Tilting the Playing Field: Why a sports league planner would choose less, not more, competitive balance

It has traditionally been argued that the organizer of a sports league would prefer more competitive balance to the level that emerges in a noncooperative equilibrium. This argument has been used to justify restraints on competition between teams, which also tend to raise profits at the expense of players and consumers. This paper shows that in theory a planner would prefer less, not more, competitive balance. The paper uses data from Major League Baseball to show just how unbalanced a league planner would choose.