Late Innings

Bill Madden of NY Daily News brought up a nasty topic for debate today:

The rumblings already have started. With three years to go in the basic agreement, baseball’s owners are once again sounding the flashpoint “c” word - as in salary cap. But this past week, events in Oakland and Miami - where a new stadium plan for the A’s was pronounced dead and one for the Marlins once again put on life support - may leave the owners no choice but to revisit another ominous “c” word: contraction.

ESPN’s Rob Neyer fired back with a assuaging rebuttal:

Look, the A’s and the Marlins both have serious ballpark/revenue woes. No question about it, and Madden does a good job enumerating those woes. But it’s a massive leap from “needing” a new ballpark to the c-word. For one thing, both the A’s and the Marlins have, in recent years, been competitive. We’re not talking about the St. Louis Browns here. We’re talking about one franchise that won 93 games three seasons ago and another that won 84 games just last year. I mean, seriously: these are the two teams that might disappear?

And Craig Calcaterra put the icing on the cake this afternoon:

Well, I think he’s right again here. But even if those obstacles were hurdled, wouldn’t it make more sense for the owners to sit around a table and figure out how to help ailing franchises rather than kill them? My assumption is that the Marlins’ and A’s owners would demand something akin to the market price + hassle charge in order to give up their franchises. I’m also assuming that, since Bud has cultivated a very chummy ownership group, they’d get at least that much. So we’re talking in the hundreds of millions here.

I remember the last time we had the contraction debate, and it was a decade ago. The teams thrown up were the Twins and the Expos. And naturally of course, everyone then had their own mock contraction drafts. That is with the first pick in the draft, teams were salivating over taking Vladimir Guerrero. If we’d contract the Marlins and the A’s, that talent would have to be divvied up both at the big club (e.g. Hanley Ramirez) and the minors (e.g. Trevor Chahill.)

I find it odd why Madden chose these two teams. The Marlins were above .500 last year, and the A’s have been perennially contending under a tight budget with Billy Beane. Besides, the A’s have been gearing themselves into contention, having signed Orlando Cabrera (at a small 4MM) this afternoon.

If baseball needs anything, contrary to what Madden believes, it’s that it needs more teams. And I’m referring to the major markets. New York could use another team, or hell two or three. Granted the Steinbrenners will fight this to the bone however. And since they’re the only party that doles out the major contracts, the players union would naturally be in similar disagreement. Any ways this brings us to our current stalemate.