MLB Needs To Punish Thrifty Owners.......
This is the chart of the payroll of each team in 2008 with what the average salary is for a player on the team.
| 2008 Team Payrolls | |||||
| No. | Team | Payroll | Average | ||
| 1. | New York Yankees | $209,081,579 | $6,744,567 | ||
| 2. | Detroit Tigers | $138,685,197 | $4,622,840 | ||
| 3. | New York Mets | $138,293,378 | $4,609,779 | ||
| 4. | Boston Red Sox | $133,440,037 | $4,765,716 | ||
| 5. | Chicago White Sox | $121,152,667 | $4,487,136 | ||
| 6. | Los Angeles Angels | $119,216,333 | $4,110,908 | ||
| 7. | Chicago Cubs | $118,595,833 | $4,392,438 | ||
| 8. | Los Angeles Dodgers | $118,536,038 | $4,233,430 | ||
| 9. | Seattle Mariners | $117,993,982 | $4,538,230 | ||
| 10. | Atlanta Braves | $102,424,018 | $3,414,134 | ||
| 11. | St. Louis Cardinals | $100,624,450 | $3,049,226 | ||
| 12. | Toronto Blue Jays | $98,641,957 | $3,522,927 | ||
| 13. | Philadelphia Phillies | $98,269,881 | $3,388,617 | ||
| 14. | Houston Astros | $88,930,415 | $3,293,719 | ||
| 15. | Milwaukee Brewers | $81,004,167 | $2,793,247 | ||
| 16. | Cleveland Indians | $78,970,067 | $3,037,310 | ||
| 17. | San Francisco Giants | $76,904,500 | $2,651,879 | ||
| 18. | Cincinnati Reds | $74,277,695 | $2,971,108 | ||
| 19. | San Diego Padres | $73,677,617 | $2,376,697 | ||
| 20. | Colorado Rockies | $68,655,500 | $2,640,596 | ||
| 21. | Texas Rangers | $68,239,551 | $2,353,088 | ||
| 22. | Baltimore Orioles | $67,196,248 | $2,099,883 | ||
| 23. | Arizona Diamondbacks | $66,202,713 | $2,364,383 | ||
| 24. | Minnesota Twins | $62,182,767 | $2,487,311 | ||
| 25. | Kansas City Royals | $58,245,500 | $2,240,212 | ||
| 26. | Washington Nationals | $54,961,000 | $1,895,207 | ||
| 27. | Pittsburgh Pirates | $49,365,283 | $1,898,665 | ||
| 28. | Oakland Athletics | $47,967,126 | $1,713,112 | ||
| 29. | Tampa Bay Rays | $43,820,598 | $1,460,687 | ||
| 30. | Florida Marlins | $21,836,500 | $661,712 | ||
Isn't it amazing then jump from the rank of lowest to the 15th ranked team goes from almost 22 million to 81 million dollars? In fact you could have 4 teams that don't even have the payroll of the differnece of 59 million dollars.
TOP NEWS

Assessing Every MLB Team's Development System ⚾
.png)
10 Scorching MLB Takes 🌶️

Yankees Call Up 6'7" Prospect 📈
It is time for MLB to step in to change the practices of thrifty owners who are not willing to spend the money. No matter what the team is you rarely see a small market team make a huge splash by signing a MVP type player or a cy young award winner. In fact more often then not the teams are letting go of those types of players to get younger talent if possible.
Look at the Cleveland Indians the team traded CC Sabathia to Milwaukee for 4 double A prospects. Anyone in Milwaukee knows that even though he's done great so far as a Brewer he's gone for more money to a team that can afford to add him. Ben Sheets is another example of the Brewers who will not be able to match a contract offer from a team that has a higher payroll.
The Minnesota Twins couldn't afford to keep Torii Hunter in town. The Oakland A's have had many players come and go even this year Rich Harden, Chad Gaudin, Dan Haren, and Nick Swisher. That's just 2008 or just before the season started.
I'm sure that many smaller market teams fans are getting sick of watching the fan favorite leave because another team can offer anywhere between 20-50 million dollars because the owner of the team refuses to open up their wallets. Yes, its good for the small market team to get the most for their players when they know they can't afford them, but it's ridiculous because it's just the same cyle over and over again. Sure occasionally you'll see a team make a run and win it, but most of the time even after winning the team is gutted for younger players.
I'm not quite sure how MLB can handle an owner who refuses to spend money. I do know that if an owner has a team for more then five years and no money has been spent towards bettering the team. Then MLB should issue a warning and if in a year it isn't resolved then the owner needs to be forced to sell the team. There's absolutely no point for a team owner no matter what professional sports team they own to no better the team for that year and for the future. If the owner shows that they are interested in spending money but don't have the resources then they should be able to sell a percentage of the team to someone or a group of owners who are willing to spend the money.



.jpg)





