Question of the week: do you care more about a floor or a cap?

[Brock Beauchamp]

This is the first DiamondCentric-wide poll, click into the link to vote. Do you care more about the next CBA having a salary cap or a salary floor? I know many of you want to hammer "both!", but ya gotta choose one.

Do you care more about MLB mandating a salary floor or a salary cap? - DiamondCentric

DIAMONDCENTRIC.NET

[Edgy MD]

Caps are insane.

Floors an insult also.

[A Boy Named Seo]

Gun to my head, I guess I'd say "floor" in this binary scenario but that's just cause I've got a gun to my head.

Nothing about a cap will improve my experience as a fan. Billionaires would be relieved of spending more money to compete and that wouldn't assure any club of a title or make things cheaper for the John Q. Lunchbuckets amongst us. But I'm pretty damn confident the "poor" MLB billionaires would use a salary floor as a means to justify price increases for the fans so we'd likely be getting the shaft either way.

[The Hot Corner]

Of the two, I would prefer a reasonable "salary floor" so that teams have to at least make some effort to be competitive.

Floor/Ceiling it doesn't matter the cost of MLB attendance will continue to skyrocket.

[Johnny Lunchbucket]

the correct answer is neither one

[Frayed Knot]

A floor.  I frequently go outside without any kind of cap or hat, but without a floor I'd fall down a lot.

 

But seriously folks ... it's kind of a meaningless question because it's not like it's a choice between one or the other; it's either going to be both or neither.

The owners desperately want a cap* meaning they have to figure out some novel approach of selling that idea to a union with decades worth of momentum standing up to anything even smelling like one; hence the floor. The union is naturally going to declare it a non-starter right off the bat so the owners are going to have to sell the idea that a floor plus whatever else is in the details of their proposal will be enough for at least a starting point for discussion because I can't believe that the owners are stupid enough to believe that they can simply wait the players out until they crack and start breaking ranks.

 

 

* in part because they get made fun of by all the other sports owners who mock them (probably at Epstein parties) for running the only sport that doesn't have one.  'Ha, you guys are so lame you can't even get a cap!!!'

[MFS62]

On 5/28/2026 at 11:34 AM, The Hot Corner said:

Of the two, I would prefer a reasonable "salary floor" so that teams have to at least make some effort to be competitive.

 

This. I've been saying that for years. And the floor should be set at the revenue each team gets from national TV and radio contracts. Then, attendance, concessions, local tv and radio and parking revenue would be kept by the teams.

IMO, this would make the smaller market teams more competitive, with more money to pay free agents and keep their own young players.

Later

[Edgy MD]

The way to make teams have to at least make some effort to be competitive is to take away all the protections and rewards they get for not being competitive.