The optics of the Los Angeles Dodgers’ place in Major League Baseball are bad right now. There’s no denying that. They’re in the playoffs every single season (literally since 2012), have won the last two World Series, have an astronomical payroll and the league-sponsored narrative is that a salary cap would mean more parity. In response, we get a mass freakout every time the Dodgers add to that payroll and sign a good player in free agency. When they trade for the two-time Cy Young winner Tarik Skubal, we get a mass freakout, too.
There are legitimate reasons to point to the Dodgers’ payroll and significant advantage in resources over most other teams. There are also legitimate reasons to believe they’d still be one of the best teams in baseball even with a salary cap.
The Dodgers aren’t the biggest villains in the Tarik Skubal trade — the cowardly teams who let it happen are
Matt Snyder
Financial advantages
First things first, the Dodgers did not open the season with the highest payroll. The Mets did. After the Mets’ selloff at the trade deadline and the Dodgers adding money, including Skubal, they will end up with the highest 2026 payroll. Last season, they owed $169 million in luxury tax penalties, and it’ll be a similarly monstrous bill this year. The first $3.5 million of the money raised through those penalties is used to fund player benefits; half of the remaining sum goes towards retirement accounts and the other half is distributed among teams that receive revenue sharing and have increased their non-media net local revenue.
The Dodgers also lead MLB in attendance every single year (2012 was the last time they didn’t, outside of 2020). Part of that is the Dodgers having the largest-capacity ballpark. They’re also just really good, and fans want to watch good baseball.
Further, in terms of TV revenue, according to Sportico this week:
Guggenheim Baseball Partners purchased the Dodgers for $2.15 billion out of bankruptcy court in 2012. The court was involved in the ongoing TV rights negotiations that were finalized in 2013. The court originally called for $84 million of the rights to be subjected to revenue sharing in Year 1, which was later increased to $130 million, with an annual escalator, after a deal between MLB and Guggenheim. Anything additional would be excluded from revenue sharing, which was 34% of all local net revenue at the time and has since been raised to 48%.
In reality, the TV rights average $334 million per year, starting around $200 million and climbing to about $500 million in 2038. The deal pays roughly $320 million this year, and more than $100 million of that is not subject to revenue sharing for a “savings” of between $50 million and $55 million, per Sportico estimates.
Yes, the Dodgers are swimming in money in a way that the rest of the Major League Baseball teams are not. That isn’t really in dispute here.
That stated, a salary cap wouldn’t incapacitate the Dodgers as much as some fans would prefer.
Wouldn’t they still be great?
The Dodgers are the best franchise in baseball at building a farm system, helping players thrive to the best of their abilities and getting the most out of their players.
They headed into the season with the No. 1 farm system in baseball. After the trade deadline, during which they used prospect currency to trade for a two-time Cy Young winner, USA Today ranked the Dodgers as the second-best farm system in baseball. Of MLB Pipeline’s top 100 prospects, the Dodgers have seven (including four in the top 25). No other team has more than six in the top 100.
Keep in mind that most other teams with top prospects get them by drafting high. Eli Willits, the No. 3 prospect, was drafted No. 1 by the Nationals in 2025. The Mariners took Kade Anderson at No. 3 that same year. Max Clark, who just made his MLB debut for the Tigers, went No. 3 in 2023, behind Paul Skenes and Dylan Crews. The Dodgers never do that, since they make the playoffs every year and typically go deep, which means the reverse rankings punish them. So too do the competitive balance tax penalties, which drop them 10 spots in the first round.
There are some very significant organizational wins in player development that don’t grab headlines like free-agent signings. Will Smith was taken 32nd overall by the Dodgers in a draft where Mickey Moniak went first, Nick Senzel went second, Ian Anderson went third and Riley Pint went fourth.
Andy Pages, the Dodgers’ second-best player after Shohei Ohtani this season by WAR, was a free-agent signing out of Cuba at age 17 for $300,000. Every team could have afforded this.
Justin Wrobleski, an All-Star this season, was drafted by the Dodgers in the 11th round in 2021.
There are productive players the Dodgers haven’t even bothered to keep. Miguel Vargas, an All-Star having a huge season for the White Sox, was sent to Chicago as part of a three-team trade that landed the Dodgers Michael Kopech and Tommy Edman. The Dodgers gave Michael Busch to the Cubs for Jackson Ferris and Zyhir Hope, the latter of whom was just shipped out in the Skubal trade. Dustin May, Ryan Pepiot and Keibert Ruiz, among others, have been traded as well.
Edman, that buy-low acquisition? He was named the 2024 NLCS MVP just a few months later after hitting .407 with 11 RBI in the series against the Mets. Justin Turner was picked up off the scrap heap by the previous front office, as were Max Muncy and Chris Taylor under current boss Andrew Friedman.
Remember, this is also the organization that let World Series MVP Corey Seager walk in free agency (he won World Series MVP again in 2023 with the Rangers), in addition to prime Max Scherzer and Trea Turner. It’s not like they had so much coming through the pipeline at shortstop when they let Seager and Turner go, either. They had to move Mookie Betts in from right field to take over at short a few years later.
But “they just sign every top free agent,” right? Nope. They just missed out on Juan Soto in the 2024-25 offseason. He’d be a hell of a lot better in their lineup than Kyle Tucker right now.
Players like Ohtani and Yoshinobu Yamamoto clearly wanted to play for the Dodgers. Would they have taken lower salaries in order to squeeze under a salary cap for the Dodgers? Maybe. We’ve seen it happen in other sports. In that world, the Dodgers still get those players; ownership just gets to keep more of the money instead of the players. How is that better? The players are the talent, and they’re the ones we all pay to watch. They should be getting paid. And free agency means they’re allowed to pick their team. Why shouldn’t that be the perennial winners?
Under a salary cap, the Dodgers would absolutely have to deal differently with their big-league roster. There’s no disputing that. But they would likely still be the best-run organization in baseball (closely followed by the Brewers, especially if Milwaukee had to spend more to reach a higher floor). The Dodgers aren’t good just because they spend a lot of money on payroll. A salary cap wouldn’t make them worse at player development and acquisition — or make other teams better.
The Dodgers are the best team in baseball at operating within the structure of the rules. If the rules change, they would still be the best in baseball at operating within the new structure. You can cope with “buying championships” accusations all you want, but they are just better at everything than everyone else. That’s the reality.
