"Yet another offseason of hyperaggressive spending and mind-boggling CBT payrolls from the Dodgers and Mets (and, this winter, the Blue Jays) has led to increased talk of competitive balance ahead of the impending conclusion of the 2022-26 collective bargaining agreement. Owners are again expected to push for a salary cap -- though that's a perpetual goal and would absolutely have been the case regardless of how the usual suspects spent in free agency this winter -- and they'll have plenty of fan support in that regard."
"The A's felt compelled to spend enough to push their CBT payroll up to $105MM last year -- roughly 1.5 times the amount they receive annually from revenue-sharing -- but that was seemingly because they're the only club to have been actually stripped of revenue-sharing status in the past. The Marlins were supposedly in the same boat this winter, and they've thumbed their nose at the idea of spending, as evidenced by a CBT payroll in the $80MM range."
Offseason spending by the Dodgers, Mets, and Blue Jays increased talk of competitive balance and renewed owner interest in a salary cap ahead of the 2022–26 CBA's end. Small-market fans feel defeatist about their teams' chances in free agency while large-market spending raises postseason probability for heavy spenders. A cap would likely include a salary floor to force minimum payrolls, but the existing revenue-sharing floor lacks enforcement. The A's raised payroll to about $105MM to avoid penalties, while the Marlins maintained roughly an $80MM payroll. Doubt remains that cap/floor rules would force low-spend clubs to meaningfully increase payroll.
Read at MLB Trade Rumors
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]