The question has been asked over and over for the past 30 years: “The other major sports have a salary cap. Why won’t MLB players accept one?”

First, it’s important to understand the dynamic of the Major League Baseball Players Association. Formed way back in 1966 by legendary labor attorney Marvin Miller, the union quickly became the singular voice for all MLB players, from superstars all the way down to each journeymen player on the back end of the 25-man roster.

Through the years, the union has fought for the rights for all players, and not just the upper-end salaried superstars. While the record-breaking contracts get the media attention, things like better hotels, higher minimum wage, increased meal money and the like have all been won through hard-fought negotiations and have benefited the whole, not the few.

The reason for the unmatched solidarity found within the MLBPA is that the bulk of the union’s membership is made up of a “middle class” of non-stars, not of All-Stars. And the non-stars have reaped wonderful benefits from the player’s union’s tireless effort on their behalf.

That would not change if a salary cap – like the $245.3 million cap proposal the owners just recently had rejected by the players – was implemented. What would change is that the “middle class” would feel the salary squeeze more than the highest-paid stars.

The game is always going to have competitive owners, like the New York Mets’ Steve Cohen, who would still go out and overpay players like Juan Soto to the tune of a 15-year, $765 million contract. And if there was a cap, the Mets’ roster would then need to be made up of a lot more guys making minimum wage, rather than the bulk of the roster earning median salaries.

The Los Angeles Dodgers are the poster boys for why some fans want a cap. But their fourth-highest paid player is Mookie Betts, who earns $20 million per season. The bulk of the two-time defending World Series winning roster resides firmly inside that middle class.

Or think of it this way: The Denver Nuggets are paying Nikola Jokic just over $59 million next season. In the salary-capped NBA, this – along with a couple other near-max contracts – have left them no room to sign a veteran mid-range salaried backup point guard, or even their own restricted free agent Peyton Watson. Watson wants around $20 million a season, too, pretty much the same salary as the Dodgers pay Betts. But Peyton can’t get that in Denver without the Nuggets doing some serious contract gymnastics and likely saying goodbye to another player they value highly.

On the other hand, the Mets are paying Soto just under $62 million this season, and because MLB operates without a cap, they can still employ more mainstream players like closer Devin Williams, a former Rookie of the Year and twice an All-Star, at $20 milion per season. In a capped league, Williams would likely be out of luck, taking a much smaller contract – if he got an offer at all. His replacement, like Watson’s, would be a minimum-wage guy.

You can, and perhaps rightfully so, say that the Mets stink and that these guys are overpaid anyway and all that. But that’s not the question at hand. The question remains: Why won’t the MLBPA accept a salary cap? The contrast between the situations involving Peyton Watson, Mookie Betts and Devin Williams illustrate one big reason why.

So in other words, the “voting block” of union members – made up of players making far closer to what Williams earns than what Soto gets – are the ones who are steadfast against a salary cap. They are why the union remains so strong, and why the threat of another lockout by the owners isn’t fazing them. The players know what’s best for the majority of the players, and a salary cap isn’t it.

The players’ union has historically created a fund made up from dollars earned via the MLB marketing pool, which the players share in. That will be used to pay the players who need income during the lockout. So the owners – provided they can all get on the same page (a very difficult task for them, at least historically) won’t be able to starve out and break the union to get a salary cap instituted.

The members of the MLBPA aren’t being asked to stand together for the good of the superstars. They’re standing together for the good of MLB’s middle class. And that’s why they won’t ever accept a salary cap.