STLtoday.com

CorneliusWolfe wrote: ↑23 Nov 2025 13:57 pm Why do you keep saying “guys over 30”??!! Who ever said that?? I haven’t heard it once from anyone here. You talk about straw men and false narratives, yet you cite examples of old free agents, as if it was even suggested, then you claim the only alternatives are 1-year flip guys.

Why can’t we trade or buy for two positions - a good long-term RHH OF’er and a starting pitcher? Then sprinkle in a couple of your short-term guys. That might actually pave the way for JJW and Doyle to come up and help WIN, instead of being anointed as saviors of the franchise with the unfair pressure that comes with it. The latter could possibly have devastating effects on their development. Losing culture and the pressure to be the one to change it when you just made it to the big leagues is not ideal and should not be the primary strategy. It’s actually ridiculous and risks ruining your best young prospects. It’s a team sport and it’s not ever going to be the JJW and Doyle show.

You said you wanted "transformative" additions.

The only "transformative" additions out there on the FA market are almost entirely guys who'll be age 30 or more next season. Bo Bichette is the youngest of the top FAs. He'll be age 28 next year, but if the Cardinals are good anywhere it's SS (Winn) and 2B (presumably Wetherholt). So he's not a fit. Are you going to get into the bidding war for Kyle Tucker (and he'll even be age 29 next year)? Do you think there is any chance of the Cardinals being able to outbid the Dodgers, et. al. for Tucker? And if they DID outbid the Dodgers I would be REALLY afraid of that contract.

So what young "transformative" addition are you going to go buy?

If you are going to trade for a younger "transformative" addition - who are you going to give up to get them? Contending teams aren't going to hand over their young, cost controlled studs - they need them in 2026 to try to "win now". Contending teams are not going to give up a young, cost controlled stud even for Donovan. Contending teams will offer you prospects of Donovan because they don't want to weaken their ML rosters. And other rebuilding teams will only give up theirs for a lot of prospect value - like giving up Wetherholt and/or Doyle.

And don't try to give me Tatis - he has a full NTC through 2028 and there is about zero chance he wants to come to St. Louis.

You can't just materialize a 25 or 26 yr. old, top player that is an OF or SP that you can actually get.

mattmitchl44 wrote: ↑23 Nov 2025 13:57 pm

rockondlouie wrote: ↑23 Nov 2025 13:06 pm

mattmitchl44 wrote: ↑23 Nov 2025 12:46 pm

rockondlouie wrote: ↑23 Nov 2025 12:40 pm Unlike Mo, I don't see Bloom making stupid free agent signings or handing out idiotic extensions!

The simple truth is - if you talk about specifically signing guys over age 30 to long, expensive contracts, nobody bats for a very high average on those.

If you want to take a shot at winning, you eventually will have to take your chances with one or more such signings, but you never like your chances of it working out, especially as you get to the middle and back end of the contract.

Agreed

Why I wanted Dewitt to go big for either B. Harper or M. Machado, M. Scherzer the first time he hit FA and wanted to come home to St. Louis.

Well, Bo Bichette is the youngest of the top FA out there now, is going to be 28 next year, and doesn't really fill a Cardinals need.

Nope, he doesn't.

I'd rather run w/JJW at league minimum.

mattmitchl44 wrote: ↑23 Nov 2025 14:09 pm

CorneliusWolfe wrote: ↑23 Nov 2025 13:57 pm Why do you keep saying “guys over 30”??!! Who ever said that?? I haven’t heard it once from anyone here. You talk about straw men and false narratives, yet you cite examples of old free agents, as if it was even suggested, then you claim the only alternatives are 1-year flip guys.

Why can’t we trade or buy for two positions - a good long-term RHH OF’er and a starting pitcher? Then sprinkle in a couple of your short-term guys. That might actually pave the way for JJW and Doyle to come up and help WIN, instead of being anointed as saviors of the franchise with the unfair pressure that comes with it. The latter could possibly have devastating effects on their development. Losing culture and the pressure to be the one to change it when you just made it to the big leagues is not ideal and should not be the primary strategy. It’s actually ridiculous and risks ruining your best young prospects. It’s a team sport and it’s not ever going to be the JJW and Doyle show.

You said you wanted "transformative" additions.

The only "transformative" additions out there on the FA market are almost entirely guys who'll be age 30 or more next season. Bo Bichette is the youngest of the top FAs. He'll be age 28 next year, but if the Cardinals are good anywhere it's SS (Winn) and 2B (presumably Wetherholt). So he's not a fit. Are you going to get into the bidding war for Kyle Tucker (and he'll even be age 29 next year)? Do you think there is any chance of the Cardinals being able to outbid the Dodgers, et. al. for Tucker?

So what young "transformative" addition are you going to go buy?

If you are going to trade for a younger "transformative" addition - who are you going to give up to get them? Contending teams aren't going to hand over their young, cost controlled studs - they need them in 2026 to try to "win now". Contending teams are going to give up a young, cost controlled stud even for Donovan. And other rebuilding teams will only give up theirs for a lot of prospect value - like giving up Wetherholt and/or Doyle.

And don't try to give me Tatis - he has a full NTC through 2028 and there is about zero chance he wants to come to St. Louis.

That’s an MLB executive’s job to figure out, not mine. All I can do is spitball and guess same as you because we do not know who is available, only GMs really know.

But I’ll play along - Donovan, another lesser roster player (Noot/Burleson?) and a mid level prospect for Noah Cameron - you don’t have to keep ALL prospects. Keep Sonny Gray and sign a reliable veteran on a short term deal and if Doyle shines, maybe flip the vet at the deadline and promote Doyle. We could easily have a solid rotation. Definitely better than the last several years. Of course someone will whine the Dodgers will have better so we should do nothing. But I don’t recall you being one of those guys.

Outfield - Bader and/or Yastrzemski, as stopgaps IF no UNDER 30 player trades can be made, which I would find hard to believe there is absolutely no one available. If there is, trade anyone in the minors except JJW, Doyle, Baez and Raniel.

And don’t rule out Tucker if teams back away from his initial asking price, which they might. He’s not too old to build around. Not all players fall apart at 30.

CorneliusWolfe wrote: ↑23 Nov 2025 14:36 pm That’s an MLB executive’s job to figure out, not mine. All I can do is spitball and guess same as you because we do not know who is available, only GMs really know.

But I’ll play along - Donovan, another lesser roster player (Noot/Burleson?) and a mid level prospect for Noah Cameron - you don’t have to keep ALL prospects. Keep Sonny Gray and sign a reliable veteran on a short term deal and if Doyle shines, maybe flip the vet at the deadline and promote Doyle. We could easily have a solid rotation. Definitely better than the last several years. Of course someone will whine the Dodgers will have better so we should do nothing. But I don’t recall you being one of those guys.

Noah Cameron isn't some established, "transformational" player. He's basically a prospect, and not necessarily even a front-of-rotation SP prospect. He had a 2.99 ERA last year, but only a 4.18 FIP backed by a substandard 7.42 K/9. He basically had the same year in 2025 as Matt Liberatore (by the peripherals), and at the same age (Liberatore is actually a few months younger).

Cameron - 138.1 IP, 7.42 K/9, 2.80 BB/9, 1.17 HR/9, 4.18 FIP, 1.8 fWAR (topped out as an FV 50 prospect)
Liberatore - 151.2 IP, 7.24 K/9, 2.37 BB/9, 1.13 HR/9, 4.03 FIP, 1.8 fWAR (topped out as an FV 50 prospect)

If the Cardinals trade just Donovan for Cameron and don't get more with him, I'd be underwhelmed.

Outfield - Bader and/or Yastrzemski, as stopgaps IF no UNDER 30 player trades can be made, which I would find hard to believe there is absolutely no one available. If there is, trade anyone in the minors except JJW, Doyle, Baez and Raniel.

1 or 2 year contract patches.

And don’t rule out Tucker if teams back away from his initial asking price, which they might. He’s not too old to build around. Not all players fall apart at 30.

If everybody else is backing away, especially the teams with really deep pockets, the Cardinals should be too. And Tucker fell apart in the 2nd half of 2025 already. Buyer beware.

Interesting observation in Baseball America on the increase in the average age of first-time free agents (it’s over 30 yrs old now).

The average debut age for position players has increased by more than a year since the 1980s and nearly two years since the mid-1970s when baseball first adopted free agency.

That’s significant because it also means players are reaching free agency later, often after their peak seasons are behind them. Generally, a position player’s peak seasons have been viewed as being in the 26-28 range, but it could be simplified as being from 26 to 30.

. . .

All of this means that when the six years of service time before a player becomes an unrestricted free agent began in an era where the average player would reach free agency at age 29 or 30. And there were generally a significant number of players who would reach free agency significantly earlier than that.

Nowadays with the average position player debuting just before or after his 25th birthday, the average player won’t reach free agency until he’s 31 or 32.

NYCardsFan wrote: ↑23 Nov 2025 15:32 pm Interesting observation in Baseball America on the increase in the average age of first-time free agents (it’s over 30 yrs old now).

The average debut age for position players has increased by more than a year since the 1980s and nearly two years since the mid-1970s when baseball first adopted free agency.

That’s significant because it also means players are reaching free agency later, often after their peak seasons are behind them. Generally, a position player’s peak seasons have been viewed as being in the 26-28 range, but it could be simplified as being from 26 to 30.

. . .

All of this means that when the six years of service time before a player becomes an unrestricted free agent began in an era where the average player would reach free agency at age 29 or 30. And there were generally a significant number of players who would reach free agency significantly earlier than that.

Nowadays with the average position player debuting just before or after his 25th birthday, the average player won’t reach free agency until he’s 31 or 32.

you're pretty much paying a FA for his services to his old team...you'll likely never get in what you're paying him for...especially the ones over 30.

I guess that's the way all the big contracts for FA turn out to be...so it's nothing new, I guess? If you break even you're considered a winner....there's a few exceptions like Holliday, but that's rare.

craviduce wrote: ↑23 Nov 2025 15:43 pm

NYCardsFan wrote: ↑23 Nov 2025 15:32 pm Interesting observation in Baseball America on the increase in the average age of first-time free agents (it’s over 30 yrs old now).

The average debut age for position players has increased by more than a year since the 1980s and nearly two years since the mid-1970s when baseball first adopted free agency.

That’s significant because it also means players are reaching free agency later, often after their peak seasons are behind them. Generally, a position player’s peak seasons have been viewed as being in the 26-28 range, but it could be simplified as being from 26 to 30.

. . .

All of this means that when the six years of service time before a player becomes an unrestricted free agent began in an era where the average player would reach free agency at age 29 or 30. And there were generally a significant number of players who would reach free agency significantly earlier than that.

Nowadays with the average position player debuting just before or after his 25th birthday, the average player won’t reach free agency until he’s 31 or 32.

you're pretty much paying a FA for his services to his old team...you'll likely never get in what you're paying him for...especially the ones over 30.

I guess that's the way all the big contracts for FA turn out to be...so it's nothing new, I guess? If you break even you're considered a winner....there's a few exceptions like Holliday, but that's rare.

You also have to factor in the market structure and auction dynamics of free agency, in which the annual supply of talent is systemically restricted. The “winner’s curse” in auction theory applies quite well to the MLB FA market. Signing high-end FAs presents significant asymmetric risk to the bidding teams.

That said, the richest teams have the balance sheets and local revenue to underwrite that risk. Unfortunately, the Cardinals are not one of them.

mattmitchl44 wrote: ↑22 Nov 2025 10:52 am For those who think we who preach that the Cardinals can rebuild their player development to be the engine that drives consistent success are wrong, Cleveland (4th), Milwaukee (5th), and Tampa Bay (8th) are among the Top 10 organizations in regular season wins in the last decade - along with the Dodgers, Astros, Yankees, Red Sox, Braves, Cubs, and Cardinals.
.................

Wow. That is a lot of work. And makes the point that unless a team has gobs of money it MUST have a superior farm system to compete. I would like to add to your point in that many of those players from other teams early in their careers were obtained by either trading from a wealthy farm system or dealing off veterans when they are most valuable instead of fearing backlash for trading a fan favorite. They churn the team constantly working to obtain as much talent at every level regardless of pressure.

These are the kind of team programs STL must emulate. Once they achieve a farm system producing like theirs do THEN they can fill in with spending on free agents.

NYCardsFan wrote: ↑23 Nov 2025 15:52 pm

craviduce wrote: ↑23 Nov 2025 15:43 pm

NYCardsFan wrote: ↑23 Nov 2025 15:32 pm Interesting observation in Baseball America on the increase in the average age of first-time free agents (it’s over 30 yrs old now).

The average debut age for position players has increased by more than a year since the 1980s and nearly two years since the mid-1970s when baseball first adopted free agency.

That’s significant because it also means players are reaching free agency later, often after their peak seasons are behind them. Generally, a position player’s peak seasons have been viewed as being in the 26-28 range, but it could be simplified as being from 26 to 30.

. . .

All of this means that when the six years of service time before a player becomes an unrestricted free agent began in an era where the average player would reach free agency at age 29 or 30. And there were generally a significant number of players who would reach free agency significantly earlier than that.

Nowadays with the average position player debuting just before or after his 25th birthday, the average player won’t reach free agency until he’s 31 or 32.

you're pretty much paying a FA for his services to his old team...you'll likely never get in what you're paying him for...especially the ones over 30.

I guess that's the way all the big contracts for FA turn out to be...so it's nothing new, I guess? If you break even you're considered a winner....there's a few exceptions like Holliday, but that's rare.

You also have to factor in the market structure and auction dynamics of free agency, in which the annual supply of talent is systemically restricted. The “winner’s curse” in auction theory applies quite well to the MLB FA market. Signing high-end FAs presents significant asymmetric risk to the bidding teams.

That said, the richest teams have the balance sheets and local revenue to underwrite that risk. Unfortunately, the Cardinals are not one of them.

the Haves and Have Nots

it's has gotten out of control.

I really welcome a work stoppage. They'll be haggling over the same thing they were haggling over in 1994...the Owners blinked. I hope they don't blink this time.....Salary Cap that everyone could reach if they went slightly bonkers, and a Floor to get us all competitive.

craviduce wrote: ↑23 Nov 2025 16:06 pm
the Haves and Have Nots

it's has gotten out of control.

I really welcome a work stoppage. They'll be haggling over the same thing they were haggling over in 1994...the Owners blinked. I hope they don't blink this time.....Salary Cap that everyone could reach if they went slightly bonkers, and a Floor to get us all competitive.

You sir are an optimist. That would be wonderful. I'll settle for harsher penalties for exceeding the luxury tax threshold and also taking away more draft picks for higher end free agent signings.

But hey I think it will be "interesting times" for baseball.

AZ_Cardsfan wrote: ↑23 Nov 2025 16:16 pm

craviduce wrote: ↑23 Nov 2025 16:06 pm
the Haves and Have Nots

it's has gotten out of control.

I really welcome a work stoppage. They'll be haggling over the same thing they were haggling over in 1994...the Owners blinked. I hope they don't blink this time.....Salary Cap that everyone could reach if they went slightly bonkers, and a Floor to get us all competitive.

You sir are an optimist. That would be wonderful. I'll settle for harsher penalties for exceeding the luxury tax threshold and also taking away more draft picks for higher end free agent signings.

But hey I think it will be "interesting times" for baseball.

unfortunately, I agree....optimist...I guess. But we can't have $300-400million payrolls for 1 or 2 teams, while 7 or 8 teams flirt with $100million...and sometimes $75million.

Teams are willing to pay the Full Tax...that's not a deterrence...you can argue their payroll is 500million with the tax....the gap between the Have and Have nots is growing.


Full Tax and pick 10 slots later in the next draft....that's full penalty right now.... Dodgers laughed.

Have a cap, and if it's exceeded, then you don't operate for that Season....that's real penalty...no laughing at that one.

craviduce wrote: ↑23 Nov 2025 16:23 pm

AZ_Cardsfan wrote: ↑23 Nov 2025 16:16 pm

craviduce wrote: ↑23 Nov 2025 16:06 pm
the Haves and Have Nots

it's has gotten out of control.

I really welcome a work stoppage. They'll be haggling over the same thing they were haggling over in 1994...the Owners blinked. I hope they don't blink this time.....Salary Cap that everyone could reach if they went slightly bonkers, and a Floor to get us all competitive.

You sir are an optimist. That would be wonderful. I'll settle for harsher penalties for exceeding the luxury tax threshold and also taking away more draft picks for higher end free agent signings.

But hey I think it will be "interesting times" for baseball.

unfortunately, I agree....optimist...I guess. But we can't have $300-400million payrolls for 1 or 2 teams, while 7 or 8 teams flirt with $100million...and sometimes $75million.

Teams are willing to pay the Full Tax...that's not a deterrence...you can argue their payroll is 500million with the tax....the gap between the Have and Have nots is growing.


Full Tax and pick 10 slots later in the next draft....that's full penalty right now.... Dodgers laughed.

Have a cap, and if it's exceeded, then you don't operate for that Season....that's real penalty...no laughing at that one.

I just see no path where the Union agrees to a hard cap. I mean yeah I like it. But I can't see the union accepting. What I would do is truly harsh the luxury tax penalty so it does hurt even LAD. And loss of their 1st round pick if they sign a premium FA ala Tucker. And of course the taxes are sent to the have nots who now have a salary floor. No more coasting and making money without even trying.

Yeah not perfect. But you have to find a solution that all sides will finally accept.

craviduce wrote: ↑23 Nov 2025 16:06 pm

NYCardsFan wrote: ↑23 Nov 2025 15:52 pm

craviduce wrote: ↑23 Nov 2025 15:43 pm

NYCardsFan wrote: ↑23 Nov 2025 15:32 pm Interesting observation in Baseball America on the increase in the average age of first-time free agents (it’s over 30 yrs old now).

The average debut age for position players has increased by more than a year since the 1980s and nearly two years since the mid-1970s when baseball first adopted free agency.

That’s significant because it also means players are reaching free agency later, often after their peak seasons are behind them. Generally, a position player’s peak seasons have been viewed as being in the 26-28 range, but it could be simplified as being from 26 to 30.

. . .

All of this means that when the six years of service time before a player becomes an unrestricted free agent began in an era where the average player would reach free agency at age 29 or 30. And there were generally a significant number of players who would reach free agency significantly earlier than that.

Nowadays with the average position player debuting just before or after his 25th birthday, the average player won’t reach free agency until he’s 31 or 32.

you're pretty much paying a FA for his services to his old team...you'll likely never get in what you're paying him for...especially the ones over 30.

I guess that's the way all the big contracts for FA turn out to be...so it's nothing new, I guess? If you break even you're considered a winner....there's a few exceptions like Holliday, but that's rare.

You also have to factor in the market structure and auction dynamics of free agency, in which the annual supply of talent is systemically restricted. The “winner’s curse” in auction theory applies quite well to the MLB FA market. Signing high-end FAs presents significant asymmetric risk to the bidding teams.

That said, the richest teams have the balance sheets and local revenue to underwrite that risk. Unfortunately, the Cardinals are not one of them.

the Haves and Have Nots

it's has gotten out of control.

I really welcome a work stoppage. They'll be haggling over the same thing they were haggling over in 1994...the Owners blinked. I hope they don't blink this time.....Salary Cap that everyone could reach if they went slightly bonkers, and a Floor to get us all competitive.

The vast gap in local broadcast and other revenue between the haves and have nots will keep owners divided. Why would owners of the Dodgers, Yankees, Phillies, Cubs, etc., get on board with owners of the Pirates, Marlins, Rays, etc.? And why would owners of the Pirates, Marlins, Rays, etc., get on board with a floor? An mountain of revenue sharing would have to occur. Good luck with that!

AZ_Cardsfan wrote: ↑23 Nov 2025 16:28 pm

craviduce wrote: ↑23 Nov 2025 16:23 pm

AZ_Cardsfan wrote: ↑23 Nov 2025 16:16 pm

craviduce wrote: ↑23 Nov 2025 16:06 pm
the Haves and Have Nots

it's has gotten out of control.

I really welcome a work stoppage. They'll be haggling over the same thing they were haggling over in 1994...the Owners blinked. I hope they don't blink this time.....Salary Cap that everyone could reach if they went slightly bonkers, and a Floor to get us all competitive.

You sir are an optimist. That would be wonderful. I'll settle for harsher penalties for exceeding the luxury tax threshold and also taking away more draft picks for higher end free agent signings.

But hey I think it will be "interesting times" for baseball.

unfortunately, I agree....optimist...I guess. But we can't have $300-400million payrolls for 1 or 2 teams, while 7 or 8 teams flirt with $100million...and sometimes $75million.

Teams are willing to pay the Full Tax...that's not a deterrence...you can argue their payroll is 500million with the tax....the gap between the Have and Have nots is growing.


Full Tax and pick 10 slots later in the next draft....that's full penalty right now.... Dodgers laughed.

Have a cap, and if it's exceeded, then you don't operate for that Season....that's real penalty...no laughing at that one.

I just see no path where the Union agrees to a hard cap. I mean yeah I like it. But I can't see the union accepting. What I would do is truly harsh the luxury tax penalty so it does hurt even LAD. And loss of their 1st round pick if they sign a premium FA ala Tucker. And of course the taxes are sent to the have nots who now have a salary floor. No more coasting and making money without even trying.

Yeah not perfect. But you have to find a solution that all sides will finally accept.

yeah, they're going to balk hard...it's what labor unions should do. I get the reasoning behind it. I'm saying to the owners....don't blink this time...save the game while you can.

and No Picks for the next season...paying over 100% tax doesn't seem to hurt the Dodgers, Mets, Sox and Yanks....they laugh and keep on going.

1 pick....they'll laugh at that too.

Take all their picks away before the 10th round and set their bonus allotment accordingly, put them on a $500,000 bonus pool for 5 years in International FA.

you gotta make it hurt

and change the contracts...no more deferring nearly entire salaries to circumvent the Payroll Tax

mattmitchl44 wrote: ↑23 Nov 2025 13:52 pm

ScotchMIrish wrote: ↑23 Nov 2025 12:49 pm That's interesting. I agree we need to move Gray, Arenado and Contreras but the problem with "MLB ready prospects" is if they were MLB ready they would already be in MLB. Caglianone is an example of that. 6th pick in the first round. Tearing up minor league pitching. If pitchers were allowed to bat they would have hit better than he did when they called him up. If we trade Donovan for prospects is had better be for more than one because we aren't going to get a prospect who can fill Donovan's shoes in 2026. If we are abandoning all hope of competing in 2026 then trade Donovan but get multiple good prospects in return.

Donovan might be the only one of those who could a significant return.

Not necessarily.

Wetherholt is a "ML-ready" prospect. He's going to go to ST with every expectation that he'll be ready to break camp with the ML team on Opening Day.

Doyle may be an "ML-ready" prospect for ST 2027.

Now it is up to Bloom and Co. to do their homework and figure out which Doyle-like or Wetherholt-like prospect from some other team has a high ceiling that they will ready and is ML-ready, and then get them for Donovan.

Would you trade Wetherholt for Arenado? Gray? Contreras?

AZ_Cardsfan wrote: ↑23 Nov 2025 16:28 pm

craviduce wrote: ↑23 Nov 2025 16:23 pm

AZ_Cardsfan wrote: ↑23 Nov 2025 16:16 pm

craviduce wrote: ↑23 Nov 2025 16:06 pm
the Haves and Have Nots

it's has gotten out of control.

I really welcome a work stoppage. They'll be haggling over the same thing they were haggling over in 1994...the Owners blinked. I hope they don't blink this time.....Salary Cap that everyone could reach if they went slightly bonkers, and a Floor to get us all competitive.

You sir are an optimist. That would be wonderful. I'll settle for harsher penalties for exceeding the luxury tax threshold and also taking away more draft picks for higher end free agent signings.

But hey I think it will be "interesting times" for baseball.

unfortunately, I agree....optimist...I guess. But we can't have $300-400million payrolls for 1 or 2 teams, while 7 or 8 teams flirt with $100million...and sometimes $75million.

Teams are willing to pay the Full Tax...that's not a deterrence...you can argue their payroll is 500million with the tax....the gap between the Have and Have nots is growing.


Full Tax and pick 10 slots later in the next draft....that's full penalty right now.... Dodgers laughed.

Have a cap, and if it's exceeded, then you don't operate for that Season....that's real penalty...no laughing at that one.

I just see no path where the Union agrees to a hard cap. I mean yeah I like it. But I can't see the union accepting. What I would do is truly harsh the luxury tax penalty so it does hurt even LAD. And loss of their 1st round pick if they sign a premium FA ala Tucker. And of course the taxes are sent to the have nots who now have a salary floor. No more coasting and making money without even trying.

Yeah not perfect. But you have to find a solution that all sides will finally accept.

They best thing the majority of owners could do is sue in federal court to get rid of the anti-trust exemption MLB enjoys.
No other sport has it and it is the one thing which gives the mega-market teams an advantage above all other factors.
Courts have already stated that the exemption is technically illegal - but have left it in place as a "grandfathered" exception.
If the small and mid-market owners had the stomach for the fight and the division it would bring, they would have a near certain win in court.
If the Cardinals, Rays, Rockies, Indians, Brewers, etc. could sell their broadcasts in LA, NY, and Chicago - and any other markets of their choosing, the entire current structure would crumble, and the mega-teams would be forced into a full revenue sharing arrangement enjoyed by the NFL and NBA.
That, in turn, would bring the union to the table because they could no longer leverage the top revenue and payroll teams against the rest.
That is the answer.
Easy.
Obvious.
Correct.
But the owners who should sue, who need to sue, will not.