Since MLB hinted at implementing a salary cap, the players showed enough resistance. However, MLB commissioner Rob Manfred’s preference about how the NFL and NBA successfully manage the salary cap is what makes it imminent within the foul line. As per the A’s Brent Rooker, the successful implementation of the salary cap in the NBA and NFL deserves a reality check, but that might not be what the popular narrative is.

“The solution that people believe that a salary cap offers, when you dig deeper into the numbers,” Rooker went brutally honest in an interview with ESPN. “You dig deeper into the NFL system and the NBA system and other cap systems, and the surface-level things that people think a cap will accomplish. It does not do a good job of that, and ends up being detrimental for not only the players, but for the league and competitive balance.”

There’s no doubt that the NFL’s parity is based on its salary cap system. The NFL uses a “hard cap”, which promotes strict parity, while the NBA’s “soft cap” allows team flexibility to retain superstars. And in both systems, it ensures that each team spends an equal amount on its roster development. But as per Rooker, that seems far from reality.

One of the major challenges that come with the salary cap is the lack of maximization of the value of the players. For instance, Shohei Ohtani’s $700 million contract might not have been possible had there been a salary cap. In that case, the Dodgers and the Marlins would have their upper limit capped, within which they need to spend. So, Ohtani would not get his justified value in regard to his talent.

Moreover, as Rooker pointed out, the salary cap in the NFL is also detrimental to the league. The Miami Dolphins stand as the most recent example. They recently released the quarterback Tua Tagovailoa. With that, they absorbed a record $99.2 million dead cap hit to move on from his contract. Last year, the New York Jets released Davante Adams to save $29.9 million against the 2025 cap. So, with such releases, the team dynamics get affected.

So, Brent Rooker warned MLB about implementing a salary cap and to dig deeper into how the NFL and NBA manage them. But what about the salary floor? Rooker might have an issue here.

Salary floor could be a middle ground for Rooker

What Rooker said about the salary cap can surely not be contested, but the salary floor could solve the issue. With a salary floor, MLB could have a minimum floor amount that every franchise needs to invest. For example, the Marlins’ 2026 payroll is about $78 million, while the Dodgers already exceeded $400 million.

In this case, rather than forcing the Dodgers to cap their upper limit, MLB could force the low-tier teams like the Marlins to increase their budget. “You’re seeing so many teams that are actually not spending,” superagent Scott Boras said last year. “They’re making more, but they’re not spending. They’re spending far less than they did two or three years ago.”

So, teams like the Marlins and Pirates are infamous for not spending enough on the team. But with MLB’s revenue share and luxury tax, these teams are earning huge amounts. For instance, the Dodgers paid a record-shattering $169 million in luxury tax for the 2025 season. That mostly went to the low-tier teams like the Pirates.

With a salary floor in place, the competitive balance Rooker desires without punishing players or high-spending teams can be created.