Sep 25, 2025; Anaheim, California, USA; Kansas City Royals shortstop Bobby Witt Jr. (7) gestures after hitting a double during the eighth inning against the Los Angeles Angels at Angel Stadium. Mandatory Credit: William Liang-Imagn Images | William Liang-Imagn Images

With the expiration date of the current competitive bargaining agreement between the Major League Baseball Players Association and the owners looming over the end of the season like a supermoon in the sky, you can be assured that there will be lots of digital ink spilled all year long about the key negotiating issues. This is, of course, one of those pieces discussing one of the key negotiating issues. The issue at hand is arguably the central issue: that of a potential salary cap.

You all know the generalities by now. MLB is the only major American sports league without a salary cap. The MLBPA has historically resisted any form of a salary cap. The owners increasingly want a salary cap. None of this has changed. What has changed is that we’re close enough to the new CBA negotiations that we’re starting to see some actual numbers floated about. Evan Drellich, probably the most well-versed and well-connected journalist on this particular topic, included what his sources are telling him could be some realistic proposed numbers in a recent piece for The Athletic:

Whatever the owners first propose probably is not where they’d be willing to end up. A reasonable goal from an ownership perspective might be $240 million at the top and $160 million at the bottom, one source briefed on management thinking who was not authorized to speak publicly said.

There are a lot of arguments, many of them deep and interesting, about whether a salary cap would benefit players or owners or lead to more or less competitive balance. For now, let us set these gently aside as out of the scope of our little examination. Let’s pretend that, tomorrow, the league and the union magically agreed to this exact salary cap. What’s the fallout?

To find out, I looked at Cot’s Baseball Contracts and pulled the 2026 projected Opening Day payrolls for all 30 MLB teams. For any team under the $160 million floor, I adjusted their payroll figure to exactly $160 million. For any team over the $240 million ceiling, I adjusted their payroll figure to exactly $240 million. I then put them in a fun little spreadsheet so we all can see the results:

Team	2026 Opening Day Projected	2026 Salary Cap Adjusted	Difference
New York Mets	$355,204,181	$240,000,000	-$115,204,181
Los Angeles Dodgers	$314,895,813	$240,000,000	-$74,895,813
New York Yankees	$296,398,833	$240,000,000	-$56,398,833
Philadelphia Phillies	$280,583,618	$240,000,000	-$40,583,618
Toronto Blue Jays	$274,188,218	$240,000,000	-$34,188,218
Atlanta Braves	$259,586,000	$240,000,000	-$19,586,000
Houston Astros	$236,532,333	$236,532,333	$0
Chicago Cubs	$220,383,079	$220,383,079	$0
San Diego Padres	$215,130,898	$215,130,898	$0
Detroit Tigers	$203,747,859	$203,747,859	$0
San Francisco Giants	$193,459,922	$193,459,922	$0
Boston Red Sox	$187,500,905	$187,500,905	$0
Texas Rangers	$183,055,000	$183,055,000	$0
Arizona Diamondbacks	$181,129,256	$181,129,256	$0
Los Angeles Angels	$174,865,260	$174,865,260	$0
Baltimore Orioles	$165,694,000	$165,694,000	$0
Seattle Mariners	$159,446,881	$160,000,000	$553,119
Kansas City Royals	$140,459,488	$160,000,000	$19,540,512
Cincinnati Reds	$126,921,333	$160,000,000	$33,078,667
Milwaukee Brewers	$125,492,605	$160,000,000	$34,507,395
Colorado Rockies	$119,501,290	$160,000,000	$40,498,710
Pittsburgh Pirates	$105,673,500	$160,000,000	$54,326,500
Minnesota Twins	$104,090,857	$160,000,000	$55,909,143
St. Louis Cardinals	$98,125,000	$160,000,000	$61,875,000
Washington Nationals	$90,564,700	$160,000,000	$69,435,300
Wandering Athletics	$89,110,713	$160,000,000	$70,889,287
Tampa Bay Rays	$85,178,000	$160,000,000	$74,822,000
Chicago White Sox	$85,008,000	$160,000,000	$74,992,000
Cleveland Guardians	$74,552,140	$160,000,000	$85,447,860
Miami Marlins	$73,936,000	$160,000,000	$86,064,000
TOTAL	$5,220,415,682	$5,641,498,512	$421,082,830

The quick and dirty results: if MLB had implemented this particular version of the salary cap and floor, the players in aggregate would have gotten $421 million more in salary. Only six teams were above the ceiling. Meanwhile, more than double the teams—14!—were below the floor. There were as many teams at least $69 million below the floor as there were teams above the ceiling by any amount.

Sure, there are still some free agents out there, but Fangraphs’ free agent tracker lists only three players that project to get $10 million+ this year and have yet to sign: Lucas Giolito, Max Scherzer, and Zack Littell. And sure, this doesn’t include 40-man rosters, which cost each team a few extra million to fill out. On the other hand, a realistic scenario here wouldn’t have a whopping 14 teams at the exact $160 million floor; just a few million dollars spent above that floor for each team would cancel both things out.

So why has the union resisted if something like this would result in more money in the pockets of their members? There’s the principal of the matter, as the union likely feels it’s not their fault that teams like the Guardians, Rays, and Brewers are such incredible cheap-asses. Additionally, the union is trying to protect the earning potential for its best players. Under this scenario, the stars of the game would see their earning potential curtailed without the half dozen or so largest markets able to flex their financial muscles.

I don’t have a huge sweeping takeaway for you. The only thing I offer is the data’s perspective here, and a perhaps more subjective perspective informed by the data: if the players stay disciplined and focused, they can give the owners the salary cap that they want while securing terms that widen their slice of the revenue pie—all while catering to a public that’s generally sick of seeing big market teams push their way to the top.

Royalsreviewrssindex

Message History

Delivery option(s)