Thank goodness for salary caps

But the Twins DO MAKE ENOUGH MONEY. That is my point. They chose to tell their fans they couldn't afford Santana. What they didn't say, but is true, is that they would have continued to make a profit even if they had signed him.

 

The Patriots missed the playoffs. So while 11-5 might look pretty, within the context of that season it wasn't good enough.

We'll know soon enough how the Colts will be without Manning. He's getting up there. Now that breathing on WRs is a penalty, all you need in the NFL to compete is a great QB. Watch how the Cardinals fare without Kurt Warner this year.

 

You're probably forgetting the central fund to which the Yankees contribute more than $100 million (31 percent of revenue) before the luxury tax is even considered.

http://bizofbaseball.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=3765:mlb-cant-have-their-cake-and-eat-it-too-revenue-sharing&catid=26:editorials&Itemid=39

This year, approx. $400 million will be distributed from high revenue making clubs such as the Yankees and Red Sox to those at the low end of the spectrum, such as the Marlins, Pirates, Rays, and Royals.

Revenue-sharing figures for each of the 30 clubs have not been leaked to the media since 2002-2003, and 2005 (see the complete set of figures), which saw revenue transfers of $169 million, $220 million, and $308.4 million respectively.

So, just over $190 million more in revenues will move between payors and payees this year compared to the last year that full figures were available in 2005, an increase of 22.9 percent.

There's no shortage of revenue sharing in baseball.

 

The Yankees aren't the only team that contributes. The total pool is more than $400 million.

To cap (limit) investment in the product would be a growth-killing disaster in an baseball. Steep revenue growth in baseball (now well over $6 billion annually) in recent years is a byproduct of most teams competing better not just in their divisions but in their local entertainment markets.

Bottom line: In baseball's system of locally generated revenue there is always going to be disparity from market to market. Baseball as an industry needs the Yankees to fuel growth. To be working on all cylinders, in fact, all teams need to be competitive in their local entertainment markets by putting the best possible product on the field.

The Yankees create 10 times more revenue for the industry than the Marlins, so the slight edge provided by their additional resources is easily justifiable to the other 29 owners. That edge in resources to invest is insignificant compared with the additional revenue and customer base the Yankees bring to the industry.

 

Which would all be fine if baseball would institute a salary floor and cap along with its current revenue sharing. But it won't, in part because franchises like the Yankees fight to protect their built-in advantage and in part because MLB thinks it is prudent to fix the game so the bigger markets have more success, thus getting on television more often.

It's funny how the MLB fanatics on here argue about how spending more money could help the smaller markets make more money, but spreading the current wealth isn't an option? Wouldn't that be an investment in the sport as whole?

Oh yeah. That gets back to the idea of giving up some of the built-in advantage. Wouldn't want that to happen.

 

Shhhhh. Don't go confusing LongTimeListener with facts.

 

Do you ever get tired of being wrong all the time? I would think it would eventually start to bother you.

 

What teams like the Twins need to do is to tell their fans that Santana isn't worth what he wants. he's 40-25 with the Mets and he's owed 80 million over the next 3 years, with the Mets buying out the team option. Overpaying players is almost never worth it over the length of the contract.

 

To be fair, they let Hunter walk.

Edit: They did offer $15 mil a year for three years.

 

What LongTimeListener fails to understand is that teams like the Twins have to make choices. Do you pay Santana and Torii Hunter? Or do you keep Morneau, Nathan and Cuddyer and try to hold on to Mauer when his deal is up?

 

Again, it would be a financial disaster for the industry to limit the Yankees ability to invest in their product because they compete in the most competitive local entertainment market (New York) in terms of attendance, television, sponsorships, etc.

MLB needs the Yankees to create stars and fuel revenue growth for the industry. Nobody in baseball thinks it's so bad that the Yankees have an edge in financial resources when they're also producing about 30 percent more revenue than their closest competitor and 10 times more revenue than the laggards of the league.

Salary caps limit investment in the product and promote mediocrity on the playing field, something that would severely stunt revenue growth for both the Yankees and the industry.

 

OK. I can see that argument.

Totally batshit.