 Feb 2026 19:52 pm
Red7 wrote: ↑23 Feb 2026 12:25 pm
First, eliminate the CBT. Cap ceiling $400 million. Cap floor $200 million. Teams can sell whatever cap space they have to teams wanting to exceed the cap. Example: Reds have met the $200 million floor. They can sell the remaining $200 million. There would be no limit to the amount a team could purchase or how many teams they can buy cap space from. That should make everyone happy.
No team would sell its unspent payroll allocation to another.
It would be a suicide pact which would immediately destroy an already disillusioned fan base of small market teams.
Zero chance the union would go for it since it would limit even further the number of teams competing for FA talent.
And, of course, the majority of owners would vehemently oppose such a scheme.
Players would reject a ceiling; owners would reject a floor: you are advocating an idea based on requirements already known to be unacceptable.
It would, in fact, make everyone unhappy.
Your heart is in the right place - but not so your thinking.
I would sell my cap space. Spend $200 million, sell $200 million. My team plays free.
Fans are disillusioned already. Read the posts on CT.
Re: A Cap/Floor Proposal The Union Would Go For
Posted: 23 Feb 2026 20:32 pm
by Cardinals1964
If the Cardinals had made the playoffs the last 3 years, there’d be less of these silly ideas. The Cardinals stars aged overnight. Left them holding $millions on players that no longer performed.
NO cap will help poor player decisions and evaluations.
Just think if Dylan Carlson, Walker, Gorman and other 1st draft picks performed like we were lead to believe they would.
Re: A Cap/Floor Proposal The Union Would Go For
Posted: 23 Feb 2026 20:59 pm
by RamFan08NY
rockondlouie wrote: ↑23 Feb 2026 13:26 pm
Red7 wrote: ↑23 Feb 2026 13:04 pm
rockondlouie wrote: ↑23 Feb 2026 12:50 pm
That's crazy but I love the out of the box thinking RedBaron!
Can you imagine how quickly the Dodgers would buy up all of the Rockies cap space they could, the Mets the same w/the Marlins?
The fascinating thing would be if BDWJr would be a buyer or a seller?
Exactly. We would see exactly how much competitive balance actually means to the owners. The ability to sell cap space would allow teams to achieve the floor and still make a huge profit. It would allow the big spenders to continue to spend and the players to make their money. In essence, it’s still the CBT/revenue sharing, but the money goes directly to the smaller market teams. Baseball doesn’t have a spending problem. It has a revenue distribution problem. This solves that problem.
It's a bright thought RB!
And if a small market team sold a lot of their cap space one seasons, then perhaps they'd have more money to spend on payroll in the next!
Or, they'd be happy to just have the Dodgers and Yankess pay their team salaries. A team could sign 200m worth of contracts, and then get 200m back to pocket from other teams.
The bottom line is, the results would be the same. LA with a 480m team payroll, and the small market teams 200m.
You need something in place to prevent the lopsided payrolls. Not give all the owners a loop hole around it.
Re: A Cap/Floor Proposal The Union Would Go For
Posted: 23 Feb 2026 21:08 pm
by TheJackBurton
makesnosense wrote: ↑23 Feb 2026 18:06 pm
TheJackBurton wrote: ↑23 Feb 2026 15:15 pm
Red7 wrote: ↑23 Feb 2026 12:25 pm
First, eliminate the CBT. Cap ceiling $400 million. Cap floor $200 million. Teams can sell whatever cap space they have to teams wanting to exceed the cap. Example: Reds have met the $200 million floor. They can sell the remaining $200 million. There would be no limit to the amount a team could purchase or how many teams they can buy cap space from. That should make everyone happy.
how does that solve anything? You are forcing teams to a floor they can't afford then allowing them to sell cap space so teams can exceed it?
No that's not how any of this work.
The whole idea of the floor is for it to be an amount a team should easily meet, 200 million isn't it.
If 200 is decided on as the floor and you can't meet it, sell the team.
What? Even if a Steve Cohen were to come in and purchase the team he would maybe be able to go crazy for a few years but that's it. Market share, economics, and size are what they are, they can't magically charge 200 dollars more a seat, 30 dollars more for a beer, 60 dollars more for parking and sign a 200 million dollar a year tv contract. They also can't magically get 10 million more fans and larger marketing dollars and increase tv market share. They are limited by their market, they can't pump hundreds of millions into a team that they can never recoup, that's completely idiotic.
