\n\u201cThe Supplemental Commissioner\u2019s Discretionary Fund,\u201d which is more interesting than it sounds<\/a>. When a high-payroll team pays luxury tax \u2014 like the $169 million the Los Angeles Dodgers paid in overages for 2025 \u2014 half of the money is distributed back to different teams through that fund.
\nThe \u201ccompetitive incentive fund,\u201d something the union wants to newly create during this round of bargaining.<\/p>\n
Now, as a matter of speculation: the league is unlikely to bite on any of these, and the union probably won\u2019t carry this specific fight very far. The players have big economic fish to fry. But if nothing else, by bringing disclosures up at the table, the union is underscoring a point it has long argued: fans would find it eye-opening to know how much owners make.<\/p>\n
MLB declined comment.<\/p>\n
One important note on this topic: the public and the union are in different boats.<\/p>\n
The league already provides some financial information regularly to the union, including audited financial statements from each team, and a list of other things outlined in the collective bargaining agreement. The union also has the right to ask for an audit of a given team.<\/p>\n
But, per the CBA, the union can\u2019t share that information publicly, so owner earnings stay out of sight \u2014 even though player salaries are widely known.<\/p>\n
The Atlanta Braves are an exception as a publicly traded team. They have to provide regular public updates, and reported about $732 million in revenues for 2025.<\/p>\n
One interesting wrinkle: a salary cap, which the owners want, would lead the league to share more financial information with the union than it does today. In that setup, the sides would agree on a formal split of industry revenue, and they\u2019d need to agree on what\u2019s included and what\u2019s not.<\/p>\n
The union is opposed to a cap, though. And even if the players changed their tune, the owners still wouldn\u2019t want to share financial information publicly.<\/p>\n
What if the World Series matchup is Guardians vs Nationals \u2014 two teams at the bottom of the payroll curve? Does it upend the CBA narrative? \u2014 Random R.<\/p>\n
Upending the narrative is one thing. Upending the CBA is another.<\/p>\n
A World Series matchup of low-payroll teams might help the players\u2019 anti-cap argument with the public, but I\u2019m not sure it would change anything about the factors being discussed behind closed doors. Owners still wouldn\u2019t like extreme salaries or the fact that different teams treat free agency \u2014 and revenue sharing \u2014 in such different ways. It\u2019s not like the Guardians would say: \u201cWe won! We don\u2019t need a cap after all!\u201d Players, meanwhile, still would want to reach free agency sooner and generally earn a higher share of the sport\u2019s revenue.<\/p>\n
The issues are what they are, and upending a Dodgers dynasty for a year wouldn\u2019t change them. But if there\u2019s a lockout coming, a low-revenue World Series would certainly play into the players\u2019 narrative more than the owners. As Ken Rosenthal wrote last week:<\/a><\/p>\n \u201cA World Series between, say, the Brewers and Rays, would lay waste to the owners\u2019 cries for greater parity, which \u2014 based on the revenue disparity that exists within the sport \u2014 are not entirely without merit. But let\u2019s be real: The primary motivation for the owners in pursuing a cap is to establish fixed costs that would enhance their franchise values.\u201d<\/p>\n What if the Pirates hadn\u2019t hung up the phone on the Yankees\u2019 proposed Paul Skenes offer? Cam Schlittler would be crushing it in Pittsburgh. Spencer Jones would be duking it out with Oneil Cruz for both the strikeout record and the first to 30 home runs. And George Lombard Jr. would likely be taking reps at 3B in AAA to soon join the MLB club and have the youngest and highest upside right side of the infield, arguably, in the NL. It\u2019s hard not to dream on that as a Pirates fan. \u2014 MA S.<\/p>\n Honestly, this is the kind of question we were expecting.<\/p>\n If you\u2019re confused by the premise of this hypothetical, it comes from a report in the New York Post<\/a> saying the New York Yankees \u201cwere prepared to offer four top prospects last July\u201d in a potential deal for Pittsburgh Pirates ace Paul Skenes. The prospects involved were not identified, but the report did note that Cam Schlittler, Spencer Jones, George Lombard Jr., and Carlos Lagrange might have been the best prospect package the Yankees could have put together at that time.<\/p>\n It\u2019s a fascinating \u201cwhat if\u201d for this season, because Schlittler and Skenes have been remarkably similar this year. Heading into Tuesday night\u2019s start, Schlitter\u2019s strikeout rate, walk rate and WHIP were almost identical to Skenes\u2019. Schlittler had the better ERA, but Skenes had a better expected ERA.<\/p>\n One-for-one, I imagine every executive would still prefer Skenes over Schlittler, but in the short term, the hypothetical trade also would have sent some high-upside bats to the Pirates \u2014 would Jones have replaced Marcell Ozuna at DH by now? \u2014 and given Schlittler\u2019s incredible start to the season, the Pirates might not have skipped a beat in the rotation. Can\u2019t blame Pirates fans, especially those who assume Skenes is going to leave eventually, for actually finding a Skenes trade they might have liked.<\/p>\n Of course, Skenes-to-the-Bronx also would have brought back some of that we-get-whoever-we-want swagger to the Yankees, and who knows how Skenes would have reacted and performed on that stage? Would having Skenes (and a thinner farm system) have pushed the Yankees to spend differently this winter? Would it have given that team an aura of inevitability, like the Los Angeles Dodgers? It\u2019s the kind of blockbuster that ripples, even when it\u2019s hypothetical.<\/p>\n Probably an obvious one \u2026 what if the Mets don\u2019t swoop in and sign Bo Bichette out from under Dave Dombrowski\u2019s nose? Does he struggle in Philly like he has in New York? \u2014 Anonymous U.<\/p>\n An unusual \u201cwhat if\u201d in which each side might prefer to take a chance on the alternative universe. For the Mets, Bichette has been a high-profile piece of a high-priced debacle. By fWAR, Bichette is one of the 20 worst-qualified players in baseball. Also in the bottom 20: Mets second baseman Marcus Semien and first baseman Mark Vientos, while Francisco Lindor and Jorge Polanco have been hurt, all of which perhaps made things harder on Bichette (both in terms of expectations and the way he\u2019s attacked).<\/p>\n But the Phillies have a similar \u2014 albeit cheaper \u2014 third base problem with Alec Bohm on pace for a career-worst season in which second baseman Bryson Stott and shortstop Trea Turner have also struggled and offseason addition Adolis Garcia is hitting below .200 with little power.<\/p>\n The Phillies have done a better job than the Mets of turning things around after a slow start to the year. Would something about that atmosphere \u2014 with Kyle Schwarber\u2019s voice in the clubhouse and a managerial shakeup right out of the gate \u2014 have brought out the best in Bichette?<\/p>\n We know this much: nothing has brought out the best in him in New York. The Mets were better in May than they were in April, but Bichette\u2019s OPS actually went down in the second month of the season.<\/p>\n What if any star free agent (Shohei Ohtani, Aaron Judge, Bryce Harper) other than Willy Adames (who is\/was not a star) had signed with the Giants? Would they still find a way to be mediocre\/boring at best, or awful at worst? \u2014 David F.<\/p>\n \n Willy Adames is one of the few marquee free agents to sign in San Francisco of late, and his presence hasn\u2019t helped much. (D. Ross Cameron \/ Imagn Images)<\/p>\n The San Francisco Giants spend a decent amount of money \u2014 just over $200 million according to Roster Resource, basically in line with the Boston Red Sox, San Diego Padres, and Detroit Tigers \u2014 and they\u2019ve been linked to some of the biggest free agents in the sport (most notably Aaron Judge in December of 2022). But let\u2019s look at the biggest names the Giants have actually acquired in recent years:<\/p>\n Jung Hoo Lee \u2014 December 2023 All but Verlander are still on the roster. Care to guess how many have been worth at least 1.0 fWAR this season? The answer is one: Arraez. Devers is somehow barely a league-average hitter, Adames has been right at replacement level, and Ray has a 4.45 ERA (with a 5.15 xERA). No surprise, the Giants have been neither good nor particularly exciting.<\/p>\n So, I asked Giants beat writer Andrew Baggarly: Would a marquee name make a difference?<\/p>\n \u201cAbsolutely, Judge or Ohtani would have made a difference,\u201d Baggarly said. \u201cBryce Harper, too, if you care to go back a bit further. Then again, \u2018difference\u2019 can go either way. Is Carlos Correa a marquee name? Because if you want to play the other side of the what-if coin, the Giants had an announcement ready to go on a $350 million contract in December of 2022. And obviously, that deal would\u2019ve been an even bigger disaster if Correa\u2019s ankle had passed a physical. Right now, the Giants are an unfocused mess of a team and the farm system hasn\u2019t done enough to augment their free-agent investments, which, as you note, have not provided the anticipated returns this season. They have to get their own house in order and that takes time. It\u2019ll take even longer if they undergo another regime change.\u201d<\/p>\n What if the \u201chistorical best\u201d players (sluggers, hitters and pitchers) played with ABS in use? Which pitchers \u201calways\u201d got reputation strikes? (eg. Greg Maddux) Which batters were \u201calways\u201d squeezed? (e.g early Aaron Judge) Which hitters would have averaged \u201cmuch higher\u201d? Ted Williams? Wade Boggs? etc. \u2014 Ted G.<\/p>\n This isn\u2019t exactly the kind of 2026 \u201cwhat if\u201d we had in mind, but it does touch on the least avoidable storyline of this season: the introduction of an automated strike zone. My assumption had always been \u2014 based on various conversations with coaches and executives \u2014 that offense would improve with robo-umps. Hitters would know the strike zone even better than they already do, which would make it harder for pitchers to convince them to chase. Give George Brett or Wade Boggs or Tony Gwynn a defined strike zone, and they\u2019d hit .400.<\/p>\n And maybe that\u2019s going to be the case eventually as hitters get more time with this system, but it hasn\u2019t happened. Here are some league-wide numbers for the past six seasons (the 2026 numbers are through Monday).<\/p>\n MLB hitting statistics 2021-2026<\/p>\n YearBABABIPBB\/K<\/p>\n 2026<\/p>\n .241<\/p>\n .287<\/p>\n .42<\/p>\n 2025<\/p>\n .245<\/p>\n .291<\/p>\n .38<\/p>\n 2024<\/p>\n .243<\/p>\n .291<\/p>\n .36<\/p>\n 2023<\/p>\n .248<\/p>\n .297<\/p>\n .38<\/p>\n 2022<\/p>\n .243<\/p>\n .290<\/p>\n .36<\/p>\n 2021<\/p>\n .244<\/p>\n .292<\/p>\n .37<\/p>\n There\u2019s no perfect data available to know for sure which hitters and pitchers from previous eras would have been most affected, but I think it\u2019s also important to note that the ABS system hasn\u2019t occurred in a vacuum. Some of the developments and technologies that led to ABS in the first place have already changed the way hitters hit and the way pitchers pitch. Today\u2019s game would give George Brett a defined strike, but it wouldn\u2019t let him feast on any middle relievers throwing 88 mph. Banning the shift was also supposed to bring back batting averages, and that hasn\u2019t happened.<\/a><\/p>\n Turns out, sometimes things don\u2019t work out exactly the way you\u2019re expecting.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"We had an idea for this week\u2019s mailbag, but some of the questions took our theme and in…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":712343,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[435],"tags":[49,48,462,475,3980,481,509,512,82,575],"class_list":["post-712342","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-mlb","tag-ca","tag-canada","tag-mlb","tag-new-york-mets","tag-new-york-yankees","tag-philadelphia-phillies","tag-pittsburgh-pirates","tag-san-francisco-giants","tag-sports","tag-sports-business"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/712342","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=712342"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/712342\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/712343"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=712342"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=712342"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=712342"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ca\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/USATSI_29069198-scaled.jpg\")
<\/p>\n
\nRobbie Ray \u2014 January 2024
\nMatt Chapman \u2014 March 2024
\nWilly Adames \u2014 December 2024
\nRafael Devers \u2014 June 2025
\nJustin Verlander \u2014 January 2025
\nLuis Arraez \u2014 January 2026<\/p>\n