[Pelican]

Somewhere (I can't find it) in this thread there was a comment (maybe facetious) about how the luxury tax works like a "soft" salary cap. To the extent that was serious, I don't think it does. Teams (looking at you, Mets) that want to spend the money just blow by the limit and pay the tax. (The Mets of course also prove that merely throwing money at a problem does not always fix it.). It's only money. A hard cap is the only way to stop that.

But I'm more concerned with the bottom end of the scale. Some teams (KC, Pirates) won't or can't spend money on free agents, extensions, arbitration-eligible players, or on player development and scouting. Rather than a cap (ceiling), there ought to be a floor - a minimum number for salaries, and possibly one for investment in player development. Think of it as like an ante in poker. If you can't or won't ante up, you're out of the game.

In my sims with something like a spending floor, the bad teams tend to improve, and the whole league is more competitive. Of course, there are always unintended consequences. With more teams bidding, free agents get more money, salaries increase. The wealthy free-spending teams spend even more. It's tough to achieve some sort of parity, without a cap as well.