Very obviously, based on my reporting for several years, I've known Major League Baseball's owners were committed to a salary cap system like the one that was formally proposed to the MLB Players Association today.
Even so, I was surprised by how ... aggressive it was in terms of getting the players to go along.
For anyone who missed it, there's a hard ceiling of $245.3 million, a hard floor of $171.2 million and universal sharing of local TV revenues to make that mandatory range attainable for all franchises, including the Pirates. Here's a full accounting, but that's the foundation of it. There's a ceiling that still allows for some teams to outspend others, a floor that forces the lower-revenue teams -- or cheapskates, depending on the scenario -- to spend what they should, and it creates the means to make it happen.
None of it's original. It's a blatant copycat of the base systems used in the NFL and NHL.
And maybe, by putting forth the numbers that MLB did, there was a method.
As I've repeated again and again, all cap systems come with a ceiling, a floor and immensely expanded revenue sharing. Now, at long last, that's in plain view for the whole baseball world to try process. Which might explain why it appeared to be so popularly received, certainly on social media, certainly in markets that weren't New York or Los Angeles. It was put into terms where every fan of every team could go over those figures and see how they'd be impacted.
As compiled by Spotrac, these are the six 2026 payrolls that'd be above the proposed ceiling:
• Mets: +$88 million • Dodgers: +$55 million • Yankees: +$46 million • Blue Jays: +$36 million • Phillies: +$36 million • Braves: +$21 million
And those below the proposed floor:
• Marlins: -$92 million • Guardians: -$90 million • White Sox: -$80 million • Nationals: -$77 million • Athletics: -$76 million • Cardinals: -$76 million • Rays: -$68 million • Pirates: -$67 million • Twins: -$66 million • Rockies: -$54 million • Brewers: -$42 million • Reds: -$38 million • Royals: -$25 million • Mariners: -$9 million • Orioles: -$4 million
So, depending on the framework of one's math on this, the players would gain an additional $500 million, roughly, toward what they'd make. With no individual maximum applied.
Crazy that they'd object, right?
They will. The brainwashing's decades deep. Scott Boras and his ilk prefer to represent the upper crust, and they don't care about the bottom. Never have. Never will. That's why the union's initial proposal doubled the major-league minimum wage to $1.5 million, just to shut up that group. (The NFL for years has tried to seize upon that class for the vote, so the union made a hollow, preemptive strike.) But the truth is, those same players would benefit far, far more within the owners' proposal.
THE ASYLUM
DK: Owners hit one in the river
Very obviously, based on my reporting for several years, I've known Major League Baseball's owners were committed to a salary cap system like the one that was formally proposed to the MLB Players Association today.
Even so, I was surprised by how ... aggressive it was in terms of getting the players to go along.
For anyone who missed it, there's a hard ceiling of $245.3 million, a hard floor of $171.2 million and universal sharing of local TV revenues to make that mandatory range attainable for all franchises, including the Pirates. Here's a full accounting, but that's the foundation of it. There's a ceiling that still allows for some teams to outspend others, a floor that forces the lower-revenue teams -- or cheapskates, depending on the scenario -- to spend what they should, and it creates the means to make it happen.
None of it's original. It's a blatant copycat of the base systems used in the NFL and NHL.
And maybe, by putting forth the numbers that MLB did, there was a method.
As I've repeated again and again, all cap systems come with a ceiling, a floor and immensely expanded revenue sharing. Now, at long last, that's in plain view for the whole baseball world to try process. Which might explain why it appeared to be so popularly received, certainly on social media, certainly in markets that weren't New York or Los Angeles. It was put into terms where every fan of every team could go over those figures and see how they'd be impacted.
As compiled by Spotrac, these are the six 2026 payrolls that'd be above the proposed ceiling:
• Mets: +$88 million
• Dodgers: +$55 million
• Yankees: +$46 million
• Blue Jays: +$36 million
• Phillies: +$36 million
• Braves: +$21 million
And those below the proposed floor:
• Marlins: -$92 million
• Guardians: -$90 million
• White Sox: -$80 million
• Nationals: -$77 million
• Athletics: -$76 million
• Cardinals: -$76 million
• Rays: -$68 million
• Pirates: -$67 million
• Twins: -$66 million
• Rockies: -$54 million
• Brewers: -$42 million
• Reds: -$38 million
• Royals: -$25 million
• Mariners: -$9 million
• Orioles: -$4 million
So, depending on the framework of one's math on this, the players would gain an additional $500 million, roughly, toward what they'd make. With no individual maximum applied.
Crazy that they'd object, right?
They will. The brainwashing's decades deep. Scott Boras and his ilk prefer to represent the upper crust, and they don't care about the bottom. Never have. Never will. That's why the union's initial proposal doubled the major-league minimum wage to $1.5 million, just to shut up that group. (The NFL for years has tried to seize upon that class for the vote, so the union made a hollow, preemptive strike.) But the truth is, those same players would benefit far, far more within the owners' proposal.
This is it. It's coming.
Want to participate in our comments?
Want an ad-free experience?
Become a member, and enjoy premium benefits!
We’d love to have you!