Brewers-Rays World Series shows Pirates' problems run deeper than payroll

The 2026 World Series is shaping up to be a nightmare for the Pittsburgh Pirates, and not just because their division rivals are competing for a championship.

The Milwaukee Brewers and Tampa Bay Rays will meet in the Fall Classic beginning Friday night. Beyond their reputations as resourceful, small-market organizations, the two clubs have something else in common: Both are among the 12 teams Major League Baseball says would need to increase spending under its proposed salary floor.

So are the Pirates.

That's an awfully inconvenient coincidence for a league attempting to convince players that baseball's economic structure needs a dramatic overhaul to give smaller-market franchises a fighting chance.

Under MLB's initial collective bargaining proposal, teams would be subject to a $171.2 million salary floor and a $245.3 million hard salary cap beginning in 2027. According to the league's calculations, based on 2026 Opening Day payrolls, 12 teams would need to increase spending by a combined $617 million to comply with the proposed floor.

Pittsburgh, Milwaukee and Tampa Bay are all on that list. The Pirates opened the season with a payroll figure of approximately $122.6 million under MLB's accounting method, compared to $130.9 million for Milwaukee and $108.2 million for Tampa Bay.

Yet the Brewers won a franchise-record 103 games before sweeping the Los Angeles Dodgers in the National League Championship Series. The Rays won 98 games and are preparing for their third World Series appearance since joining MLB in 1998. The Pirates, meanwhile, celebrated their first winning season since 2018 after finishing 82-80 and missing the postseason entirely.

If two organizations operating within the same financial constraints as Pittsburgh can reach the World Series, how much of the Pirates' continued irrelevance can really be blamed on competitive imbalance?

Brewers-Rays World Series exposes Pirates' ownership problem, not payroll problem

To be fair, Milwaukee and Tampa Bay reaching the World Series doesn't necessarily invalidate MLB's argument for a salary floor.

There's a meaningful difference between assembling a championship-caliber roster through exceptional scouting, player development and shrewd trades, and having the financial resources to sustain that success.

A salary floor accompanied by meaningful revenue-sharing reform could theoretically help smaller-market teams retain homegrown stars, compete more aggressively in free agency and avoid constantly replacing expensive veterans with cheaper alternatives.

But MLB's proposed spending minimum comes attached to a hard ceiling, something the players' union has historically opposed because of its potential to suppress earning power. And the success of Milwaukee and Tampa Bay raises an equally important question about whether smaller-market ownership groups are genuinely incapable of spending more or simply unwilling to do so without being forced.

Pittsburgh doesn't need to match the Dodgers' payroll to build a winner. Milwaukee and Tampa Bay have already demonstrated that. But imagine what organizations with their player-development success could accomplish with even greater financial flexibility.

The Pirates, then, should be asking themselves why their competitors are making those resources count while Pittsburgh continues falling short.

A salary floor might eventually force Nutting to spend more. It won't magically make the Pirates better at constructing a roster, developing hitters or making the right investments.

And as two supposedly financially disadvantaged franchises prepare to compete for baseball's ultimate prize, Pittsburgh's biggest problem looks less like the economic system and more like what its ownership and front office have accomplished within it.

Add us as a preferred source on Google

Follow