From: snichols@adobe.com (Sherri Nichols)
Subject: Re: Dear Sherri
Organization: Adobe Systems Incorporated
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 00:07:02 GMT

In article <1992Apr9.231440.3706@ists.ists.ca> dchhabra@stpl.UUCP (Deepak CHHABRA) writes:
>Ok, but you still didn't answer the question.  How can teams with small
>revenues *compete* with teams with large revenues in an environment of
>unrestricted free agency?

A number of ways.  By aggresively scouting and developing young players,
who are cheaper, for example.  The difference between this and the current
draft situation is that you can do it more quickly without a draft.  By
treating the players well when you do have them, engendering loyalty
(which does happen in baseball, media screaming to the contrary).  By doing
better marketing even in small markets and increasing revenues.

  Teams with poor management, of course, can't do it, but teams with poor
management lose *no matter what the situation on free agency and the draft
is*.


>Your main argument is that the draft is equally bad or worse.  So let's
>examine the draft and who got who (the #1 is the team's 1st pick).

Of course there are good players in the draft.  That's the only way players
can enter the league currently.  What's your point?  How many Cups has
Steve Yzerman won in Detroit?  Lafontaine?  

>LA Kings:  McNall came to town and bought Edmonton.  So much for free
>agency.

How many Cups has McNall bought?  How many has Edmonton won *since* selling
Gretzky and Coffey?

>>As a precedent for what?  Increased parity?  That's exactly what exists in
>>baseball right now.  
>>
>No.  In MLB a few teams who can afford the elite get them.

Do you watch baseball?  Seriously.  Baseball just went through a decade of
unprecedented parity.

>  Baseball will
>collapse under its own financial strain soon.  It's already common practice
>to let guys go that you can't afford.  This is why Benito Santiago is up
>for grabs.

Doomsayers to the contrary, there is no evidence that baseball is anywhere
near financial strain.  Baseball has set attendance records 6 of the last 7
years.  Baseball owners have cried financial problems forever, *even when
they had complete control of the players via the reserve clause*.

>  Eventually things will likely straighten themselves out, and
>perhaps your prediction of free agency driving salaries down will come 
>true.

I said *total* free agency would drive salaries down.  Baseball doesn't
have anything like total free agency.

>Now, if you want to talk free agency with a salary cap or some other type
>of NBA-like mechanism, I'll probably agree.

No, I don't support a salary cap.  *IF* there is a problem with parity
among the teams because of revenue imbalances, I believe it is best
addressed by correcting the revenue imbalance, i.e. revenue sharing.  

A salary cap doesn't even necessarily correct problems of parity.  Remember
that the NBA salary cap is set at a percentage of total revenues.  If there
is a large discrepancy in revenues between the haves and the have nots,
then the max salary cap will be pushed up so high that it has no real
effect; that is, if my revenues are $20 million dollars, and my competitor's
revenues are $80 million dollars, then a $50 million dollar salary cap
isn't going to do anything to prevent my competitor from out-bidding me for
players.  

Sherri Nichols
snichols@adobe.com