A salary cap might change the Pittsburgh Pirates’ financial picture. It would not change Ben Cherington’s track record.
That’s the central flaw in the argument that a cap-and-floor system would somehow rescue poorly run clubs and turn them into contenders. It would absolutely narrow baseball’s spending gap and force ownership to commit real money. It would not, by itself, solve the problems that have followed Cherington through nearly seven seasons in charge of baseball operations.
Since Cherington took over in November 2019, Pittsburgh has gone 19-41, 61-101, 62-100, 76-86, 76-86 and 71-91 in his first six seasons. The Pirates entered Tuesday at 58-62 in 2026. Put it all together and the club is 423-567 under Cherington, a .427 winning percentage, with no winning season and no playoff berth.
At some point, “small market” stops explaining everything away. That’s especially true when the whole point of the rebuild was supposed to be building a talent pipeline sturdy enough to make the team less dependent on free agency.
Cherington has had the kind of runway rebuilding general managers dream about: high draft picks, trade chips, low external pressure and an ownership group publicly preaching patience. Seven years later, the payoff still hasn’t arrived.
That’s why the salary-cap debate matters so much in Pittsburgh. It’s easy to frame the issue as an ownership problem alone, and Bob Nutting absolutely deserves criticism. A salary floor would take away one of ownership’s favorite excuses by requiring the Pirates to spend a meaningful share of their revenue on the major-league roster.
But payroll and competence are not the same thing.
The 2025-26 offseason made that pretty clear. Pittsburgh was expected to have roughly $30 million to $40 million in additional payroll room, and Cherington used it on Brandon Lowe, Ryan O’Hearn, Gregory Soto and eventually Marcell Ozuna, among others.
Ozuna cost $12 million. The Pirates cut him in August after he hit .203 with eight home runs in 70 games.
That’s the salary-floor argument in one move: forcing a team to spend more money doesn’t ensure it spends it well.
The same lesson showed up in the bullpen. The Pirates opened 2026 thinking they had enough there, only to watch the unit fall apart. By the trade deadline, Cherington had to remake it on the fly, bringing in Luke Weaver, Camilo Doval, Lake Bachar and Kirby Yates.
Credit him for reacting. The bigger question is why the mess existed in the first place.
This isn’t to say every Cherington move has gone sideways. It is to say the total body of work has to be judged as a whole, and the standings have already done that.
The conversation also shouldn’t stop at Pittsburgh. When people look at the Dodgers or Yankees and assume a salary cap would wipe out everything they’ve built, that misses the bigger picture. Those teams are strong not just because they spend, but because they draft, scout and develop well enough to keep producing talent and then use their money to fill in the rest.
A cap would trim some of that advantage. That’s the point.
For the Pirates, a floor would raise the payroll. It would not make Henry Davis hit.
It would not change the Josh Bell or David Bednar trades. It would not turn failed development into success.
It would not have prevented the bullpen from collapsing in April and needing an August rebuild. And it would not erase a 423-567 record.
Travis Williams said this season the organization’s goal was to make the playoffs in 2026 - “Period. Full stop.” He later told fans to hold the team accountable for that standard.
So hold them accountable. Hold Nutting accountable for the financial limitations that have made building a winner harder than it should be. And hold Cherington accountable for what he has done with the opportunities he’s had.
A salary cap and floor would help address Major League Baseball’s financial imbalance, and the Pirates should want that system in place. But a fairer starting line is not the same thing as a competent front office.
Under that setup, Cherington would have fewer excuses. The record would still be his.
In Other News...
Oneil Cruz Is Forcing A Tough Pirates Decision At The Worst Time
Oneil Cruz is back on the field with Double-A Altoona as he works his way back from fractures in his left hand, and the Pirates are keeping a close eye on every step. With Pittsburgh trying to find some offensive rhythm, the timing of his rehab assignment matters almost as much as the results, because Cruz is one of the few players on the roster who can change a game with his bat, his speed and his defense in center field.
The concern, of course, is that he has not yet looked fully in sync at the plate during this minor league tune-up, which leaves the Pirates weighing whether to rush him back into a lineup that badly needs a lift or give him more time to round into form. It is a delicate call at the worst possible moment for a club already searching for answers, and how they handle Cruz now could shape both their immediate offense and the bigger picture in center field. [Read more 🡒]
Bryan Reynolds Is Becoming A Bigger Problem For The Pirates Lineup
Bryan Reynolds second-half slide has become one of the bigger reasons the Pirates offense has stalled, and it comes at a time when the lineup can least afford another long stretch without production from a middle-order bat. After a strong first half, Reynolds has not matched that level since the break, with the drop showing up not just in average, but in the power and plate discipline that usually help anchor his at-bats.
The broader problem is that his downturn has lined up with a teamwide offensive dip, which has left Pittsburgh searching for answers around him as much as from him. Reynolds and the Pirates would both stand to gain if the lineup around him starts giving him more support and if some injured hitters can work their way back later in the season. [Read more 🡒]