STLtoday.com

“Heyman: Early estimates suggest proposed salary cap might be set around $260M-280M and floor around $140M-160M.

Thoughts if this became a reality?”

Goldfan wrote: ↑27 Feb 2026 09:12 am “Heyman: Early estimates suggest proposed salary cap might be set around $260M-280M and floor around $140M-160M.

Thoughts if this became a reality?”

It would make no sense for the Cardinals to spend $150M this year.

I'd be ecstatic with that.

JohnnyMO wrote: ↑27 Feb 2026 09:16 am I'd be ecstatic with that.

Seems reasonable

Reasonable to me

alw80 wrote: ↑27 Feb 2026 09:14 am

Goldfan wrote: ↑27 Feb 2026 09:12 am “Heyman: Early estimates suggest proposed salary cap might be set around $260M-280M and floor around $140M-160M.

Thoughts if this became a reality?”

It would make no sense for the Cardinals to spend $150M this year.

I dont think they'd have to this year. Next year? It would be great. Much bigger talent pool available for the smaller market teams, as the big boys will already be capped out.

I have nothing but an opinion- I'd be surprised if the floor was that high.

RamFan08NY wrote: ↑27 Feb 2026 09:44 am

alw80 wrote: ↑27 Feb 2026 09:14 am

Goldfan wrote: ↑27 Feb 2026 09:12 am “Heyman: Early estimates suggest proposed salary cap might be set around $260M-280M and floor around $140M-160M.

Thoughts if this became a reality?”

It would make no sense for the Cardinals to spend $150M this year.

I dont think they'd have to this year. Next year? It would be great. Much bigger talent pool available for the smaller market teams, as the big boys will already be capped out.

If there was a floor they would.

Goldfan wrote: ↑27 Feb 2026 09:12 am “Heyman: Early estimates suggest proposed salary cap might be set around $260M-280M and floor around $140M-160M.

Thoughts if this became a reality?”

Right ballpark, but I think a tad high on the floor especially.

I expect ~$260 million for a cap and ~$130 million for a floor.

As demonstrated elsewhere, if you had put a $125/$250 million structure on 2025, you likely would have ended up with exactly the same amount of money going out in player salaries. Bumping that to $130/$260 million would likely allow for about a 4% increase in money going out in player salaries from 2025 to 2027.

At a $260 million cap in 2027, I think the Dodgers would be the only team right now with contract commitments and an expected payroll that would exceed that and have to be "grandfathered." They would get under the cap in 2028.

Goldfan wrote: ↑27 Feb 2026 09:12 am “Heyman: Early estimates suggest proposed salary cap might be set around $260M-280M and floor around $140M-160M.

Thoughts if this became a reality?”

Dodgers/Mets would have to trade a third of their team w/nothing but prospects coming back!

That'll never fly w/the MLBPA.

Even if they did agree to a cap (they won't), they'd want it at $400M.

rockondlouie wrote: ↑27 Feb 2026 10:16 am

Goldfan wrote: ↑27 Feb 2026 09:12 am “Heyman: Early estimates suggest proposed salary cap might be set around $260M-280M and floor around $140M-160M.

Thoughts if this became a reality?”

Dodgers/Mets would have to trade a third of their team w/nothing but prospects coming back!

That'll never fly w/the MLBPA.

Even if they did agree to a cap (they won't), they'd want it at $400M.

Per Cot's, the Dodgers have salary commitments of $340 million for 2027, but only $263 million in 2028.

The Mets are $254 million in 2027 and $170 million in 2028.

The Yankees are $209 million in 2027 and $151 million in 2028.

The Phillies are $189 million in 2027 and $137 million in 2028.

The Blue Jays are $205 million in 2027 and $185 million in 2028.

So at $260 million, you probably only need to "grandfather" the Dodgers in 2027 and bump the cap a bit in 2028.

Yeah, the Mets in 2027 and the Dodgers in 2028 might each have to move one or two sizeable contracts each in order to be able to fill out their rosters with ML minimum players, but it would be doable. The Mets could deal Clay Holmes and Luke Weaver before the 2027 season and free up $25 million to pay ML minimum players. The Dodgers could deal Tyler Glasnow or Edwin Diaz before the 2028 season and free up over $20 million (or both for over $40 million).

If 27-28 owners want it, the Dodgers, Mets, and maybe Yankees are just going to have to accept it.

mattmitchl44 wrote: ↑27 Feb 2026 10:25 am

rockondlouie wrote: ↑27 Feb 2026 10:16 am

Goldfan wrote: ↑27 Feb 2026 09:12 am “Heyman: Early estimates suggest proposed salary cap might be set around $260M-280M and floor around $140M-160M.

Thoughts if this became a reality?”

Dodgers/Mets would have to trade a third of their team w/nothing but prospects coming back!

That'll never fly w/the MLBPA.

Even if they did agree to a cap (they won't), they'd want it at $400M.

Per Cot's, the Dodgers have salary commitments of $340 million for 2027, but only $263 million in 2028.

The Mets are $254 million in 2027 and $170 million in 2028.

The Yankees are $209 million in 2027 and $151 million in 2028.

The Phillies are $189 million in 2027 and $137 million in 2028.

The Blue Jays are $205 million in 2027 and $185 million in 2028.

So at $260 million, you probably only need to "grandfather" the Dodgers in 2027 and bump the cap a bit in 2028.

Yeah, the Mets in 2027 and the Dodgers in 2028 might each have to move one sizeable contract each in order to be able to fill out their rosters with ML minimum players, but it would be doable.

If 27-28 owners want it, the Dodgers, Mets, and maybe Yankees are just going to have to accept it.

Fangraphs is way off (they're not discounting deferred money, something I think w/be bargained way down to stop the Dodgers). tT

They have the Dodgers at $395M, Mets at $364M.

Doesn't matter though.

The MLBPA will never, ever go for a salary cap no matter how badly owners and we fan want to see one.

the key point its, is what are the penalties for going over? Under? Will the league nullify contracts that put the team over? Will they demand a cash payment to the league for the amount under the floor? Will the over limit teams actually trade top talent to comply, or will they just pay the penalty, which is what they are doing now. How to enforce the limits is the key.

rockondlouie wrote: ↑27 Feb 2026 10:39 am

mattmitchl44 wrote: ↑27 Feb 2026 10:25 am

rockondlouie wrote: ↑27 Feb 2026 10:16 am

Goldfan wrote: ↑27 Feb 2026 09:12 am “Heyman: Early estimates suggest proposed salary cap might be set around $260M-280M and floor around $140M-160M.

Thoughts if this became a reality?”

Dodgers/Mets would have to trade a third of their team w/nothing but prospects coming back!

That'll never fly w/the MLBPA.

Even if they did agree to a cap (they won't), they'd want it at $400M.

Per Cot's, the Dodgers have salary commitments of $340 million for 2027, but only $263 million in 2028.

The Mets are $254 million in 2027 and $170 million in 2028.

The Yankees are $209 million in 2027 and $151 million in 2028.

The Phillies are $189 million in 2027 and $137 million in 2028.

The Blue Jays are $205 million in 2027 and $185 million in 2028.

So at $260 million, you probably only need to "grandfather" the Dodgers in 2027 and bump the cap a bit in 2028.

Yeah, the Mets in 2027 and the Dodgers in 2028 might each have to move one sizeable contract each in order to be able to fill out their rosters with ML minimum players, but it would be doable.

If 27-28 owners want it, the Dodgers, Mets, and maybe Yankees are just going to have to accept it.

Fangraphs is way off (they're not discounting deferred money, something I think w/be bargained way down to stop the Dodgers). tT

They have the Dodgers at $395M, Mets at $364M.

Doesn't matter though.

The MLBPA will never, ever go for a salary cap no matter how badly owners and we fan want to see one.

For 2026, the Dodgers Competitive Balance Payroll number is $411 million (which distributes back in deferred money) vs. an actual payroll of $318 million. The Mets Competitive Balance Payroll number is $378 million vs an actual payroll of $358 million.

I'm talking actual payrolls. The Dodgers will have deal with all of their deferred money in the future vs. whatever the cap is in the 2030s (probably $300+ million by that point).

And make changes which sweeten the pot enough for the "have not" players so they can earn a more justifiable amount of money in their early years (and/or their short careers) and I think the owners could get to 51%.

mattmitchl44 wrote: ↑27 Feb 2026 10:45 am

rockondlouie wrote: ↑27 Feb 2026 10:39 am

mattmitchl44 wrote: ↑27 Feb 2026 10:25 am

rockondlouie wrote: ↑27 Feb 2026 10:16 am

Goldfan wrote: ↑27 Feb 2026 09:12 am “Heyman: Early estimates suggest proposed salary cap might be set around $260M-280M and floor around $140M-160M.

Thoughts if this became a reality?”

Dodgers/Mets would have to trade a third of their team w/nothing but prospects coming back!

That'll never fly w/the MLBPA.

Even if they did agree to a cap (they won't), they'd want it at $400M.

Per Cot's, the Dodgers have salary commitments of $340 million for 2027, but only $263 million in 2028.

The Mets are $254 million in 2027 and $170 million in 2028.

The Yankees are $209 million in 2027 and $151 million in 2028.

The Phillies are $189 million in 2027 and $137 million in 2028.

The Blue Jays are $205 million in 2027 and $185 million in 2028.

So at $260 million, you probably only need to "grandfather" the Dodgers in 2027 and bump the cap a bit in 2028.

Yeah, the Mets in 2027 and the Dodgers in 2028 might each have to move one sizeable contract each in order to be able to fill out their rosters with ML minimum players, but it would be doable.

If 27-28 owners want it, the Dodgers, Mets, and maybe Yankees are just going to have to accept it.

Fangraphs is way off (they're not discounting deferred money, something I think w/be bargained way down to stop the Dodgers). tT

They have the Dodgers at $395M, Mets at $364M.

Doesn't matter though.

The MLBPA will never, ever go for a salary cap no matter how badly owners and we fan want to see one.

For 2026, the Dodgers Competitive Balance Payroll number is $411 million (which distributes back in deferred money) vs. an actual payroll of $318 million. The Mets Competitive Balance Payroll number is $378 million vs an actual payroll of $358 million.

I'm talking actual payrolls. The Dodgers will have deal with all of their deferred money in the future vs. whatever the cap is in the 2030s (probably $300+ million by that point).

And make changes which sweeten the pot enough for the "have not" players so they can earn a more justifiable amount of money in their early years (and/or their short careers) and I think the owners could get to 51%.

Until they change their stance that's been in place since 1966 it won't matter since the MLBPA won't accept a salary cap.

(But like most in here I wish they would too)

Galatians221jb1 wrote: ↑27 Feb 2026 10:41 am the key point its, is what are the penalties for going over? Under? Will the league nullify contracts that put the team over? Will they demand a cash payment to the league for the amount under the floor? Will the over limit teams actually trade top talent to comply, or will they just pay the penalty, which is what they are doing now. How to enforce the limits is the key.

Enforcing a cap would be as you describe- a contract that does not comply with the rules is nullified. It's much the same as they do with roster management now- you have a limit at 26 and 40 players that you don't get to exceed. If you want to do something different, you have to make a corresponding move. You don't get a 41 man roster no matter who you are.

As for the floor, I suppose they just pay the difference (plus, perhaps a penalty?) for the shortcoming?