The point of the cap should be to keep a team from becoming the Yankees....

Its not necessarily to prevent a team from becoming the Braves (7th highest payed team last year).

If you make the cap threshold so low that it affects 30% of the teams then you're doing a dis-service also.

First, a cap that affects that many teams is to extreme.

Second, if you institute a cap at that level now the game becomes who can trade for the most productive players with the lowest PB value. Now your guys like A.J. Burnett (7.5/5.1 2.384 PB Value) become really popular because they give you the same performance as a Ramon Ortiz (6.1/6.7 4.468 PB value) at approcimately 55% of the PB value. Is that what we want the game reduced to?

Or ....... Now its going to be harder for a rebuilder to trade that aging veteran because the contending team may say...... Hey. I like Robbie Alomar for the stretch run... But his PB value is too high for next year and I can't fit him under the cap. So I can't give you what you are asking for because I only get him for 40 games this year plus the playoffs.

I am suggesting that if you make the cap too low then you will restrict movement of OLDER STARS because people will realize they can't fit them under the cap the next year. Then the rebuilding teams with those stars are stuck.

The same phenomenon will affect relief pitchers. As it is most relief pitchers (except the elite few) are considered to have an average useful life of about 2 years. With a cap that is too low then they all become one year projects and get thrown back in the FA draft. So its going to be harder to trade much value for them if the cap is too low.

TO SUMMARIZE

A cap that affects on average 5% of the teams is fine. Maybe in one league it will affect 3 teams and in another league it will affect none. But a cap that affects 20% of the teams across the board is too extreme.