The Mets have remained in contact with agent Scott Boras regarding center fielder Brandon Nimmo throughout his free agency, but MLB.com’s Anthony DiComo reports that there’s a “general pessimism” among many in the organization about the team’s chances of re-signing him. As DiComo points out, manager Buck Showalter was effectively referring to Nimmo in the past-tense last night. Joel Sherman of the New York Post wrote last night that GM Billy Eppler was using terms like “get creative” and “opportunistic” earlier in the week when discussing further transactions.
Of course, since that time, the Mets agreed to a two-year, $26MM deal with Jose Quintana and acquired lefty reliever Brooks Raley from the Rays, both of which represented rather straightforward augmentation of the team’s pitching staff. And even amid reports of pessimism and a shift toward more measured spending, SNY’s Andy Martino tweets that the Mets are at least remaining open-minded about the possibility of an all-in push for both Nimmo and righty Kodai Senga.
The Mets found themselves with a substantial array of needs to address heading into the offseason, with Nimmo, Jacob deGrom, Edwin Diaz, Chris Bassitt, Taijuan Walker, Seth Lugo and Adam Ottavino all reaching the open market. They’ve patched up the rotation by adding Justin Verlander and Jose Quintana to join Max Scherzer and Carlos Carrasco, and the Mets’ first strike was to bring Diaz back on a record-setting five-year, $102MM contract. The recent acquisition of Raley added some needed support in the bullpen.
Those moves, however, have left the Mets with a projected $306MM in terms of luxury-tax obligations. As a second-time offender, they’ll pay a 90% tax on on any expenditures north of $293MM. In other words, one or both of Nimmo and Senga would cost the Mets nearly double whatever annual salary is applied to their contracts — at least this season.
The Mets can certainly explore avenues to lower their luxury number, perhaps shopping for a taker on the remainder of James McCann’s contract or (less problematically) by gauging interest in veterans like Mark Canha or Eduardo Escobar, each of whom represents a relatively significant luxury expenditure ($13.25MM for Canha; $10MM for Escobar). To that end, Mike Puma of the New York Post suggests the Mets are shopping Darin Ruf in hopes of getting a team to absorb some or all of his $3.25MM he’s still owed, though that would amount to little more than a drop in the bucket for their enormous luxury obligations.
Nimmo is widely expected to command a nine-figure deal of at least five, if not six years in length. Senga’s price tag is a bit tougher to gauge, as while agent Joel Wolfe revealed this week that he’s received offers of five and six years in length for his client, the annual value being discussed on such deals is not publicly known. Speculatively speaking, it’s not all that difficult to imagine the pair combining for something in the $40MM range, AAV-wise, which would mean at least an additional $36MM in taxes on top of their actual contracts. At present, the Mets are tentatively looking at roughly $41MM in luxury penalties, and by being more than $40MM over the luxury line, they’re also slated to have their top pick dropped by 10 places in next year’s draft order.
Further complicating matters is that the Mets are already projected for approximately $201MM of luxury obligations as far out as the 2024 season. Scherzer has an opt-out in his contract that could greatly reduce that number, but that’s hardly a guarantee to be exercised at this time. That $201MM figure also doesn’t include arbitration raises for Pete Alonso (projected by MLBTR contributor Matt Swartz to earn $15.9MM in 2023) or Jeff McNeil (projected for $6.2MM); that pair could combine for more than $30MM in 2024. Again using that speculative $40MM combination of AAVs for Nimmo and Senga, the Mets would be barreling toward the fourth tier of luxury penalization again in ’24, which would then come with a mammoth 110% tax rate in their third consecutive year of exceeding the tax threshold.
The ultimate decision rests in the hands of owner Steve Cohen. It bears mentioning that this type of lavish payroll bonanza is among the reasons that the league’s other owners sought to implement a fourth tier of luxury penalization — colloquially dubbed the “Cohen Tax” — in its recent wave of collective bargaining with the MLB Players Association. It doesn’t appear to be stopping the Mets from taking on upwards of $40MM in luxury penalties, but adding Nimmo and/or Senga to that pile would teeter on unprecedented with regard to the scope of the luxury penalties incurred.
I think resigning Nimmo was more important than resigning deGrom would have been for the Mets. Losing both would be kind of brutal.
I believe the Giants are interested in Nimmo. He would be a nice addition to the team. Money would not be a problem.
Have to think they know Marte in center and Kermeier replacing Nimmo is not on par offensively with PHI & ATL
They don’t need to be on par offensively with those teams, especially since they play them a lot less than previous years. They just need to win more games than them, and that’s feasible.
With respect Von, they don’t need to win more games, thanks to Manfred, they just need to be in the vicinity. I like the Phils, always have, great acquisitions so far. Trea & Harper together? Awesome. Phils are in the hunt for 2023
Yes exactly. They don’t even need to win the division.
Just gut – despite PHI run as the 3rd wild card last season proving just get in the dance, Cohen intention is to field a team that can win east. And on paper that would seem to require more work, even with Bryce Harper bat sidelined for early season. Plus – gotta think SF, SD others going to fortify. Have to be impressed with CHC additions. Will be many applicants for 3 WCs.
I noticed that you forgot to mention the continuously best team in the NL East, the Braves.
No worries. Everyone seems to forget about them when mentioning teams in the NL East and NL.
I think Turner sign was great for the Phillies. If I could have one free agent Turner would be my choice.
If it’s only costing 40M for 2 players that could push a team like the Jays into serious contenders ….why haven’t the Signed Nimmo and Senga yet?
That’s pocket change in this current climate, you can’t tell me Nimmo is holding out for 30aav or Senga wouldn’t sign immediately for 18 x 6
Those two (Senga & Nimmo) are perfect fits on the Giants and would cost them the same as if they’d signed Judge. SF has the money and needs to go all in.
Pete’sView;
You’re a great poster….
But those players would have to want to go there over other teams.
Samuel — Thanks for the compliment, and what you say is true. But San Francisco is one of the greatest cities in the world.Can’t see why (if the money’s there) a player wouldn’t want to come there. The team is almost always relevant and right now (despite the naysayers) they’re not far from contention.
Taxes, taxes, taxes.
Sure, but that doesn’t keep these millionaires from coming to SF, LA and SD. (Giants, Dodgers, Angels, Padres, and for awhile Oakland.)
They are not a contender and their baseball park is pitcher friendly. Sluggers may not be interested (Harper as an example).
No, Oracle Park is no longer pitcher friendly. It’s neutral and there’s plenty of offense (HRs, too) at it. Giants were 7th in offense in MLB in 2022.
The luxury tax makes it prohibitive for your team (90% tax is insane).
The Bluejays have done next to nothing since acquiring Swanson for Teoscar. The only thing that would make sense at this point would be for them to sign Nimmo.
I wouldn’t get your hopes up.
It appears trades are the routes they are likely to go down, which I don’t fully understand.
Value wise, prospects and players are more valuable than money. Money can be replaced, a Moreno doesn’t come along all the time.
I’d love yo be a fly on the wall and understand their big plan. Is BO just a trade chip to them? Are they going to use Vlad as the “retool on the fly” trade bait in a few years.
They could have used the worst prospect to get Bellinger and only pay Money to pick up his salary, at the least you knew CF was sewn up and Springer gets to play RF making him healthier too, securing your investment there as well. He’s LH, has the chance to perform with the bat in a stacked lineup while being protected.
2nd base is still up in the air, unless someone’s predicting Espinal becomes the next Altuve, it seems Moreno is likely to be used there alot and not part of a trade
Caroll in ARZ would pair better with this squad than Moreno. And vice versa, but it’s 2 clubs that can’t seem to see the forest through the tress
The Teoscar trade made me think they understood the assignment, the PCS for this squad were abd and are still out there to make this team legitimate. But im starting to doubt they even know what route to take.
Nimmo needs overpaying – MONEY
Carroll or Varsho by any means necessary -TRADE
Move Bo to 2nd get a SS – MONEY
Sign a SP that at least slots in at #3 or better although most of them are gone. – MONEY
Get involved in Reynolds – TRADE
All of those things are still achievable and the Jays have the Money / Players / Prospects to make it happen
Moreno for Carroll
Orelvis headlines a Pittsburgh deal
Spend money!!!
I’ve read nothing that suggests Arizona is interested in trading Corbin Carrol. Top prospect for top prospect trades rarely ever happen. This one won’t either.
Desperate to win a ring and steal some headlines from the Bronx. Who will win a ring first, SD or NYM?
Bryzzo2016;
Which of the 2 teams will the penalties eat up first?
Wait till the Padres get to resigning Soto, only to find that for every cent they pay him they’ll have to match in taxes.
LOL
Machado could opt out and make signing Soto easier.
LOL
Got me there!
And they very probably know Manny is pretty much tired of the situation there. In reality – I don’t think Soto’s going to be too happy with it either.
Wow! Good question…both teams have incredibly talented rosters and owners who are not afraid to spend money or prospect capital at the trade deadline. Each team also has to beat a Division Rival who has recently won the WS- (LAD in 2020 and ATL in 2021.)
IMO its a coin flip but my guess is the SD Padres. Only because of the added length to the Padres lineup with Tatis Jr.
You could argue the Padres Rotation has a slight edge just because of the ages and marginally better health record of Darvish, Snell and Musgrove over Verlander, Scherzer and Carrasco. If the latter 3 stay healthy though…that is again a coin toss imo.
We will see if SD’s move to put Martinez in the rotation pays off. If it doesnt thats at least a very good weapon to add to Hader and Suarez in the BP. The more I think about it I honestly can’t see one team having a better chance than the other. It will all come down to luck and the health of their rosters!!
You’re already over it. You have oodles of money falling off over the next two years while Baty, Vientos, Mauricio, Alvarez, Hamel, Vasil, Parada, Tidwell, Ziegler and possibly Allen are grooming to take some slots. Foolish to just kind of go over. Cohen himself stated he would blow by rather than just barely exceed. Grab Senga for sure and Nimmo if possible with a few trades to lighten it up. If not get Benintendi. Pitching is vital.
As currently constructed, Mets will pay 34ish million in taxes on top of all those player salaries. Add 90% of any additional contract signed to that tax value. So I don’t expect any more huge additions without some salary dumps first. Cohen is rich, but he’s not going to lose money on the Mets. He’s a business man first.
He made $2 billion since buying the team overall. I think he will make up his own mind here. Again, they have loads of money coming off the books. They are kind of pot committed now. And nothing turns a profit better than a winner. What other option? Stay in purgatory and hope they get hot like the Phillies did without having the best team or try to field the absolute best? Spending $300M with no results is way worse than spending $350M and filling that stadium every night. Merchandise alone if they add Senga would offset a lot. Marketing a big time roster is business 101
The idea that they need to add even more big contracts to sell more tickets seems silly to me. They won 101 games with a similar roster. Big additions like Nimmo and Senga are only going to move the needle slightly at this point. They’re already a good team who will be costing them an additional 34 million in tax penalties. I’d focus on the very vacant pen and creative trades before making another huge signing.
Ok. Diaz alone makes it far from vacant. They added a nice BP arm today via trade and got a nice pick up in the rule 5. Drew smith back. Still talking to Otto. Robertson and Chafin available and affordable. Peterson and Megill to pen if Senga comes. Kind of helps solve the BP issue. Again, with all these contracts falling off in two years (Scherzer, Verlander if it doesn’t vest, Cano, McCann, Escobar, Marte, Canha) and some real minor league talent coming (Baty, Mauricio, Parada, Alvarez, Tidwell), every incremental move helps. Depth wins. Starting depth wind even more so than bats, although a few teams have slugged their way. Senga is nearly a no brainer to add. Report is Dodgers offered 5 years at $70M. Beat that – $18m to add a potential third ace? It’s not my money. It’s not my call. But it seems pretty simple to me. There is a big pot of chips on the table already and two players (Phillies and Braves) are in the hand too – you don’t lay it down now. Show your cards with pride and let those chips fall where they may. I have believe that is exactly what Cohen and Eppler are thinking right now. We arent sitting on a flush draw here. We have good cards but it never hurts to hit that big one on the river
The bullpen moves you talked about would be great additions, and I think that should be their focus. Remember, each one they sign would add to the tax penalty. That’s drastic. I think a deeper bullpen is more important than a 7th SP.
Maybe 3-4 of those prospects will turn out to be anything if you’re lucky.
They are crying that they have to pay luxury tax already…and the threshold is $293 million?
Maybe they should have thought about that before they spent it.
Pathetic.
Who is crying? Pretty sure that Cohen is sitting comfy and is prepared to spend more.
This one belongs to the Reds;
“They” aren’t crying anything.
lmao, Cohen is not crying. He already blew past the threshold. Don’t you have enough to gripe about with the Reds without having to make stuff up about the Mets?
How do you know? Did you talk to him? Those articles come from somewhere. They don’t write themselves.
The fact that a luxury tax threshold is at 293 is disgusting in itself when most clubs aren’t able to break 200 million in payroll.
This isn’t about the Mets, it’s about a larger problem that you large market followers don’t see or care about that is killing the sport.
Really we’re seeing more spending by more diverse teams. The Reds are the problem here, not the Mets.
Found castelinnis burner account stop pocketing start spending
This one belongs to the Reds;
The writer is bringing up a point that to his credit has not been brought up elsewhere.
Steven Cohen is a self-made billionaire and a power in Wall Street and international finance.
Do you think he wasn’t aware of this situation years ago when he authorized the moves they’ve made?
Make no mistake – I do believe that because so many are going over the luxury tax when most teams can’t afford to get anywhere near it, that the majority of the owners will vote for even harsher penalties at the first opportunity. These things tend to self-correct themselves.
P.S. I recognize your frustration. But you need to look at what Cleveland to the north has done as well as Baltimore. Keep an eye
on both of those teams.
I’m impressed with what Nick Krall did this past year. He was made fun of for dumping a group of players on teams, that wound up holding the bag. And he brought back a nice amount of very good young players. If the owner stays hands-off they can well do what Cleveland and Baltimore did.
“Those articles come from somewhere. They don’t write themselves”
Allow me to introduce you to the NY tabloid media. Jon Heyman and Joel Sherman? This is The one belongs to the Reds. If you’re interested in basketball, over there is Marc Berman.
Killing the sport? The A’s, Pirates… and to some extent, the Reds are killing the sport. If you’re unprepared to invest in a quality product over a prolonged period of time and are more interested in pocketing profits and letting the franchise rot, why should the owners who are actually willing to pump money into their organizations be blamed? Want to own a baseball team, be an actual owner and grow your product. That goes for literally every business in existence.
Yet I’m watching the good low payroll clubs compete with the spending Giants.
I think the additional tax was bogus. Let Cohen spend all he wants to. Simply Spending money doesn’t equal success.
Then watch him lose to the Astros or dodgers. Or one of these scrappy low payroll clubs that are on their way up.
I’ll give my piece on the disparity between markets with the spending.
I’ve always had a strong opinion about this spending discrepancy that goes on among MLB teams and have been an advocate of a Cap&Floor system that includes a sort of exception similar to the NBA’s “Larry Bird Exemption”. Afterall, as a Marlins fan, I would have a strong opinion about this. Now, with all of the moves that I see going on these last couple of days, and how the same teams are now adding or attempting to add additional massive contracts to the contracts they already have (such as the Phillies, Padres attempts, Yankees, etc.), I have pretty much looked at a bigger reality with this that all of us fans have to come to terms with – no matter the size of the market power and financial strength our favorite team has.
Here’s where my thoughts are now that we are where we are with the discrepancies. MLB needs to determine what do they expect their franchises to be, their league size and structure should be, and what the standards should be for their teams to be able to sustain in spending ability. Based on their decision, they need to determine and go through with either of the following (IMO):
A – If they want all of the teams in the current markets to stay as is, MLB and MLB PA need to come to an agreement with a hard Cap&Floor system with a “Larry Bird Exemption” type of addition that encourages players to stay with their team and only leave because they want to because they can get paid the most by staying with the team they’ve been with. Note of importance: Some people may say to just relocate the struggling teams, but the reality is that all of the markets that MLB is talking about moving to will just struggle as well. Other than Las Vegas, no other location has the financial ability to compete with the markets in NY, LA, Boston, Chicago, etc. etc. big market spender.
B – If they determine to keep the league locations as is, but can’t come to terms on a Cap&Floor system, then they may need to look at realignment that involves regional structures for division. Since financial ability tends to be based on region, it would place teams in division with other teams that are in the same financial situations as they are in. For example, a Northeast division with the Phillies, Red Sox, Mets, Yankees and Blue Jays…or a division with the Marlins, Rays, Braves, and other nearby markets. Guardians, Red and Pirates in the same division, etc.
C – A sad reality that I’m starting to come to terms with, contraction of about six teams down to what looks like would be a total of a 24-team league of teams that can afford to pay these deals. Perhaps this discussion could get the discussion of a Cap&Floor system going since we all know that the MLBPA would not want this. However, how can you expect fans in small markets to continue to support their teams if there is no real chance to compete with the other markets that are able to dish out these massive contracts? This is a sad reality. And I’m being objective here because my view would make the Marlins and Rays here in Florida as at least having one contracted and very likely both.
These are just how I’m viewing things right now. The facts are that you can’t have a league with an imbalanced ability to compete and have success. And you certainly can’t have it when competing leagues (like the NFL and NBA) are destroying you at attracting young fans. I’ll use my home as an example. Do you think MLB is attracting kids in Miami with the Marlins while the NBA have the Heat and NFL have the Dolphins? Look at other cities like Pittsburgh with the Pirates and the Steelers; Reds and Bengals; Royals and Chiefs; A’s, MLB Giants and Warriors; Rays, Lightning and Bucs. Pretty much everywhere MLB succeeds, the other leagues succeed. Everywhere MLB is failing or struggling, the NFL and NBA succeeds.
MLB needs to take a serious look at all of this. I love this game greatly, but I’m getting to the point that I’m just going to watch the Marlins out of appreciation of having an MLB team in my town, but it’s getting to the point where my passion can’t be tied to them. It’s getting there for a lot of passionate fans in cities where are teams can’t compete financially. That’s a red flag for MLB and MLBPA. You can’t make money if your customers aren’t happy with the product.
Are you that impressed with Krall?
He did OK.
But some of those guys played. Winker was a bust but the prospect Williamson, he got back lost all his command and needs to be fixed. Eugenio Suarez was also very productive.
Luis Castillo brought back a haul but deservingly so. Mariners got a below market extension after seeing the market shake out now. Sonny Gray trade looks positive thus far. Gray was as good as expected for MN though.
Am I missing any others? I don’t think he dumped off any big losers aside from Winker but he was packaged with Suarez, who actually produced. Surprisingly so.
All correct deals for a rebuilding club to make though. We’ll see if he can develop them.
I’m impressed with what Nick Krall did this past year. He was made fun of for dumping a group of players on teams, that wound up holding the bag.
===========================
While the writers castigated the Reds, the Reds were miles ahead on those trades. Barnhart, Castellanos & Miley were basically worthless.
VPH
Agree!
Until we see Noelvi Marte and Spencer Steer play a few more years, to early to judge.
There is not a more irresponsible team in baseball than the New York Mets. When you’re building a roster and payroll you want bang for your buck. They get very modest bang for their buck. Check out Cleveland or Tampa for the way to do things. Houston is also a good example of how to do things – spend, but spend wisely.
MuteButton
I agree that some of their spending has been unwise. But given that the sport is a monopoly, I would say the most irresponsible spending is the Pittsburgh Pirates. The fans deserve more. By spending more, the Mets are doing the right thing. Sure, they want instant gratification instead of doing it the right way (hasn’t worked out so far), but they are also building for the future and have made some sensible smaller moves that are easily overlooked. My answer remains the same even if they are third in their division next year, there will be three very good teams. Building the farm is the most important step to becoming a consistent contender, look at the Dodgers, Atlanta and Astros.
What’s doing it the right way? They had a team with a core of Nimmo, McNeil, Alonso, deGrom- all homegrown players supplemented by a series of free agents. That’s kinda how you do it.
❤️ MuteButton;
Agree with you in principle.
But each business has to have a short, intermediate, and long-term plan.
When Mr. Cohen bought the franchise he said he wanted to contend immediately. To do that he was winning to spend a lot of money.
However, he also said that was only being done until the farm system could be built up. They’re working on that. That doesn’t get done in a year or two, and most of the young players you’re reading about were already in the farm system when the Cohen administration took control of the franchise. I’d suspect there will be quite a few more coming in the long-term. Generally it takes 3-5 years for signees to even reach the majors and play decently.
They get a lot of bang for the buck- Verlander, Scherzer, Lindor etc…take a look at how the Nats have spent piles of money into the next 2 decades on guys not even on their team. Or how the Dodgers have taken on garbage contracts for guys like Price to be a $30m bullpen piece. The Mets spend money but none of it has been spent poorly under Cohen to this point. The only garbage contract on their roster really is McCann.
McCann was a lot of money spent poorly. You could argue that Escobar was overpaid as well, but I actually like him. To your greater point, Mets spent a ton of money and won 101 games. That was money well spent so far. People love to see big spenders fail, but that hasn’t happened here.
Good thing the Mets had to eat Robinsons Cano’s deal to get Diaz from Seattle. They paid him $22.25m last year and will do this season too. They’ve also paid deGrom quite a lot to not pitch because he was hurt. And don’t forget the Bobby Bonilla contact is part of their salary cap/ luxury tax math through 2035.
Let’s keep bringing up Bonilla as if the Mets are the only team doing this. They may have started the trend, but the Nationals will be paying out $23.5 million dollars this year in deferred money to Max Scherzer, Brad Hand, Jon Lester and Rafael Soriano. In 2028, they will owe Strasburg $26.6 million and then $30.6 million in 2029.
Deferred contracts are now in vogue in Dodgerland. Both Betts and Freeman have a combined $172 million in deferred salaries between them.
So while we can continue to laugh about Bonilla day every July, his compensation has absolutely no impact on the current team finances. You think the Nationals can say the same thing?
The Bonilla comment was at the end b/c it’s a throw away comment. Interesting that’s what aggrieved you.
I’ll try. Cano was before Cohen took real control and is off the books soon. All the new contracts are short term leaving incredible flexibility in the near future and minimizing risk. All while trying hard to build a legit farm.
And mentioning Bonilla is so beyond childish and worn out it makes the rest of the comment a skim over. Maybe don’t go there if you are trying to make a serious point. It was an insanely brilliant contract that has been copied a hundred times over because it lowers the overall value for the team while guaranteeing the player a nest egg in case they stupidly blow it all.
David Price was the cost of acquiring Mookie Betts on a trade, doubt many Dodgers fans are upset about that.
Excellent article!
Package McCann with Matt Allen + a lesser prospect. Try to shop Lindor. Lindor might be the worst 3rd hitter in baseball. Everytime he got up last year in a clutch situation he struck out unless they were facing the Marlins or Nationals. Amazing defense though
In 2022, Lindor had a 125 OPS+ overall and with two outs and runners in scoring position (ie, clutch situations), he had a 1.008 OPS in 63 plate appearances. So I think you’re wrong here.
@Rct yeah, agaisnt the Marlins and Nationals, vs any good teams, he did awful in clutch situations
Not disagreeing with you, but can you provide me with some stats on that? Or is this one of those ‘just trust me, bro’ situations?
I’ve seen Lindor play well against the Braves and Phils. The last Braves series leaves a bad taste in everyone’s mouth, but that doesn’t define Lindor’s season.
Dear lord you make us look bad. The guy was a 2nd team all MLB player.
@bryan c yeah because he plays shortstop and is an amazing fielder. You compare Lindor strictly vs the best hitters, regardless of position, and he might barely be around the 60-70 player range, and thats being generous. Just because hes a better hitter then most shortstops doesnt mean hes worth 341 million. If the Mets were smart, they should try and trick teams by selling high on him and add a prospect with him
Agree to disagree I guess. I mean 25+ home runs and 100+ RBI from a gold glove caliber SS is pretty good. No one is taking that contract though. The Mets absolutely overpaid, I will give you that but there are far worse players to be “stuck” with
Overpaid in treasure and in prospects. The Mets gave up Amed Rosario, Andres Gimenez, Isaiah Greene and Josh Wolf in the Lindor/ Carrasco trade everyone at the time thought they’d won. That trade is no longer a win for the Mets.
There is no point in a luxury tax, baseball needs a salary cap (and floor). It really is that simple. Floor is always half of cap. Ex. $200m cap and $100m floor. Done.
This keeps all teams competitive and barely lowers the top player’s salaries. Teams just need to be more strategic about how they are building a team and who they sign.
Nothing is ever that simple, and this sure isn’t. The root of the problem is the huge inequity in the revenues between the teams and the rewarding of failure.
There is never a world where every team would have the same fan base and same amount of revenues. This is how it is in every professional sport. But if you are an owner, that is a risk you take from a business perspective.
Don’t play in the big leagues unless you are prepared to invest money and build wealth for your teams. Or prepared to lose money.
Sure, but every team owner in a pro sport is a franchise holder within the one business of that sport. The individual franchises have no reason to exist without all of the others. They simply haven’t run the sport as if that was the case. It has never been good for the business of baseball (not to mention, the fans of baseball) to have team owners being effectively paid to lose.
“There is never a world where every team would have the same fan base and same amount of revenues. This is how it is in every professional sport.”
msiegel67;
To some degree that’s true.
I don’t follow the NHL, but I do know that the NBA and NFL share
a good portion of their revenues. The revenue disparity in MLB is beyond absurd.
The problem isn’t the revenue disparity. There’s a league wide revenue sharing policy. The problem is the crappy owners pocket the cash instead of reinvesting it into their organization. Pittsburg & the Reds are the worst at this.
It’s both. Revenue sharing is meant to make up for part of the disparity between larger and smaller market teams, but it comes far short of closing the gap. To compensate them further, teams on the short end are rewarded for being noncompetitive. Nobody should be shocked by how they respond to these incentives. The lottery for the top six draft picks is designed to mitigate the failure incentive, but it’s just another bandaid on top of all the others. Because the real problem nobody in ownership wants to fix.
msiegel67;
A cap and a floor would assure that small market teams not only would never get to a World Series…..they’d seldom even compete
for a playoff spot.
The owners of those teams as well as many mid-market teams
would never go for that.
How so? Right now you have teams that spend $80m and teams that spend $280m. How would getting those numbers just a little closer, make the competition worse?
There are more teams spending big than ever before. A salary cap would have the inverse effect, and we would see more tanking.
msiegel67;
Because small market teams can go into a total rebuild for years as they build a farm system of quality players. They take their payrolls down to a minimum, and roll revenue over to use in coming years. (This is nothing new, all businesses do this if their mid and long-term planning is to roll out new products in 3-7 years). So teams like the Guardians and Orioles get to the point they’re at now – they have dozens of high quality young players on their ML roster and in the upper levels of their farm system. The players are under team control for 6 years. Initially those guys will play cheap. Each year their salaries will rise, the ones that do better will get bigger raises. More fans will come to see them play or watch more on TV. The franchise will get increased revenue. But it will not keep up with 1) the raises the players are getting, and 2) free agents or veteran players the organization trades for to strengthen some areas they find they’re weak in. That’s where the rolled over money comes into play.
By setting a floor, a small (or mid-market) team will not be able to do this. They’ll have to pay for 5-6 players that aren’t going to do much to help the team be much better. There won’t be any money being rolled over for future use. It guarantees that those teams will never have a chance to build a contending team – because a contending team has to have at least a dozen quality players….and the money will never be there for the franchises to pay out. This is rotisserie league stuff – you have to spend the money or lose it.
This is the problem with these team “commitments” when the media talks about future salaries. A small market team coming out of a rebuild may have few commitments – but that’s by design. They know that they have a lot of young players that will be getting better that they’ll want to keep…and in turn that means a much higher payroll.
This is why discussion of the O’s paying Rodon $30m-plus a year for over 5 years is morainic. Even if the guy stays healthy a few years down the road they’ll have to trade some of what will then be their core young players because their payroll is maxed out. What Cleveland did signing Bell and Baltimore did signing Gibson is logical. They commit to a veteran for a year or two at as reasonable salary. But it won’t interfere with them giving large raises to many of their players in 3-4 years as some become stars.
Rotisserie leagues give all owner equal amounts of money to spend each season. MLB doesn’t work that way. It just demagoguery for the larger market owners (and their fans) to complain about the small market owners taking profits as their teams lose. The large market owners take profits….and theirs are far, far larger. No one complains about that. (How many Steinbrenner families are being supported in high life styles by the Yankees?…and I have no problem with that.) None of us go into business it lose money or break even. An investment of time and money should generate a profit….if not you sell. And few people are going to buy into something that they know will lose them money.
If this is the case though, then to be fair you’d need additional regulations/exceptions for tax-heavy states. It’s not “fair”, as you put it, that states/teams would lose players within such a tightly regulated salary space because of taxes, which they would.
But this isn’t insuring competitiveness, which exists already. All you’re suggesting, honestly, is to forcibly regulate all MLB player salaries as they increase.
Also, some states have better weather, which would naturally put NE & NW states at a disadvantage, so you’d have to compensate for that as well….to be fair. Unless this has nothing to do with actual fairness.
@Yankee Clipper. Not sure if you’re responding to me, but I don’t see why any of the things you mention would require compensation. They aren’t compensated for now.
Divide the revenue of the game up in 30 equal shares and reward success instead of failure and watch how quickly the game changes for the better. I don’t kid myself that this will ever happen, but it’s the only solution that isn’t a bandaid on top of a bunch of other bandaids.
No, Blue, sorry, not to you.
I mean, this is how life is, right? If you work in NYC or SF or another major city you get paid more than people doing the exact same job in Kansas and Oklahoma. Some cities have a higher cost of living and your employer offers wages based on that. Location is always a factor in every job market.
Why should it be different for professional athletes? If they are so concerned about paying a couple extra million in taxes on an already enormous salary, then don’t go play for that team in that location.
Not sure that analogy really works. Ballplayers play around three months out of the year in “their” city, and players aren’t getting paid more for playing in LA or NYC because the cost of living there is higher, but because those teams have immensely more to spend.
You say “this is how life is” while also ignoring the fact that if a business makes more money in NYC and therefore can pay its employees far more, it will draw more potential top-rated employees. That’s how baseball used to be. Yankees made more and they paid whatever they wanted.
You’re suggesting that’s capped, but then say, “well if players don’t want to live there because of taxes, too bad.” You’re simply now changing the premise of your argument to fit your desire. Which goes to my point that it has nothing to do with competitiveness or fairness…. For you it’s about regulating the rest of the league for your club to have access to people whom they refuse to pay.
If I’m misreading that than I apologize, but it appears the notion is that the argument works one way not the other.
Exactly. If it has no teeth, it won’t work and it has been gumming for years.
Salary cap works in the NFL and they have to spend 80% of it. All teams have an even playing field and anyone can win, even the Bengals. Players don’t complain because they still get paid. Done.
Except in the NFL those contracts are not guaranteed beyond the bonus money
This one belongs to the Reds;
Salary caps work in the NFL because most of the revenue is shared equally.
Here’s some estimated revenue from 2022:
Reds – $266 million
Mets – $302 million
Yankees – $482 million
Dodgers – $565 million
@msieg67, if you look at 2022 payrolls and took every team above $200M to $200M you would subtract $273M in payroll. Bringing the teams below $100 up to $100M only creates $212M in payroll. The players union will oppose any measure that net net cuts down on payroll. The MLBPA will always choose higher salaries and a free market with no ceilings does that.
We’ll see what option they choose when there are less MLB jobs because teams have gone bankrupt.
You large market boys laugh but it is going to start happening sooner than you think because 20 or so teams with less resources can’t keep up with the Joneses forever.
Bankruptcy is just about the best thing that can happen to a team owner. If you don’t believe, just ask Frank McCourt.
Reds: I know that was a general statement, but I think they’ve done a decent job of compromising with big and small(er) markets. I think they will continue to find ways to hone that process as well because it seems to be addressed each contract. One new case in point is the playoff expansion.
But it’s a valid point and a valid concern you have, which many small-market fans share (and others).
Nonetheless, I think looking at the WS winners, MLB has demonstrated that they’ve got the best system currently because it’s by far the most diverse in its winners. NFL isn’t nearly as diverse.
So, I don’t think anyone is proposing to go back to the 60’s or whatever. I just think the other extreme would go too far as well. Hope that makes sense on my part.
I had put those numbers as examples.
Maybe start with a $250m cap, and $125m floor, then increase the cap by $2m a year, and floor by $1m a year until new CBA is in place in a few years? Re-evaluate at that time, but generally keep the same structure in place.
So cap the salaries so the owners keep more of their money? Nah. They should just put in a salary floor and get lessen the luxury tax penalties.
Darin Ruf and James McCann the gifts that keep giving LOL Mets
So Nimmo has become a Boras client. Wonderful. Baseball reference still has him with CAA. C’mon BF get on the ball.
personally, as much as I love Nimmo and he was a joy to watch as a met, let him go and bring up Jake Magnum. personally I think the kid is worth a shot and just the same, all metrics point to the fact that he is very similar to that of Jeff McNeil. It would be worth giving him a shot. If you’re in need of another outfielder, in addition to Magnum, bring up Daniel Panka as well. both of these players I think would honestly make a difference for the team. Danny is a good power bat while Jake is a strong fielder.
It definitely would help the payroll as well.
@jmaggio76 Mangum’s peak is as a backup OFer. That’s at best.
He didn’t even make AAA until he was 26. His numbers at AA simply don’t translate to a major league ballplayer. At 26 his AA line was .273/.338/.399. 5th OFer, if that.
Arguing about caps and floors takes us no-where, as the CBA will be in place for a while. This simply comes down to a question of whether the Mets want to spend more, and pay the penalty. They are playing by the rules, just as teams who strip their rosters of any player contracts that cost more than the ML minimum, present an inferior product to their fans, while demanding tax and infrastructure goodies from their home towns. There’s no right or wrong here, just naked business considerations. And very few teams wearing white hats.