Summerlin is pretty nice. That’s where I’d live if I was there.

The more that I think about limiting outfield shifting the more I like it compared to the other ideas of forcing SP innings minimums, especially given the early AFL results.

Heeeeeelllll no

Not sure Yeli swung

Dump her

Sticking with my prediction of a gentlemen’s sweep for the Brewers

If revenue disparity is an owner problem, then why when the list of biggest spending MLB teams comes out yearly, the Royals never top the list? It’s always an LA or NY team. Maybe market size is the real problem.

And this may be the last time we see this for a really long time.

If he barreled a few more up, he’s basically Kenny Lofton or Jose Reyes-level game changing player.

Shifting money from the Dodgers to the Royals is a de facto cap either way. They won’t just have less revenue and spend the same on players. A real system codifies this so there are actual rules.

They didn’t create the problem of large markets and higher revenue being a function of higher population levels near those areas.

You just want to have your cake and eat it too. The Dodgers won’t spend less unless you make them by rule *and* mechanically by media revenue sharing. Same goes for the Pirates spending more.

Any redistributive mechanism means the Dodgers et al pay players less and the Pirates et al play players more. It will have a quashing impact at the top end and a positive impact at the bottom end. But that’s life if, like me, you want the majority of players to be paid more.

If we made an analogy to housing, it’s like the anti-cap folks are denying the reality that a doctor can afford a more expensive house than a cashier. If they instead submitted offers for the same house, the doctor would get it every time. That’s not how MLB should be.

It’s so funny to hear everyone dancing around the idea that the cap and floor system is the sanest way to accomplish the desired result of keeping the delta between top spenders and bottom spenders manageable and curtailing tanking.