Not possible, not going to happen. When people talk about performance to salary, they almost always mean free agent dollars to wins. The problem is, the only wins that are actually worth what teams pay to free agents are wins that put a team directly in line for playoff contention. The first 70 or so wins a team gets, have virtually zero marginal revenue attached. Another 15 or so, getting you into the mid-80s and the start of playoff contention, have quite limited marginal revenue. It's really just those playoff wins that bring substantial marginal revenues with them. Further exacerbating this problem, is the modern MLB revenue structure, with TV rights and national deals, a huge percentage of overall revenue is entirely disconnected from production; you can't increase your marginal revenue from those deals, or assign value from them to any given player in any rational way. So if you wanted to actually link salary to performance, you'd have to completely, wholly and fundamentally alter the entire salary structure. If you try and do something like a straight average value of a win, you would have to do something like paying guys after the season based on their production up to a set percentage of revenues (to account for the revenue streams not affected by performance) and divvied up according to their respective production. Free agency and a real link of salary and performance for all players, at all levels of service time, is incongruous.