Pay for Play, and Play for Pay

Let's fix sports ... all of them (or at least football, baseball, and basketball). One year contracts with pay based on your previous year's play and your current year's play. A bonus for both the teams and players that stay together. Thus, if Chicago Bulls guard Kirk Hinrich is worth $5 million in a given year, he might get $6 million if he's been with the Bulls for 5 years, but would only get $4 million if he put up the same numbers for a new team. Continuity in sports is important, and should be rewarded. It is important for fan-player-team relationships and the overall product, since familiarity with teammates is usually a good thing.

The NFL has a problem in that players are tied into contracts, while the teams can cut players during their contracts. Basketball and baseball have guaranteed money, which doesn't lead to guaranteed performance. Terrell Owens signed a 7-year, $49 million contract, but he wouldn't have come close to $7 million this year, even if he hadn't been suspended without pay for the later part of the season. The players should be protected. They should have some recourse if they overperform their deal, just like the teams do if players underperform. It should be an equitable system.

In baseball, here are some names: Chan Ho Park, Kevin Brown, Jeff Bagwell (the Astros are trying to get him to retire so they can recoup $15.6 million of his $17 million salary for 2006). Then, there are Manny Ramirez, Miguel Tejada and everyone else who wants to change his location. Let them. In the NBA, Allan Houston, Anfernee Hardaway, Grant Hill, Carlos Boozer. Injuries happen, but teams shouldn't be hindered for years because of them.

I'm not trying to get player salaries reduced. Sure, they are, at times, outrageous and it would be nice if they were a little lower. Keep the average salary the same (or close to the same level), but redistribute the money to the people who earn it. Maybe you would see fewer people working hard in their contract year (like Austin Croshere) and then wasting away the rest of their career because they are set for life. Does anyone really think the Mets got their money's worth from CF Carlos Beltran in 2005? If you are consistent (like Kevin Garnett, Alex Rodriguez, Allen Iverson), you'll get a consistent check. Hopefully, this system will help persuade players to devote enough time during the off-season to at least stay in shape, maybe even improve.

In order to restrict player movement, projected salaries would be used if a cap is necessary, like in the NBA and NFL which have salary caps. Thus, you can not stockpile expensive talent. In MLB, I guess you could go without the cap, and continue to have the Yankees recruiting more than their fair share of the talent, like a premier college team. The key concept of the cap would be its restriction on player movement, not on having the best players.

Initially, everyone on their current team doesn't count at all against any cap. Likewise, draft picks don't count against your cap, and neither do trades (although, a governing body would have to approve all trades to make sure they are reasonable). Every year, everyone is a free agent, and they are free to move around the league. As a team, you can sign players that have a sum of projected salaries of less than or equal to the salary cap. These players will count against the cap for some number of years, with their cap number staying the same, or decreasing, over time, depending on performance.

For instance, say the Cleveland Cavaliers decide to reunite LBJ and Carlos Boozer. James wouldn't count against the Cavs cap, but Boozer would. How much? Based on his recent production, perhaps his projected salary for the season would be $4.5 million, since he should be healthy, but hasn't been the last couple years, but when he is playing, he's very productive. So, he'll count $4.5 million against the cap his first year. If he continues to be injury plagued and doesn't produce much, his projected salary and cap number will reduce, until he goes off the books after 5 years (or if he retires). However, if he returns to his role as a prominent power forward in the league, averaging near 20 points and 10 rebounds per game, his salary will climb. But, the Cavs will only have a $4.5 million cap hit for the 5 year duration, despite Carlos being paid much more than that for his production. Thus, teams will not have their hands tied by injuries, nor will they be penalized for having their players improve during their stay.

Oh, injuries. Currently, they ruin careers, but not finances. In this system, injured players won't be thrown under the bus, but they won't be paid like productive players either. Salaries will be reduced, quite dramatically, down to a base level, which will be the compensation until a player reaches a predetermined age which is the end of a reasonable career, probably in the 35-40 range. The compensation may be something like 50% of previous 3 years average, then 30%, 20%, 10%, base (or the base if the initial salary wasn't that high), with the base being something like $150K, a very nice salary, considering you don't have to do anything.

Obviously, the system needs some tweaking and further analysis, but it's hard to argue with the basic idea.