Report: Nick Sorensen will not return as 49ers' defensive coordinator →

There are 351 users in the forums

***2024 MLB Regular Season Thread***

Originally posted by GoreGoreGore:
MLB is a joke. They desperately need a salary cap. It's basically the same teams every year that can compete. Then most of the league has a 1-2 year window and then they go back to sucking again for 10 years.

Can you explain to me why you believe that the league that has the most parity out of all the major American sports needs a salary cap?
MLB revenue is all screwy

I read a business article explaining why the rich teams resist any sort of salary cap and even playing field.

Regional broadcast revenue is the culprit.

Basically all national broadcast revenue is split evenly (good) while regional broadcast revenue has a portion shared with MLB teams and a remainder kept by the local team (this is a real bad idea)

This regional money is insane for teams like the Dodgers ($334 million per year)

Contrast that with Padres who just lost their $60 million per year deal bc the broadcast parent company declared bankruptcy

MLB money disparity is rotten to the core
  • pd24
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 9,127
Originally posted by SanDiego49er:
It was still earned in playing years in CA and will likely be taxed in CA. $700 million is too much for a baseball player. What a joke. If they want to be that dumb OK. But it's dumb.

It will only be taxed for CA income tax if henis a CA resident during the payout years. Same reason a lot of state workers move to Nevada or Arizona when they retire, so their State of CA pension won't be subject to state income tax.
Originally posted by pd24:
Originally posted by SanDiego49er:
It was still earned in playing years in CA and will likely be taxed in CA. $700 million is too much for a baseball player. What a joke. If they want to be that dumb OK. But it's dumb.

It will only be taxed for CA income tax if henis a CA resident during the payout years. Same reason a lot of state workers move to Nevada or Arizona when they retire, so their State of CA pension won't be subject to state income tax.

Pension is AFTER you retire and much different than earned income.
  • pd24
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 9,127
Originally posted by SanDiego49er:
Originally posted by pd24:
Originally posted by SanDiego49er:
It was still earned in playing years in CA and will likely be taxed in CA. $700 million is too much for a baseball player. What a joke. If they want to be that dumb OK. But it's dumb.

It will only be taxed for CA income tax if henis a CA resident during the payout years. Same reason a lot of state workers move to Nevada or Arizona when they retire, so their State of CA pension won't be subject to state income tax.

Pension is AFTER you retire and much different than earned income.

It's going to be treated the same. Depends on when it is paid out and his residency at the time.

Doesn't matter to me though. I am glad the Dodgers got him and don't really care what he is taxed
Originally posted by pd24:
Originally posted by SanDiego49er:
Originally posted by pd24:
Originally posted by SanDiego49er:
It was still earned in playing years in CA and will likely be taxed in CA. $700 million is too much for a baseball player. What a joke. If they want to be that dumb OK. But it's dumb.

It will only be taxed for CA income tax if henis a CA resident during the payout years. Same reason a lot of state workers move to Nevada or Arizona when they retire, so their State of CA pension won't be subject to state income tax.

Pension is AFTER you retire and much different than earned income.

It's going to be treated the same. Depends on when it is paid out and his residency at the time.

Doesn't matter to me though. I am glad the Dodgers got him and don't really care what he is taxed

Some states don't tax retirement income. Some do. That can include social security, pension, IRA, Roth IRA. Some or all of those or some combination. It actually varies by state. So it does actually matter and not treated the same as earnings in working years. Not necessarily. Depending on the state and situation.
Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:
Originally posted by GoreGoreGore:
MLB is a joke. They desperately need a salary cap. It's basically the same teams every year that can compete. Then most of the league has a 1-2 year window and then they go back to sucking again for 10 years.

Can you explain to me why you believe that the league that has the most parity out of all the major American sports needs a salary cap?

That just comes with the "randomness" of the game and teams can just tank for awhile and load up on good young players that they don't have to actually pay anything meaningful for several years. And then get rid of them when they have to pay and go back to sucking for another 5-10 years.

You can argue that the same teams are usually the ones contending in the NBA, but that's because a lot of the times the star players want to go to bigger markets. However, theres also a decent amount of smaller market teams that have drafted well and signed their top players to big contracts and have done very well for an extended period of time. Warriors (not a small market but they've never been a top destination for players until recent memory), Nuggets, Milwaukee, San Antonio, just some recent examples.

You don't have to pay a player 10 years 700mil to keep him, which makes it so only a handful of teams with very wealthy owners can do. The As is the perfect of example of what's wrong with the mlb, that s**t is ran as pure business when MLB is the business of entertainment, not just make revenue and that's it.

A salary cap will allow a bunch more teams to keep a core of players together for a long time, but they also need a better way to split rev (Tigerlaw is absolutely right) and get rid of owners who don't want to spend and use their MLB team as a stream of income.
[ Edited by GoreGoreGore on Dec 12, 2023 at 10:05 PM ]
They may win the off-season every year, but any season in which the Yankees or Dodgers don't win the World Series is a great season to me.
  • pd24
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 9,127
Originally posted by SanDiego49er:
Originally posted by pd24:
Originally posted by SanDiego49er:
Originally posted by pd24:
Originally posted by SanDiego49er:
It was still earned in playing years in CA and will likely be taxed in CA. $700 million is too much for a baseball player. What a joke. If they want to be that dumb OK. But it's dumb.

It will only be taxed for CA income tax if henis a CA resident during the payout years. Same reason a lot of state workers move to Nevada or Arizona when they retire, so their State of CA pension won't be subject to state income tax.

Pension is AFTER you retire and much different than earned income.

It's going to be treated the same. Depends on when it is paid out and his residency at the time.

Doesn't matter to me though. I am glad the Dodgers got him and don't really care what he is taxed

Some states don't tax retirement income. Some do. That can include social security, pension, IRA, Roth IRA. Some or all of those or some combination. It actually varies by state. So it does actually matter and not treated the same as earnings in working years. Not necessarily. Depending on the state and situation.

I get that. I don't care why he did it, he makes enough money off the field to do so. I am a Dodgers fan and am glad he is on the team and gave them some flexibility in paying Competitive balance tax on 46 million a season while only paying him 2 million and not having to pay CBT on 70 million. It let's them spend more, that is basically what the Dodgers get from it.
Originally posted by GoreGoreGore:
Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:
Originally posted by GoreGoreGore:
MLB is a joke. They desperately need a salary cap. It's basically the same teams every year that can compete. Then most of the league has a 1-2 year window and then they go back to sucking again for 10 years.

Can you explain to me why you believe that the league that has the most parity out of all the major American sports needs a salary cap?

That just comes with the "randomness" of the game and teams can just tank for awhile and load up on good young players that they don't have to actually pay anything meaningful for several years. And then get rid of them when they have to pay and go back to sucking for another 5-10 years.

You can argue that the same teams are usually the ones contending in the NBA, but that's because a lot of the times the star players want to go to bigger markets. However, theres also a decent amount of smaller market teams that have drafted well and signed their top players to big contracts and have done very well for an extended period of time. Warriors (not a small market but they've never been a top destination for players until recent memory), Nuggets, Milwaukee, San Antonio, just some recent examples.

You don't have to pay a player 10 years 700mil to keep him, which makes it so only a handful of teams with very wealthy owners can do. The As is the perfect of example of what's wrong with the mlb, that s**t is ran as pure business when MLB is the business of entertainment, not just make revenue and that's it.

A salary cap will allow a bunch more teams to keep a core of players together for a long time, but they also need a better way to split rev (Tigerlaw is absolutely right) and get rid of owners who don't want to spend and use their MLB team as a stream of income.

I was sort of with you until the end. I dont see how a salary cap would allow a bunch more teams to keep a core of players together. Forcing owners to spend, with a salary FLOOR, might do that. But what difference does it make if a team cant spend more than, say, $200M a season? The cheap ass owners are still not going to give out big contracts. You think if there was a salary cap, Marcus Semien and Matt Olsen would still be Oakland Athletics? I dont.
Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:
Originally posted by GoreGoreGore:
Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:
Originally posted by GoreGoreGore:
MLB is a joke. They desperately need a salary cap. It's basically the same teams every year that can compete. Then most of the league has a 1-2 year window and then they go back to sucking again for 10 years.

Can you explain to me why you believe that the league that has the most parity out of all the major American sports needs a salary cap?

That just comes with the "randomness" of the game and teams can just tank for awhile and load up on good young players that they don't have to actually pay anything meaningful for several years. And then get rid of them when they have to pay and go back to sucking for another 5-10 years.

You can argue that the same teams are usually the ones contending in the NBA, but that's because a lot of the times the star players want to go to bigger markets. However, theres also a decent amount of smaller market teams that have drafted well and signed their top players to big contracts and have done very well for an extended period of time. Warriors (not a small market but they've never been a top destination for players until recent memory), Nuggets, Milwaukee, San Antonio, just some recent examples.

You don't have to pay a player 10 years 700mil to keep him, which makes it so only a handful of teams with very wealthy owners can do. The As is the perfect of example of what's wrong with the mlb, that s**t is ran as pure business when MLB is the business of entertainment, not just make revenue and that's it.

A salary cap will allow a bunch more teams to keep a core of players together for a long time, but they also need a better way to split rev (Tigerlaw is absolutely right) and get rid of owners who don't want to spend and use their MLB team as a stream of income.

I was sort of with you until the end. I dont see how a salary cap would allow a bunch more teams to keep a core of players together. Forcing owners to spend, with a salary FLOOR, might do that. But what difference does it make if a team cant spend more than, say, $200M a season? The cheap ass owners are still not going to give out big contracts. You think if there was a salary cap, Marcus Semien and Matt Olsen would still be Oakland Athletics? I dont.

A Salary Floor would be the best way to go. Make some of these cheap owners actually have to spend some money for once instead of being awful for decades and then selling the teams for significantly more than they bought them for.
[ Edited by JustinMT on Dec 13, 2023 at 2:33 PM ]
Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:
Can you explain to me why you believe that the league that has the most parity out of all the major American sports needs a salary cap?

Small market teams suck for years, make a run for two to three years, have to trade away all their top players and start from scratch, suck for awhile, hope to make a run for a few years, rinse and repeat. Meanwhile the Dodgers, Yankees and other large market teams buy up basically whatever players they want and even if the flop, no biggie, they'll just eat the contracts and go after whoever the current top salary players are.

The margin for error for a large market tiny is significantly smaller than it is for smaller market teams that have to basically hit on everything and in the end, they're still not going to be able to compete on salary with the bigger spending clubs.
Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:
Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:
Can you explain to me why you believe that the league that has the most parity out of all the major American sports needs a salary cap?

Small market teams suck for years, make a run for two to three years, have to trade away all their top players and start from scratch, suck for awhile, hope to make a run for a few years, rinse and repeat. Meanwhile the Dodgers, Yankees and other large market teams buy up basically whatever players they want and even if the flop, no biggie, they'll just eat the contracts and go after whoever the current top salary players are.

The margin for error for a large market tiny is significantly smaller than it is for smaller market teams that have to basically hit on everything and in the end, they're still not going to be able to compete on salary with the bigger spending clubs.

The best analogy I have ever heard was imagine it like poker. The small market teams get their 5 cards, and get to draw once. The big market teams get their 5 cards, and get to draw 5 times. The small market poker hands can still win from time to time, but its much harder to do so.

Using that analogy, putting a salary cap on this would make each team only be allowed to draw from the deck 3 times. But I dont believe that the Pirates and A's of the world WOULD draw from the deck three times. They are too cheap to do so. So like I said, the problem is not having a salary floor. A cap isnt an issue. Especially considering the fact that the team with the largest payroll hasnt really won in decades.
Lets take a look at the highest payrolls in baseball for the recent past for a second.

2023
Mets: missed playoffs
Yankees: missed playoffs
Padres: missed playoffs

2022
Dodgers: Division Round exit
Mets: Missed playoffs
Yankees: swept in ALCS

2021
Dodgers: Lost NLCS
Yankees: Lost Wildcard
Mets: Missed playoffs

2020
We dont acknowledge 2020 as a season.

2019
Red Sox: Missed playoffs
Cubs: Missed playoffs
Yankees: Lost ALCS

2018
Red Sox: Won World Series
Giants: Missed playoffs
Dodgers: Lost World Series

2017
Dodgers: Lost World Series
Tigers: Missed playoffs
Rangers: Missed playoffs

2016
Dodgers: Lost NLCS
Yankees: Missed playoffs
Red Sox: Swept in Divisional round

2015
Dodgers: Divisional Round exit
Yankees: Lost Wildcard game
Nationals: Missed playoffs

2014
Dodgers: Lost in Divisional round
Yankees: Missed playoffs
Phillies: Missed playoffs

2013
Yankees: Missed playoffs
Dodgers: Lost in NLCS
Phillies: Missed playoffs

There are your last 10 years of real baseball seasons. As you can see, more often than not, the top payrolls in baseball dont even make the playoffs. Very few teams have had actual success. 2018 is clearly an aberration.
Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:
Lets take a look at the highest payrolls in baseball for the recent past for a second.

2023
Mets: missed playoffs
Yankees: missed playoffs
Padres: missed playoffs

2022
Dodgers: Division Round exit
Mets: Missed playoffs
Yankees: swept in ALCS

2021
Dodgers: Lost NLCS
Yankees: Lost Wildcard
Mets: Missed playoffs

2020
We dont acknowledge 2020 as a season.

2019
Red Sox: Missed playoffs
Cubs: Missed playoffs
Yankees: Lost ALCS

2018
Red Sox: Won World Series
Giants: Missed playoffs
Dodgers: Lost World Series

2017
Dodgers: Lost World Series
Tigers: Missed playoffs
Rangers: Missed playoffs

2016
Dodgers: Lost NLCS
Yankees: Missed playoffs
Red Sox: Swept in Divisional round

2015
Dodgers: Divisional Round exit
Yankees: Lost Wildcard game
Nationals: Missed playoffs

2014
Dodgers: Lost in Divisional round
Yankees: Missed playoffs
Phillies: Missed playoffs

2013
Yankees: Missed playoffs
Dodgers: Lost in NLCS
Phillies: Missed playoffs

There are your last 10 years of real baseball seasons. As you can see, more often than not, the top payrolls in baseball dont even make the playoffs. Very few teams have had actual success. 2018 is clearly an aberration.

Like said, baseball is a "random" sport. But a bunch of those teams you listed are always in the playoffs or are very competitive.

Part of it is bc it's a long ass season too. Some many ups and downs in baseball.

Salary cap isn't the main answer, owners spending is a big part of it. The way the revenue is split is a big part of it.

Idk what the salary cap needs to be set at, but it would make a huge difference if they get it right. Salary cap, MLB forcing owners to spend or gtfo, and revenue adjustments.
Search Share 49ersWebzone