GotowarMissAgnes wrote:As far as I know there is no good study that looks specifically at this issue. But what we do know is that previous studies of baseball markets and economic theory support the notion that higher salaries attract players. There certainly are other factors, but no one can claim on the basis of any evidence that the salary increase had nothing to do with it.
If you interpreted me as saying the rise in salaries from 1970 to now had zero impact on making baseball an attractive option, I certainly didn't mean to say that. I disagreed with you initially on the rises from now into the future, not 1970 to now. Essentially, as long as salaries stay extremely high in relation to other jobs, they're attractive enough. And we all know that will not be a problem. We also know that won't be a problem for NBA or NFL, which is where the initial disagreement started.
Of course we know that the rise from making nothing to making a lot of money will attract players to baseball. But they've been making a ton of money for over 25 years, and they will continue to make even more money, for as far as the eye can see. It's an incentive to make a lot of money, but how much of an incentive is it to make a little bit more than a lot of money? When I'm a regular kid, $2 million or $3 million both sound great. Yeah, when it was $17k, I might say "no way. I'm going to college." In fact, I know a lawyer who was a star hockey player in college in the late 60s. He chose to become a lawyer instead of go to the NHL. He was so good he would form an amateur team to play against the Bruins every year, and they would sometimes win. The pay back then wasn't worth the sacrifice to him. So your point is quite valid from $17k to $2 or 3 million. Less so as it goes higher from here is my point as the incentive is already huge. Still some impact, perhaps, but not a huge one by any stretch.
And I still see no support for your argument that a continued rise in baseball salaries will make athletes choose baseball over football and basketball, which have salary caps. That was the central point of my contention, and I still see no support for it.