I will push back on one point. Yes the owners are all rich but not every owner wants to take a loss on their team and I don't fault them for that. Just because someone is rich doesn't mean they should say "well it's ok if we lose 100M a year so we can keep up with the Dodgers". Regardless of how well the team does some teams simply do not have the ability to generate the kind of revenue the Dodgers do.

In 2023 the Diamondbacks and the Rangers played in the World series. That year the DBacks had revenue of 315M and the Rangers had revenue of 425M. The Dodgers had revenue of 55OM (eliminated in DS). The following season the Rangers spent 60% of that revenue on player salaries which was the exact same percentage as the Dodgers and the DBacks spent 70% of that revenue on player salaries which was higher than the Dodgers. Yet the Dodgers had a payroll of 110M million more than the DBacks and 80M more than the Rangers.

No you can't buy a championship, it's baseball, but having 4 hall of famers in your lineup and 4 ace starting pitchers in your rotation will give you a heck of a head start. Add in the fact that you can add another 70M of value to payroll in the form of deferrals and then say well the Diamondbacks owner should spend 400M a year to keep up when the best revenue year they ever had was 315M is easy to say when you don't have to pay the bills.

Again, I don't think there should be a cap on salaries and I have no problem with what the Dodgers are doing to invest in their players, organization and facilities to build a consistent winner. I am just pointing out it is easy to say teams should replicate the Dodgers but not every team can do it and that if MLB is going to have a luxury tax system they should probably crack down on deferrals (at least in terms of using them to avoid luxury tax penalties).