Despite some initial intrigue from some members of the MLB Players Association about the owners’ proposal of a salary floor, the union remains steadfast in its desire to avoid any sort of cap system amid ongoing labor talks between the two sides. <\/p>\n
Per ESPN’s Jeff Passan<\/a>, even though players were “initially intrigued” by the salary floor idea, they have become less enamored the more they learned about it and believe the system proposed by the league is “actively worse for them and that addressing competitive balance does not necessitate a salary cap.”<\/p>\n In the first official proposal<\/a> for a new collective bargaining agreement made on May 28, the league put forth a cap system that would start at $245.3 million in 2027 and included a floor of $171.2 million. <\/p>\n The floor of $171.2 million is more than the 2026 payrolls for 14 teams, while seven teams this season are over the $245.3 million cap. <\/p>\n Theoretically, this would make it so all 30 teams would be spending a combined minimum of $5.136 billion under the cap-floor system. The 30 clubs are spending a total of $5.59 billion<\/a> on player salaries in 2026. <\/p>\n If all 30 teams spent closer to the midpoint of the floor and cap in 2027, total player salaries would end up around $6.25 billion. <\/p>\n Passan did note specifics of the MLB proposal are hard to parse out because exact details of it have not been made public. <\/p>\n The union quickly dismissed the proposal, though, with MLBPA interim executive director Bruce Meyer\u00a0telling Eric Fisher<\/a>\u00a0of\u00a0Front Office Sports that the deal would reduce the players’ share of league revenues and effectively eliminate guaranteed contracts. <\/p>\n “Player share [of industry revenue], under their proposal, would go down,” Meyer said. “Your contracts are never really guaranteed. … I thought they would try harder to make it look good, and they didn’t even do that. They’ve effectively managed to cobble together the worst system for players in any of the major sports, and it’s not even close.”<\/p>\n In a non-scientific survey of more than 14,000 fans conducted by The Athletic<\/a> prior to the start of this season, 68 percent of respondents voted in favor of a cap-floor system. <\/p>\n There is evidence from other sports to support the MLBPA’s stance that a cap-floor system doesn’t improve competitive balance. <\/p>\n For instance, the NBA has a salary floor system that requires teams to spend at least 90 percent<\/a> of the total cap. Teams got around that by handing short-term, inflated<\/a> contracts to free agents. <\/p>\n Even without a cap system in place, there have been MLB teams that had to spend money to avoid breaking the rules. <\/p>\n