Salary cap chatter starts up
Posted: Friday, January 16, 2009 5:50 PM
The drums beat for a salary cap in baseball. They beat slowly at first, with a brave owner or two carrying the flag in opening public statements. Next the talking heads and blogger universe run with the idea. A populist movement is afoot -- who wouldn’t want the Royals to have a chance at signing CC Sabathia? Why should the Yankees get whomever they want?
Finally, enough owners believe to create a faction -- one that must be heard
within the meeting room. The last play in this scenario is to target the next labor negotiation as the time to make a fundamental change in the “partnership” (and that’s what it is) between owners and players.
Here’s where, as the Smiths declared in their 80s classic, “Stop me if you think that you’ve heard this one before?” Yes, and it always ends the same way: a strike/lockout followed by minor tinkering to the existing system.
And doesn’t it seem to you that baseball is healthy? Doesn’t it seem -- current economic fear aside (and its impact is pending) -- that baseball has been flush in cash over the last decade? From the brink of self-destruction in 1995, hasn’t baseball generated the greatest renaissance in the history of American professional sports?
But the Yankees sign three free agents for almost half a billion dollars and now a few owners, understandably aggrieved, start to mouth the words guaranteed to destroy any relationship with the players – “salary cap.”
This week I spent time with the president of a “major league” franchise (not MLB) representing a small to mid market. We talked about the current economic downturn and he mentioned how his market and others like it, feel more pain. They have a smaller corporate presence in their cities which means fewer customers for the high-priced seats, suites and advertisements that fuel pro sports.
Downsize? That’s what most companies do when hard times arrive. But with a salary cap comes a salary floor. It’s a minimum payroll for each team. Upside: It prevents a stripped-down franchise, most recent example being the Marlins. Downside: It forces teams in smaller markets to spend more than they would otherwise (which is sometimes a good thing. I know the Brown family resented the NFL’s salary cap as it forced the Bengals to invest more in player salaries. It would be hard to arrive at an argument that the floor has hurt the Bengals).
Don’t believe me? Shawn Hoffman of Baseball Prospectus ran the numbers and projected that with a cap/floor, Pittsburgh would have needed to increase its Opening Day payroll by $28 million. My friend the president of the aforementioned major league franchise is concerned that franchises like the one he runs will be forced by their sport to spend more than their decreased revenues would justify.
If that happens, you know what’s next? A strike/lockout/work stoppage. My friend mentioned that possibility for all three leagues (NFL, NBA, and NHL) that have a salary cap. He believes there is danger that the current systems won’t work. If so, the only relief for teams would be a new system that only is born after a work disruption.
Many in baseball believe there will never be a salary cap as long as Don Fehr or any Fehr disciple heads the players’ union. It is Marvin Miller’s legacy. Allow free markets to work. Place no restriction on what a single player can earn. The operating philosophy: allow the star player to earn what he can. As his salary rises, he lifts the salaries of his brethren.
To owners and fans, they accept a salary floor to achieve a salary cap. To Miller, Fehr and the players, they would have to accept a salary cap to achieve a salary floor. And they are unwilling to make that trade.
Of course, such a stance is rife with the appearance of hypocrisy. Why would a union be against a minimum team payroll but in favor of a minimum salary?
Any salary cap talk exists because of the Yankees. But here’s a thought that came to me after a conversation with a 35-year pro sports executive a few months back. In the economic downturn, his belief was that value mattered more than ever. No longer could teams expect people to spend/attend just because there was a game. Teams had to provide “value”.
Question: has any team provided more value to its fans in recent years than the Yankees? They charge more than any baseball team, yet how many fans would you think leave a Yankees’ game saying they didn’t get their money’s worth? A scant few I argue.
So if the Yankees charge a high rate, they justify it by providing a quality product. And isn’t that really just good business? Now we can go into the revenue sharing (a gentle name for corporate welfare) talk and other areas ad nauseum. But, I was struck by two takes: Cubs chairman Crane Kenney said he had no problem with the Yankees working “within the system” as the rules currently allow. And Chipper Jones’ take in the recent Sporting News where he said the Yankees “feel they have to offer a New York-style signing bonus on top of what a player is worth to the rest of the league just to get them to play in New York.”
That probably does little to mollify the owners in Pittsburgh, Oakland and Milwaukee who have started the cap chatter. Credit to Brewers owner Mark Attanasio. He has spent in Milwaukee and won. Thus, his opinion on said matters carries more weight. In those words, though, lies a rarely heard explanation about how the Yankees bid…and just how many players will take the extra bucks.
Salary cap? I don’t believe I will live to see one in baseball. Last time someone tried, the game stared Armageddon in the eye.
FIVE MORE SWINGS:
1. I HAVE BEEN CORRECTED…rather rudely though accurately…on a factual error in a post earlier this week. Hal Bodley lost his vote for postseason awards. Hall of Fame votes are kept for life. I apologize for that error committed in haste.
But it only fuels my befuddlement at the Hall-of-Fame voting process.
I assume that any reader of this blog knows that Hall-of-Fame votes are gained after 10 years of membership in the Baseball Writers’ Association of America as a badgeholder. I did not know votes are kept for life. My question remains one of transparency. How does a voter achieve 10 years of BBWAA of membership -- does he or she have to cover the game on a regular basis? Can a columnist who attends only a handful of games per year be afforded that right to vote? And how can anyone be allowed Supreme Court tenure to vote for an honor so great? How is Corky Simpson a voter? One step in the right direction: I read that Internet writers are now offered BBWAA membership.
2. LOTS OF YANKEES…A vote in New York is expected to extend $372 million in tax-free financing for the new Yankee Stadium. This has stirred a political firestorm. I defend the Yankees spending as within the system but it is hard to square this “break” with the economic crisis in full bore. No politics here, only this point -- as outlined above -- the Yankees are an honest proposition. They believe they offer a product worthy of its high price tag. They are like a Broadway show -- the curtain rises, the performance takes place and afterwards, the producer hopes the customers enjoyed. There is no “community” involvement with the Yankees -- they are a sports version of Broadway. Fine, except the Broadway theaters aren’t lined up for these kinds of tax breaks.
3. MORE ON THE YANKEES…a recent poll of 12 former MLB managers by The Sporting News asked, “Would you work for the Steinbrenners if given the opportunity?” The responses: 10 yes, two no. Also asked, “What’s the best managerial job in the majors?” Yankees and Cardinals tied with three votes each.
4. THE SCOTT BORAS MEDIA TOUR…landed in San Francisco this week when the agent gave an interview in which he said he was fending off suitors for Manny Ramirez. Of course, he was smart enough to say that on the Giants’ flagship radio station. The Giants bought that same line about a guy named Zito.
5. YOUNG CATCHERS ON THE HORIZON…Baltimore signs Gregg Zaun as a caretaker until Matt Wieters gets the call. San Francisco invites Buster Posey to big league spring training. Expect both to be in the bigs by the All-Star Break. Posey may get a look at first base but with Bengie Molina in the final year of his contract, Posey should have a place to play in the future. The Giants hope Posey can be this generation’s Will Clark, a college star who reaches the majors on a fast track.
