MLB doesn't care about most of its teams

[puckstopper1]

I've felt this way for years, but this offseason really pushed me over the edge - that MLB does not care about most of its teams.  This article on MLB.com seals it in my opinion.

https://www.mlb.com/news/carlos-correa-mets-deal-takeaways

Item #5 on this list *really* irks me.  Really - the best offseason ever?  What is you are a fan of the 22 teams that can't spend up to (or blow away) the Luxury Tax?  Do you really feel that this was the best offseason ever?  Of that's right - your not in LA or NY or Philly or Chicago so you do not matter to MLB.

MLB BASEBALL IS SOOOOOO BROKEN RIGHT NOW!  I have been a fan of the game and of the Twins for over 50 years and have never been so frustrated with the state of the game.  The average team can not compete and the average fan can no longer afford to attend games.

Not sure what the fans of most of the teams have to look forward to this summer...

[DJL44]

20 minutes ago, puckstopper1 said:

Item #5 on this list *really* irks me.  Really - the best offseason ever?  What is you are a fan of the 22 teams that can't spend up to (or blow away) the Luxury Tax? 

The Padres should have killed this myth. There are very few baseball teams that can't spend up to the luxury tax. There are 15-20 teams that would rather show a huge profit than spend the money available to them. Is the winner of the season the team with the trophy or the team with the largest profit? It depends on how you're keeping score.

The revenue sharing formula is messed up. Teams that receive revenue sharing have negative incentives to increase their own  local revenue. What you're seeing here are economic incentives in action. More revenue sharing without changing the formula will make the problem worse, not better. A hard salary cap just takes money away from the players and gives it to the owners.

They need to share all national sources of revenue (broadcast rights, merchandising, licensing). These dollars exist because MLB exists. They need to stop sharing any revenue generated at the stadium (tickets, parking, concessions). This will incentivize teams to put a more entertaining product on the field. It will align the economic incentives with creating a better product for fans.

[Mike Vendsel]

MLB BASEBALL IS SOOOOOO BROKEN RIGHT NOW!  I have been a fan of the game and of the Twins for over 50 years and have never been so frustrated with the state of the game.  The average team can not compete and the average fan can no longer afford to attend games.

 

 

This statement is dead on!

[puckstopper1]

12 minutes ago, DJL44 said:

There are 15-20 teams that would rather show a huge profit than spend the money available to them. Is the winner of the season the team with the trophy or the team with the largest profit? It depends on how you're keeping score.

DJL - Just curious - do you have proof of this?  Hard for me to believe that the "non big spenders" are making a huge profit right now.  These teams have to overspend to get good players, and even though they are billionaires, they won't stay that way if they are stupid with their cash.

If the Twins has matched the Mets offer to Correa, I strongly feel that his contract would have cost the team millions of dollars in loses.

I can't speak to what the Padres owner is doing.  His pockets must be so deep that he just doesn't care.  Just like MLB...

[DJL44]

24 minutes ago, puckstopper1 said:

DJL - Just curious - do you have proof of this?

MLB teams are making $60M a year just from the national broadcast television money. They get an additional $110M in pooled revenue sharing. That's $170M in guaranteed revenue without selling a single hot dog. Pooled revenue sharing represents 48% of the take which means the average team revenue is $230M plus the $60M in TV money for at least $290M. That's before you get into things like the windfall from the sale of MLBAM, licensing fees, "official BLANK of MLB" sponsorships, etc.

MLB Teams Will Receive At Least $100 Million Annually From TV Rights Contracts (dodgerblue.com)

MLB’s revenue sharing problem, and how to solve it - Bless You Boys

The Orioles ran a $45M payroll last year which gives them at least $125M in profit.

I'd say there are seven teams who would lose money if they had a payroll near the $233M luxury tax - Pirates, Reds, A's, Marlins, Rays, Guardians and Royals. Two of those teams went to the playoffs last year.

[DJL44]

This doesn't even get into the massive tax advantages for billionaires if they can show a paper loss with their baseball team. It is one of the best tax shelters you can find.

[DJL44]

MLB had revenues near $11B last year. Divide that by 30 teams and you get $366.7M per team. If the players received 50% of the overall revenue the average salary would be $7M. Last year the average salary was $4.4M.

Massive profits. Underpaid players.

[4twinsJA]

 I am for a hard max. cap and a hard minimum floor for payroll. Would increase overall money to players.. Increased revenue sharing-looks like BallySports may be going bankrupt, I think they broadcast 16 MLB teams, would be a good start for MLB to buy them out and work to acquire other teams broadcasting rights. Free agency sooner, hard to believe someone can be drafted and controlled by that team for 8-9 years. Theilbar is 36 y.o. and won't reach FA for another 2 years. Now there are a handful of quality free agents, then it is a bunch of players 32-36+ y.o. past their prime. The top spending teams pick off the quality FAs and everyone else is left dumpster diving.

[Andy Brodie]

Not to say changes aren’t needed, but MLB has actually seen more parity and competitive success across the league than NFL, NHL, or NBA. 

Perhaps even more than a cap, MLB needs a floor.

Pohlads are among the wealthiest owners in the league. Too many Twins fans are too eager to keep apologizing and making excuses for ownership and the FO. We should stop making it so easy for them. 
 

https://www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/why-major-league-baseball-does-not-need-a-salary-cap-for-the-sake-of-parity/

 

[spanman2]

4 hours ago, DJL44 said:

MLB teams are making $60M a year just from the national broadcast television money. They get an additional $110M in pooled revenue sharing. That's $170M in guaranteed revenue without selling a single hot dog. Pooled revenue sharing represents 48% of the take which means the average team revenue is $230M plus the $60M in TV money for at least $290M. That's before you get into things like the windfall from the sale of MLBAM, licensing fees, "official BLANK of MLB" sponsorships, etc.

MLB Teams Will Receive At Least $100 Million Annually From TV Rights Contracts (dodgerblue.com)

MLB’s revenue sharing problem, and how to solve it - Bless You Boys

The Orioles ran a $45M payroll last year which gives them at least $125M in profit.

I'd say there are seven teams who would lose money if they had a payroll near the $233M luxury tax - Pirates, Reds, A's, Marlins, Rays, Guardians and Royals. Two of those teams went to the playoffs last year.

WOW...very interesting.  Appreciate the share!

[Cap'n Piranha]

4 hours ago, DJL44 said:

MLB had revenues near $11B last year. Divide that by 30 teams and you get $366.7M per team. If the players received 50% of the overall revenue the average salary would be $7M. Last year the average salary was $4.4M.

Massive profits. Underpaid players.

Not quite.  This assumes that each team pays 26, and only 26,  players MLB wages.  Anytime a player is on the IL, this of course raises that number.  It's much more likely that over the course of the season, a team will pay the equivalent of 30-32 MLB players.  That puts the average salary somewhere between $5.7M and $6.1M at a 50% share.  I'll leave aside the conversation of whether a 50/50 split of all profits is "fair".

[Cap'n Piranha]

MLB will not find the parity most posters seem to desire until one thing changes.  Unless a method for ensuring the same amount of money is made whether a team wins or loses, teams will always find ways to make money by losing (unless of course teams make more money by winning).

[Riverbrian]

I agree that the current system is unfair. 

From a talent standpoint... Most of us agree that the Mets have won the off-season.

From a payroll standpoint... the Mets are #1 and #2 is a long ways away. This is clearly not a level playing field. 

However, one thing that is lost in this discussion. 

The Mets still have to convert all those dollars and all of this free agent talent to actual winning on the field. 

No matter how much they have spent. They still have to play better than the Braves, Phillies, Cards, Brewers, Dodgers and Padres and whoever else shows up to contend. Those teams are not going to roll over for them because they spend more.  

At this point most of us assume wins are sure to come but they will start the season 0-0 just like everyone else. Let's see what happens.