Should baseball relegate teams??

[DirrtySouth78]

re: Should baseball relegate teams??

I've always been for a salary foor more than a cap. You wanna spend 200 million go ahead, but I think that you should hafta spend a certain amount. I don't think it should be a set amount, but a percentage of what the top payroll is.

Never have been a fan of salary caps, because in my opinion it doesn't bring parity, it brings mediocrity.

Look at the NFL, everyone talks about how well that works, but guys get cut solely based on the amount they make. Teams just look for someone cheaper. I wanna see the main guys on a team stay on the same team.

I just think a salary cap in baseball wouldn't work as well as people think. It could make some teams much worse instead of better. If a team gets rid of players because of how much they make, but don't have players who are ready or good enough in the minors it could make certain teams worse.

It also doesn't help teams who don't properly draft and develop talent in the minors get better.

[imapotato]

re: Should baseball relegate teams??

I am so shocked when I see young people be so for socialist standards and against capitalism. No one should micro manage owners...their primary objective is to make a profit

As for salary cap...doesn't work in football. Great teams will be great, and the Lions will be the Lions.

They should fix it so that a player is tied to a team longer but the MLBPA is too strong and the commish is too weak to do that.

BTW, teams that get the benfit of the luxury tax have it heavily auditted. The pIrates for example have used it for minors development and scouting...that has shown via players such as Alvarez, Tabata and McCutcheon. They will get better...as will the Royals

Its just those teams when they make a mistake in how a player will perform it is magnified, because they cannot just go out and get another like the big market teams

[24]

re: Should baseball relegate teams??

I love how football leagues (soccer) around the world regulate teams that don't perform good during the season. I'm looking at the standings, it's always the same teams in the bottom pit. I think MLB & MiLB should start regulating teams. It would give the game more of an interest. Make the owners try harder and spend their money to get better players instead of hoarding it.

first off NEVER compare America's national pastime to soccer. Thank sweet baby Jesus that baseball has been left alone for all these years. no regulation, no salary cap. if it ain't broke don't fix it and the MLB is running fine right now. You can say how some teams are unbalanced to a point where they do nothing but lose (Pirates) to nothing but win (Yankees, Red Sox) but the sport has always been like that.

[ryan36]

Re: Should baseball relegate teams??

Baseball is too cyclical, because it has a farm system like no other sport. Remember how good those early 90's yankees teams were?

Remember the late 90's Mariners?

Besides nobody wants to watch a team where they have no chance. What's the point? Yay we won the minors!! ugh

If you want to improve baseball , contraction works

[Speedy]

Re: Should baseball relegate teams??

I agree Ryan but the follow-up question: Who to contract?

Washington is having a serious buzz with Stras-mania and soon to be Bryce Harper...TB is a great ball club w/o the fan fare, Minnesota was going to be removed but has since been a perennial contender in the AL Central, Florida/Miami is building a new park.

The issue is simply ownership and idiotic GMs/Operations managers.

[ryan36]

Re: Should baseball relegate teams??

I agree Ryan but the follow-up question: Who to contract?

Washington is having a serious buzz with Stras-mania and soon to be Bryce Harper...TB is a great ball club w/o the fan fare, Minnesota was going to be removed but has since been a perennial contender in the AL Central, Florida/Miami is building a new park.

The issue is simply ownership and idiotic GMs/Operations managers.

It is. That's why it can't be fixed. I mean if you took the worst few teams from each league , you'd be contracting the Orioles, Mariners, Royals...and who from the NL? Diamondbacks, Astros , Nationals/Marlins?

[vernond]

Re: Should baseball relegate teams??

I am so shocked when I see young people be so for socialist standards and against capitalism. No one should micro manage owners...their primary objective is to make a profit

As for salary cap...doesn't work in football. Great teams will be great, and the Lions will be the Lions.

They should fix it so that a player is tied to a team longer but the MLBPA is too strong and the commish is too weak to do that.

BTW, teams that get the benfit of the luxury tax have it heavily auditted. The pIrates for example have used it for minors development and scouting...that has shown via players such as Alvarez, Tabata and McCutcheon. They will get better...as will the Royals

Its just those teams when they make a mistake in how a player will perform it is magnified, because they cannot just go out and get another like the big market teams

That's exactly why it works the Lions are the lions because they suck and have made poor decisions. They don't suck because they can't afford to resign their players and keep them. If there's no salary cap in football there is definitely not a good team in Green Bay, maybe no team at all. The Chiefs would never be good. The Cowboys, Giants, and Jets would have pro bowl squads and their definitely would be at least one or two teams in LA again.

Btw, there should be a competitive balance and regulation when the entire league depends on the rest of the league for survival. It's in the leagues best interest for the entire league to be strong.

I really believe that baseball is going to suffer in the long run if it doesn't fix the competitive unbalance it has. We're not too far into this deal, it's really only gotten bad since post strike 94. Give it another 5-10 yrs and they'll lose some teams.

[TheMatrix31]

Re: Should baseball relegate teams??

What competitive imbalance?

AL World Series teams since 2000 -- Yankees, Yankees, Angels, Yankees, Red Sox, White Sox, Tigers, Red Sox, Rays, Yankees.

NL World Series teams since 2000 -- Mets, Diamondbacks, Giants, Marlins, Cardinals, Astros, Cardinals, Rockies, Phillies, Phillies.

That's 14 franchsies who have had a spot in the World Series over the last decade. Really, that's not bad at ALL.

[vernond]

Re: Should baseball relegate teams??

What competitive imbalance?

AL World Series teams since 2000 -- Yankees, Yankees, Angels, Yankees, Red Sox, White Sox, Tigers, Red Sox, Rays, Yankees.

NL World Series teams since 2000 -- Mets, Diamondbacks, Giants, Marlins, Cardinals, Astros, Cardinals, Rockies, Phillies, Phillies.

That's 14 franchsies who have had a spot in the World Series over the last decade. Really, that's not bad at ALL.

Out of those 20 teams 11 of them come from New York, Boston, LA, Chicago, or Philadelphia. St Louis, Detroit, Houston, and SF are all mid to large markets, closer to large. 3 out of 20 teams come from small markets.

Any team can catch lightning in a bottle and make a run one year but they have no chance to substain their team. That's the imbalance I'm talking about. Kansas City, Florida, Pittsburgh, Oakland, Cincinatti, Cleveland, Colorado, San Diego, Seattle, Milwaukee, and Tampa Bay can win but they'll have a 2-3 yr window at best then they will have to scrap their teams because they can't afford to keep their teams together. It happened to Florida a couple times, Oakland a couple years ago, Cleveland a couple years ago, happening to Milwaukee now, and it will happen to Tampa in the next couple years. The size of the market a team plays in shouldn't determine whether a team can be succesful and keep it's players.

I know, I know it's a business and owners are out to make a profit but these aren't independent businesses they are ran under the same umbrella of major league baseball and all teams need the other teams in the league. It's like saying individual Mcdonald's can do whatever they want, they can't they still fall under the Mcdonald's banner and have to follow the rules of the corporation.

I feel it's a competitive imbalance because over 1/3 of the league can not sustain a competitive team year in and year out due to strictly financial reasons. I know Montreal would agree with me

[Azamien]

Re: Should baseball relegate teams??

Relegation wouldn't work in MLB. It would simply kill off the relegated teams for good.

Relegation works in European soccer because the fans still come out to support the local team regardless of which division they're in. But if you put the Pirates, who already struggle for attendance, into a lesser league, their revenue would completely dry up and they'd never be able to field a major league quality squad.

[Sportsforever]

Re: Should baseball relegate teams??

For everyone saying that baseball can't work if every team doesn't have a chance, you need to study baseball history.

Baseball has always had those teams that perennially finish in the second division (think St. Louis Browns, Washington Senators, etc). Do the Yankees/Red Sox have an advantage by having so much money? Yes, but the fact is they are still WELL RUN organizations. Teams that don't have as much money are horrible because they are poorly run (see Kansas City, Baltimore, etc).

If anything, I would want to see a system that allows for teams to keep their younger talent longer, but I would not be in favor of implementing a salary cap/floor.

[vernond]

Re: Should baseball relegate teams??

For everyone saying that baseball can't work if every team doesn't have a chance, you need to study baseball history.

Baseball has always had those teams that perennially finish in the second division (think St. Louis Browns, Washington Senators, etc). Do the Yankees/Red Sox have an advantage by having so much money? Yes, but the fact is they are still WELL RUN organizations. Teams that don't have as much money are horrible because they are poorly run (see Kansas City, Baltimore, etc).

If anything, I would want to see a system that allows for teams to keep their younger talent longer, but I would not be in favor of implementing a salary cap/floor.

If teams are run because they're horribly ran that's one thing but finances play too much of a part in it, in my opinion. Look at the Royals they could've had an outfield of Damon, Beltran, Dye, add Sweeney with the role players they had to rely on as their stars and they could have been a competitive team for years. I believe the fact that teams can't keep their homegrown talent is the biggest issue in baseball. If that were the case the Marlins, A's, and probably the Expos would be the top teams in baseball for the past decade or so.

[Cebby]

Re: Should baseball relegate teams??

Out of those 20 teams 11 of them come from New York, Boston, LA, Chicago, or Philadelphia. St Louis, Detroit, Houston, and SF are all mid to large markets, closer to large. 3 out of 20 teams come from small markets.

Any team can catch lightning in a bottle and make a run one year but they have no chance to substain their team. That's the imbalance I'm talking about. Kansas City, Florida, Pittsburgh, Oakland, Cincinatti, Cleveland, Colorado, San Diego, Seattle, Milwaukee, and Tampa Bay can win but they'll have a 2-3 yr window at best then they will have to scrap their teams because they can't afford to keep their teams together. It happened to Florida a couple times, Oakland a couple years ago, Cleveland a couple years ago, happening to Milwaukee now, and it will happen to Tampa in the next couple years. The size of the market a team plays in shouldn't determine whether a team can be succesful and keep it's players.

Every city in baseball is a mid to large market.

St. Louis is the #21 market in the US behind Miami, Tampa, Oakland, Cleveland, Denver, and Seattle and only one spot above Pittsburgh.

Of the teams currently in last place in their division you have the #10, #12, #14, #17, #22, and #24 markets in the US.

Of the teams in first place you have the #5, #8, #13, #15, #27, and #33.

You can win with small market teams and lose with big market teams.

[rsox]

Re: Should baseball relegate teams??

Out of those 20 teams 11 of them come from New York, Boston, LA, Chicago, or Philadelphia. St Louis, Detroit, Houston, and SF are all mid to large markets, closer to large. 3 out of 20 teams come from small markets.

Any team can catch lightning in a bottle and make a run one year but they have no chance to substain their team. That's the imbalance I'm talking about. Kansas City, Florida, Pittsburgh, Oakland, Cincinatti, Cleveland, Colorado, San Diego, Seattle, Milwaukee, and Tampa Bay can win but they'll have a 2-3 yr window at best then they will have to scrap their teams because they can't afford to keep their teams together. It happened to Florida a couple times, Oakland a couple years ago, Cleveland a couple years ago, happening to Milwaukee now, and it will happen to Tampa in the next couple years. The size of the market a team plays in shouldn't determine whether a team can be succesful and keep it's players.

I know, I know it's a business and owners are out to make a profit but these aren't independent businesses they are ran under the same umbrella of major league baseball and all teams need the other teams in the league. It's like saying individual Mcdonald's can do whatever they want, they can't they still fall under the Mcdonald's banner and have to follow the rules of the corporation.

I feel it's a competitive imbalance because over 1/3 of the league can not sustain a competitive team year in and year out due to strictly financial reasons. I know Montreal would agree with me

When the Angels won the World Series in 2002 they did it with a primarily home-grown roster. Kevin Appier, Aaron Sele, and Brad Fullmer were their big offseason acquisitions before the '02 season and they were still the Anaheim Angels.

What happend to the Marlins after the 1997 season was Wayne Huizenga giving the people of Florida the finger because he went out and bought a championship but the people of Miami refused to foot the bill for a new stadium and he promised the Marlins would never win another championship until they got a new stadium. What happend after 2003 isJeffrey Loria stinks as an owner.

Kansas City and Pittsburgh have inept front-offices who follow no real direction. Under both Allard Baird and Dayton Moore the Royals spend on free agents one year and then say they are going with youth he next. The Pirates have been "rebuilding" for 18 years and counting (long before the Red Sox and Yankees started outspending everyone).


Walt Jockety will likely make the Reds contenders for at least as long as he is in Cincinnati. The A's got farther in the post-season after letting Hudson, Mulder, Tejada, Giambi, etc go.

Seattle tied the ML record for wins in a single season without Griffey, Johnson, or ARod. Bad front-office decisions (hiring and not firing quickly enough) Bill Bavasi being top among them is what took the Mariners down.

The Padres have been more succesfull in the last decade than in any other in the teams history.

What you fail to mention is 23 out of the 30 teams in Baseball have played in the post-season since 2003. Of the 7 teams that have not made it 2 are in position to make the playoffs this season (Rangers, Reds), thats not bad.

[vernond]

Re: Should baseball relegate teams??

Every city in baseball is a mid to large market.

St. Louis is the #21 market in the US behind Miami, Tampa, Oakland, Cleveland, Denver, and Seattle and only one spot above Pittsburgh.

Of the teams currently in last place in their division you have the #10, #12, #14, #17, #22, and #24 markets in the US.

Of the teams in first place you have the #5, #8, #13, #15, #27, and #33.

You can win with small market teams and lose with big market teams.

Yes, they are all mid to large markets but there's a big difference in Kansas City and New York. I also agree that big markets can lose and small markets can win. Any team can win but the small markets can not be good year in year out like the larger market teams are and if the large markets have a bad year (which for them is 80 wins or so and if a small market has a .500 year it's a pretty good year) they can throw 30-40 mill at free agents and be right back next year.