Turn Off Ads?
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 18

Thread: Report: MLB could tax low-spending clubs

  1. #1
    Maple SERP savafan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio
    Posts
    17,564

    Report: MLB could tax low-spending clubs

    http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/20...pending-clubs/

    This tweet comes from Jayson Stark, who has done a great job of covering the soon-to-be-announced CBA for ESPN.com:

    There have been lots of rumblings there will also be a tax on teams that spend too little on big-league payroll. Looking forward to details

    There are none of those available yet, so what kind of floor is being talked about is unclear. In 2011, one team opened with a sub-$40 million payroll (Kansas City), while four more came in at under $50 million (Tampa Bay, Pittsburgh, San Diego and Cleveland).
    My dad got to enjoy 3 Reds World Championships by the time he was my age. So far, I've only gotten to enjoy one. Step it up Redlegs!

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #2
    We Need Our Myths reds1869's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Overlooking GABP
    Posts
    4,448

    Re: Report: MLB could tax low-spending clubs

    I like the spirit of the proposal, but punishing a team like the Rays that wins while spending very little seems harsh.

  4. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Lexington
    Posts
    5,745

    Re: Report: MLB could tax low-spending clubs

    Quote Originally Posted by reds1869 View Post
    I like the spirit of the proposal, but punishing a team like the Rays that wins while spending very little seems harsh.
    I understand the principle of a salary floor, but there should be some sort of contengencies for a rebuilding club that trades vets for young'uns. Maybe two or three years to get back to a certain level.
    Last edited by corkedbat; 11-19-2011 at 01:18 PM.

  5. #4
    The Lineups stink. KronoRed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    West N. Carolina
    Posts
    55,614

    Re: Report: MLB could tax low-spending clubs

    Quote Originally Posted by corkedbat View Post
    I understand the principle of a salary floor, but there should be some sort of contengencies for a rebuilding club that trades vets for young'uns. Maybe two or three years to get back to a certain level.
    Exactly, forcing teams to hand out bad deals to reach some threshold is ridiculous.
    Go Gators!

  6. #5
    Where's my chair? REDREAD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Posts
    20,929

    Re: Report: MLB could tax low-spending clubs

    Quote Originally Posted by KronoRed View Post
    Exactly, forcing teams to hand out bad deals to reach some threshold is ridiculous.
    They don't have to hand out bad deals.. They just have to pay the fine.

    There's plenty of ways to get around this for a rebuilding club.
    Give your draft picks ML contracts with salaries instead of signing bonuses.
    They could also front load the contracts of young players they are locking up longterm (or at least make them equal payments instead of a big payoff the final year, when they are often dumped).

    This change is LONG overdue.. If small market teams want revenue sharing they need to have a salary floor.

    Somehow I think the smart clubs like Cleveland and Tampa will do just fine under this new rule. They won't suddenly start handing out dumb deals.
    Thank you Walt and Bob for going for it in 2010-2014!

    Nov. 13, 2007: One of the greatest days in Reds history: John Allen gets the boot!

  7. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Lexington
    Posts
    5,745

    Re: Report: MLB could tax low-spending clubs

    Quote Originally Posted by REDREAD View Post
    They don't have to hand out bad deals.. They just have to pay the fine.

    There's plenty of ways to get around this for a rebuilding club.
    Give your draft picks ML contracts with salaries instead of signing bonuses.
    They could also front load the contracts of young players they are locking up longterm (or at least make them equal payments instead of a big payoff the final year, when they are often dumped).

    This change is LONG overdue.. If small market teams want revenue sharing they need to have a salary floor.

    Somehow I think the smart clubs like Cleveland and Tampa will do just fine under this new rule. They won't suddenly start handing out dumb deals.
    Not sure how giving salaries to picks would fly under the new system that is rumored to have some sort of slotting system. Also, wouldn't that require a major league contract, a 40-man slot and start the option clock early?
    Last edited by corkedbat; 11-21-2011 at 03:01 AM.

  8. #7
    Where's my chair? REDREAD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Posts
    20,929

    Re: Report: MLB could tax low-spending clubs

    Quote Originally Posted by corkedbat View Post
    Not sure how giving salaries to picks would fly under the new system that is rumored to have some sort of slotting system. Also, wouldn't that require a major league contract, a 40-man slot and start the option clock early?
    Not saying it is the smartest thing to do.
    But look at Chapman.. His salary counted as ML. I am not 100% sure if Alonso's deal counted as ML salary or not.

    The bigger point is that the small market clubs are not going to be "forced to hand out bad contracts". If they are 3 million below the threshhold, for example and can't think of an intelligent way to spend that money, why not just pay the 3 million fine? That's a better option than handing out an ill advised long term deal.. Somehow though I think the smart clubs will figure out a way to spend the money efficiently.
    Thank you Walt and Bob for going for it in 2010-2014!

    Nov. 13, 2007: One of the greatest days in Reds history: John Allen gets the boot!

  9. #8
    Maple SERP savafan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio
    Posts
    17,564

    Re: Report: MLB could tax low-spending clubs

    http://www.nj.com/yankees/index.ssf/...es_hgh_te.html

    Players and owners did not agree to a tax on low-payroll teams, although they did have some discussion during negotiations.
    My dad got to enjoy 3 Reds World Championships by the time he was my age. So far, I've only gotten to enjoy one. Step it up Redlegs!

  10. #9
    Where's my chair? REDREAD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Posts
    20,929

    Re: Report: MLB could tax low-spending clubs

    Well , that sucks that didn't get done.

    I guess Carl is smiling in his grave though.
    Thank you Walt and Bob for going for it in 2010-2014!

    Nov. 13, 2007: One of the greatest days in Reds history: John Allen gets the boot!

  11. #10
    KungFu Fighter AtomicDumpling's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Hamilton, OH
    Posts
    2,708

    Re: Report: MLB could tax low-spending clubs

    I think the large payroll teams are growing tired of some of the small market teams pocketing all of the money they receive from revenue sharing. Most of the small market teams are highly profitable each year. The high payroll teams generate much larger increases in franchise valuation, which the owners leverage to finance their other business and real estate interests. This is why neither the large market owners nor the small market owners are in favor of a salary cap.

    The reason revenue sharing was implemented in the first place was to improve payroll parity. But payroll parity has only gotten worse since revenue sharing was implemented. It is in reality more about profit-sharing rather than equitably distributing talented players throughout the league.

  12. #11
    The Boss dougdirt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    35,106

    Re: Report: MLB could tax low-spending clubs

    Quote Originally Posted by AtomicDumpling View Post
    I think the large payroll teams are growing tired of some of the small market teams pocketing all of the money they receive from revenue sharing. Most of the small market teams are highly profitable each year. The high payroll teams generate much larger increases in franchise valuation, which the owners leverage to finance their other business and real estate interests. This is why neither the large market owners nor the small market owners are in favor of a salary cap.

    The reason revenue sharing was implemented in the first place was to improve payroll parity. But payroll parity has only gotten worse since revenue sharing was implemented. It is in reality more about profit-sharing rather than equitably distributing talented players throughout the league.
    Yeah.... the idea for revenue sharing was good in thought, but the application of the idea isn't going as planned.

  13. #12
    For a Level Playing Field RedFanAlways1966's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Oakwood, OH
    Posts
    11,686

    Re: Report: MLB could tax low-spending clubs

    Quote Originally Posted by REDREAD View Post
    Well , that sucks that didn't get done.

    I guess Carl is smiling in his grave though.
    Perhaps you can tell us where the REDS stood amongst all MLB teams during Carl Lindner's ownership in spending?

    Perhaps you can explain to us why Carl Lindner should spend his own money to make someone like you happy?

    Perhaps you can explain to us why everything is Carl Lindener's fault and has nothing to do with the broken system for salary fairness that is called MLB?

    Perhaps you need to let it go now that the man has passed?
    Small market fan... always hoping, but never expecting.

  14. #13
    Waitin til next year bucksfan2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Cincinnati
    Posts
    10,125

    Re: Report: MLB could tax low-spending clubs

    Quote Originally Posted by AtomicDumpling View Post
    I think the large payroll teams are growing tired of some of the small market teams pocketing all of the money they receive from revenue sharing. Most of the small market teams are highly profitable each year. The high payroll teams generate much larger increases in franchise valuation, which the owners leverage to finance their other business and real estate interests. This is why neither the large market owners nor the small market owners are in favor of a salary cap.

    The reason revenue sharing was implemented in the first place was to improve payroll parity. But payroll parity has only gotten worse since revenue sharing was implemented. It is in reality more about profit-sharing rather than equitably distributing talented players throughout the league.
    Its a shame the Yankees, Red Sox, Angles, Phillies, and Cubs need other teams to play. Just think they could make a super league and not have any revenue sharing.

    Payroll parity makes sense in that both the Yankees and Pirates have equal shots at free agents. Revenue sharing makes sense in that Yankees have an advantage just have to pay over 100% for their free agents. All the revenue sharing in the world isn't going to allow the Pirates to pay CJ Wilson $18M/year for 4 years.

    I like the idea of a salary floor if implemented correctly. But I trust Selig about 0% to do the correct thing.

  15. #14
    Member Sea Ray's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio
    Posts
    15,539

    Re: Report: MLB could tax low-spending clubs

    I don't like looking at it as a tax on the low spending clubs. It should be described as their revenue sharing checks will be adjusted downward. The idea is that revenue sharing should at least in part be tied to player payroll

  16. #15
    We Need Our Myths reds1869's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Overlooking GABP
    Posts
    4,448

    Re: Report: MLB could tax low-spending clubs

    Quote Originally Posted by Sea Ray View Post
    I don't like looking at it as a tax on the low spending clubs. It should be described as their revenue sharing checks will be adjusted downward. The idea is that revenue sharing should at least in part be tied to player payroll
    That is a very good point.


Turn Off Ads?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most importantly, enjoy yourselves!


RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball


Contact us: Boss | GIK | BCubb2003 | dabvu2498 | Gallen5862 | LexRedsFan | Plus Plus | RedlegJake | redsfan1995 | The Operator | Tommyjohn25