Anti Tanking?

[Ken]

Whatever they ended up with in the collective bargaining agreement did not work. It seems like we're seeing more blatant payroll cuts and tanking in the last few days than ever. The Reds and A's are just selling everyone who has a pulse

[Sour Masher]

Yeah, for all the praise the player's union gets, and they do deserve a lot of that, I just do not get how they could not come to some kind of agreement on at least a soft floor, even if it meant concession for a soft cap. It seems the players cared more about not restricting the top teams from spending more, but for a competitive balance standpoint, it would be better for increased revenue sharing and some kind of salary floor, even just a stepped tax system where the less you spend, the less you get in revenue sharing. I know most baseball fans are cool with the status quo,, but the spending disparities in baseball have always annoyed me. You have teams spending less on their whole payroll than some teams spend on one or two guys.

[mgwiz22]

I don't think the union cared about competitive balance. The union cared solely about higher salaries.

[Ken]

I don't think the union cared about competitive balance. The union cared solely about higher salaries.

There's correlation there though. When a team can tank and shed salary with extremely positive benefits (better draft picks, revenue sharing benefits), then salaries go down.

[Bene Futuis]

I don't think the union cared about competitive balance. The union cared solely about higher salaries.

This is just not true.

[mgwiz22]

This is just not true.

I guess we will have to disagree.

[Bene Futuis]

I guess we will have to disagree.

Well, I mean I guess the cynical take could be that everything is ultimately about the money. But still, a bunch of changes were made regarding competitive balancing, even if you think they were not sufficient.