Baseball Thread Number 8: Cal Ripken says the playoff hunt is fun

In 2008-2009, the spending on salaries ranged from about $33 million to $66 million. With salary-cap shenanigans such as wildly frontloading contracts (and thus at the end having a player with a large cap hit and almost no real salary, perfect for a team trying to meet the salary floor), I suspect we'll see that difference widen.

 

and small market teams compete just fine. The gap was a hell of a lot more before the cap came in. If you can't make it finacially with the system in place, you shouldn't be in the league.

 

For 2009, the Yankees have MLB's highest payroll at $201,449,289. The Marlins are at the bottom at $36,814,000. You really think the gap in hockey is comparable?

 

*walks by whistling*

 

Yes, especially because of the different dynamics in the sports. Small-market hockey teams don't get guaranteed control of young players at extreme discounts for six years after they enter the league, for example.

 

Only problem is, even if a MLB team does everything right -- drafts the right players, gets them signed, is aggressive with the international market, makes shrewd deals, etc. -- they're still tearing down and building up all over again every five years.

The Rays had the perfect storm last year. Now, they've traded Kazmir and Crawford could be next during the offseason, because they're following the blueprint that got them to the World Series in the first place. Build up, tear up, build up, tear down, it's a constant process. And there's little margin for error compared to the Yankees, Mets, Red Sox, Angels, Cubs, etc. They don't have $5 million to waste on Penny as a No. 5 starter, another $5 million to waste on Smoltz as a No. 5 starter, etc.

 

The Cubs need a bigger margin for error.

 

Interesting that you bring up Smoltz. If you just looked at the size of the city/market, St. Louis probably would be considered a "small market team." I mean, no NBA team, trouble keeping an NFL team, and just not as huge of a population as New York, Chicago, Dallas, Atlanta, etc...

But that is such a baseball town, with such tremendous fan support, that they can go out and make deals for people like Matt Holliday and John Smoltz in the heat of a pennant race. And the money to pay for those guys will be there.

I think it gets back to the argument about the Pittsburgh Pirates -- some cities are just better baseball towns than others.

 

Except the Cardinals basically aren't paying Smoltz or Lugo, both Red Sox mistakes. Boston's picking up the tab there.

It's it's not big/small market. It's big/small money. And the small money teams can compete, if they have the right management in place, there's no question about that. The Bucs might finally have that.

 

Sorry, that doesn't make up for $160-plus in payroll difference. Not even close.

More importantly, you are assuming that NHL teams will find more holes in the cap system, rather than the more likely possibility that the teams that have been playing games with the cap will have the bill come due.

This all began with a discussion of Pittsburgh, a city whose sports teams provide a wonderful example of what meaningfull revenue sharing and a salary cap can do. The Steelers have no problem competing financially in the NFL. They never have. The same seems to be true of the Penguins, though I think there is still a lot to learn about how the NHL will function with the salary cap in the long term.

The Pirates and other reams at their level of revenue are at a distinct disadvantage when compared to the large-market teams in baseball. Yes, they have horrible ownership which puts the bottom line before winning. Yes, they have been led to disaster by a parade of failed baseball people. But if you don't think the lack of revenue has also been an issue over the last 17 years, I don't think it is worthwhile to even try to reason with you. I'm sorry if that is harsh, but I have come to believe that some people hate the idea of a salary cap so much they will argue any point, no matter how silly it is.

 

No question. Pittsburgh is not a great baseball town. In fact, I've been making that very argument for a few pages now. Attendance is a much larger part of the revenue for MLB teams than it is for the NFL or NHL. The Cardinals draw. They have for as long as I can remember, in good or bad years. And despite what some might believe, the a couple of 90-win seasons would not bring them anywhere near the Cardinals' level.

 

The Cardinals don't draw as well as they once did. Check out StubHub sometime. There are usually loads and loads of sub-$10 tickets available, though that might be subsiding know that they're in a pennant drive.