We all know that a lockout is looming. Most of us don’t want it, but it looks like, according to many fans, it is necessary. And at the center of it all are the Los Angeles Dodgers, who seem to be the reason for the whole CBA and the owners pushing for a Salary Cap. But according to Bob Nightengale, the Dodgers are not the only ones at fault.

“With all of the vitriol directed towards the Dodgers, remember,” wrote Nighengale. “The Red Sox chose not to sign Mookie Betts and traded him to LA. Atlanta walked away from Freddie Freeman. The Angels declined to match Shohei Ohtani’s offer. The Astros and Cubs didn’t want to keep Kyle Tucker.”

The Dodgers have long drawn heated criticism for “ruining baseball” as they kept signing star players and stacking elite talent.

The recent signing of Kyle Tucker to a four-year, $240 million deal magnified the outcry because of its size and timing compared to other offers. Tucker’s deal included opt-outs after years two and three, a flexible feature rare in MLB free agency contracts.

That signing pushed the Dodgers’ projected payroll past $413 million, well above nearly every other club in the league.

Yet critics often overlook that other teams played major roles in this imbalance long before the Dodgers signed Tucker.

The Boston Red Sox traded Mookie Betts to Los Angeles in 2020 after extension talks failed, and Betts then signed a 12-year, $365 million extension with the Dodgers. The Los Angeles Angels declined to match the Dodgers’ offer when Shohei Ohtani reached free agency in 2023, allowing him to choose LA.

The Braves were unable to find common ground with Freddie Freeman before he signed a six-year, $162 million contract with Los Angeles in 2022.

The Houston Astros and Chicago Cubs also factored into Tucker’s free-agency path, as neither team retained him before he hit the open market. Tucker spent seven seasons with the Astros and played with the Cubs in 2025 before reaching free agency.

Both clubs ultimately did not outbid the Dodgers or Blue Jays, leaving Tucker to pick LA’s offer of the highest average annual value.

These individual cases show that player movement isn’t solely about a single team’s will to spend, but also reflects other franchises’ choices or limitations.

Boston’s decision not to extend Betts created the opportunity for Los Angeles to secure his long-term services. The Angels’ failure to retain Shohei Ohtani in free agency is part of a broader narrative of stars migrating to teams perceived as better positioned for winning. Atlanta’s handling of Freeman’s extension talks left him free to sign elsewhere, illustrating how team strategy interacts with market forces.

While the Dodgers’ payroll sits among the highest in the sport, many bottom-tier clubs appear unable or unwilling to match competitive spending.

Reports show that teams like Cleveland, Tampa Bay, and Miami hang around $100 million payroll levels, far below elite clubs’ commitments. In 2025, the Dodgers paid a record $169.4 million in competitive balance tax, with payroll at roughly $417 million.

This stark contrast contributes to fan frustration and perceptions of uneven competition.

If MLB seeks real balance, solutions should address both extremes of spending, not just the cap top teams.

Luxury taxes exist, but do not compel lower-payroll teams to increase spending or compete more aggressively. Many fans and analysts note that a salary floor, paired with a cap, would ensure baseline competitiveness across all 30 teams.

Ensuring more balanced spending might help the sport maintain competitive integrity and keep fans engaged across markets.

MLB fans lunge at Nighengale after his comment on the Dodgers’ offseason

Bob Nightengale stirred the pot again, and MLB fans weren’t holding back. The Dodgers’ wallet-heavy offseason has become the unofficial measuring stick for baseball envy. As the league debates salary caps and spending floors, fans are quick to assign blame, and the Dodgers remain the perfect lightning rod.

A fan commented, “This tweet was sponsored by the Los Angeles Dodgers front office,” implying Nightengale promotes the team. The fan believes Bob Nightengale is acting as a Dodgers mouthpiece in his reporting. They think Nightengale deflects criticism by emphasizing other teams’ choices over LA’s spending. This perception grew after Nightengale highlighted the Red Sox, Braves, Angels, Astros, and Cubs decisions benefiting the Dodgers.

Top Stories

Rift Cracks Open in Blue Jays as Real Reason Behind Bo Bichette’s Exit Emerges, per Insider

Who Are Kyle Tucker’s Parents? All about Mike Tucker and Lisa Fernandez

What Is Kyle Tucker’s Ethnicity, Nationality, and Religion? All You Need to Know

Mets Immediately Retaliate After Cody Bellinger failure by Stealing Yankees’ Prime Trade Target

Dodgers Given Clear Advantage by MLB, Thanks to Concerning Loophole & Foolish 25-Year Commitment

Another wrote, “How much are they paying you in deferrals, Bob?” targeting Nightengale directly. The comment implies the Dodgers are compensating him indirectly, like player contract deferrals. Fans reference big deferred deals, such as Shohei Ohtani’s $700 million.

“You can make all the excuses you want. This speaks for itself,” another criticism read. They highlighted Ohtani’s $680 million deferred pay over ten years. The fan points out that Ohtani receives only $2 million annually during his playing period. This comment underscores frustration over deferred payments while questioning the team’s influence on narratives like Nightengale’s.

Then, one defended Boston: “The Red Sox didn’t choose to sign Betts.” They noted the 10-year, $300 million offer was real, but Mookie Betts declined. The fan explained that Betts aimed to surpass Mike Trout’s record and preferred free agency. This comment challenges the narrative that Boston refused to pay, emphasizing Betts’ own decision-making.

The same sentiment around LA’s contract structure surfaced, as one wrote, “Dodgers overpaying for everyone then deferring the money is the problem.” They highlighted that other teams cannot spend enormous sums on single players like the Dodgers do. The fan explained that smaller-market clubs lack revenue, making it unrealistic to match top payrolls. This comment underscores the disparity between high-revenue and low-revenue teams, framing the Dodgers’ strategy as unique.

Bob Nightengale’s commentary shows how the Dodgers’ spending ignites debate more than the actual league rules. Fans highlight that Boston, Atlanta, and the Angels also shaped player movement, not just Los Angeles decisions. Ultimately, MLB’s drama isn’t ruined by the Dodgers alone but by teams unwilling to match competitive dollars.