BrandoFan Posted April 21, 2004 Share Posted April 21, 2004 no team with one player having >15% of team payroll has won a WS for the last 15 years Sounds reasonable. I am pretty sure Pudge, Jr made almost 20% of the Marlin payroll though....he did return it in spades, however, by single-handedly beating the Giants and Scrubs in game 1 of NLCS. But I digress. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxFanForever Posted April 21, 2004 Share Posted April 21, 2004 He made $10 million last year but I believe half of it was deferred so I doubt he took that much of their payroll. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted April 21, 2004 Share Posted April 21, 2004 Sounds reasonable. I am pretty sure Pudge, Jr made almost 20% of the Marlin payroll though....he did return it in spades, however, by single-handedly beating the Giants and Scrubs in game 1 of NLCS. But I digress. That's kind of a misleading statement even if it is true. The Giants were 5 outs away from winning the World Series in 2002, and I am just making an assumption(don't shoot me if I'm wrong) that Bonds was making => 15% of the Giants payroll. Given, Bonds is the main exception in the majors leagues, with him being about the only guy in the league who actually does make every player around him better. Do you think there is a reason to explain the Giants success of the past few years without using the name Bonds somewhere in the explanation? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrandoFan Posted April 21, 2004 Author Share Posted April 21, 2004 That's kind of a misleading statement even if it is true. The Giants were 5 outs away from winning the World Series in 2002, and I am just making an assumption(don't shoot me if I'm wrong) that Bonds was making => 15% of the Giants payroll. Given, Bonds is the main exception in the majors leagues, with him being about the only guy in the league who actually does make every player around him better. Do you think there is a reason to explain the Giants success of the past few years without using the name Bonds somewhere in the explanation? Yes, back in 2002 Bondsie was making close to 20%. Berroids is Berroids, though. An exception. See, my rule is 20% even for marquee players, but the 15% thing makes sense too. The mitigating factor is popularity/marketability. So Shamy Sooser making 20% of the payroll circa 2001 certainly crippled the team a bit, but at least he brought in enough revenue in the 1998-2001 period to actually be a bargain at 13-14 Mill he was making. So the fault for the team losing lies squarely on Andy Mac wasting a bunch of cash on washed-up vets.........If Maggs can put up same numbers Sosa put up in those 4 years and could be as big a draw, I'd give him 14 Mill tomorrow. IF. It's be interesting to see if it hold true for PLAYOFF teams, not only WS champs. First 15%. Then 20%. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxFanForever Posted April 21, 2004 Share Posted April 21, 2004 Yes, back in 2002 Bondsie was making close to 20%. Berroids is Berroids, though. An exception. See, my rule is 20% even for marquee players, but the 15% thing makes sense too. The mitigating factor is popularity/marketability. So Shamy Sooser making 20% of the payroll circa 2001 certainly crippled the team a bit, but at least he brought in enough revenue in the 1998-2001 period to actually be a bargain at 13-14 Mill he was making. So the fault for the team losing lies squarely on Andy Mac wasting a bunch of cash on washed-up vets.........If Maggs can put up same numbers Sosa put up in those 4 years and could be as big a draw, I'd give him 14 Mill tomorrow. IF. It's be interesting to see if it hold true for PLAYOFF teams, not only WS champs. First 15%. Then 20%. I really don't think Sosa's paycheck back in 2001 crippled the team at all. Considering the team is owned and paid for by a Fortune 500 company that is a very powerful media outlet. I believe they just didn't bring in a lot of help for him because why should they? They were drawing tons, making a ton off concessions, tickets, tv and everything else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bighurt52235 Posted April 21, 2004 Share Posted April 21, 2004 He made $10 million last year but I believe half of it was deferred so I doubt he took that much of their payroll. As silly as it is, I think Mike Hampton may have made more than 15% of their salary. How much of his salary did the Marlins pay? I've researched, but can't find it anywhere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperSteve Posted April 21, 2004 Share Posted April 21, 2004 As silly as it is, I think Mike Hampton may have made more than 15% of their salary. How much of his salary did the Marlins pay? I've researched, but can't find it anywhere. I think the Rox covered some too though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.