Twins Collapse with Home Field Adv.

[caulfield12]

For the time being there are only 2 ways to win the AL pennant:

The first way is to spend like the Yankees and Red Sox, on both the Major league and Minor League levels.

The second way is to go into the s***ter for a 5 year period, and emerge with the amount of talent that the Rays have built over the last 5-7 years.

Another note: When you spend or draft, at the end of the process, you must possess 2 pitchers with #1 stuff, one of which pitches like a #1, and the other of which pitches like a #2 or #3.

The period between 2004-2008 was special because the Yankees made some really bad contract choices. When the marquee free agents returned to the market it was back to this way. As long as the Yankees have a $200 MM payroll and spend it wisely, these are the only ways to compete with them. It does not matter what you do, The Yankees will always win unless you have somewhere close to the amount of talent that they do.

This is why, IMO there should be a cap of a $150 MM payroll in baseball.

Unfortunately, there is a more level playing field in the NL.

 

Not to mention from the early 80's through 1995.

[kitekrazy]

This is why, IMO there should be a cap of a $150 MM payroll in baseball.

 

Maybe they'll might think about it if the NHL surpasses MLB in popularity. Baseball owners don't appear to be the most brilliant people in sports.

A cap should be about $100M. Each player can make $4M. The NFL cap I don't think is $150M and they have a much larger roster. I fear the NFL owners will think they way the MLB is setup that it's a great idea.

 

[Balta1701]

I fear the NFL owners will think they way the MLB is setup that it's a great idea.

WTF?

 

Really, you think that the reason baseball has no cap is the owners? And not the fact that it has the most powerful union in Sports?

[kitekrazy]

WTF?

 

Really, you think that the reason baseball has no cap is the owners? And not the fact that it has the most powerful union in Sports?

 

Your latter statement I place on the owners. So, yes.

 

[southsider2k5]

http://espn.go.com/new-york/columns/story?...&id=5656406

 

Since Ron Gardenhire took over as manager in 2002, the Twins are 16-45 (.262) against the Yankees during the regular season, which Elias says is the worst record any team has against an opponent during that span. The record is even worse when you include Minnesota's 2-10 postseason mark against the Yankees: 18-55 (.246). That's a worse winning percentage than the 1962 Mets had. The Twins so resemble the Washington Generals to the Yankees' Harlem Globetrotters that I keep expecting to see Derek Jeter pull down Joe Mauer's pants and toss a bucket of confetti into the Minnesota dugout.

 

Wow. We think we have it bad.

[Jack Parkman]

Not to mention from the early 80's through 1995.

This was before the YES network turned the Yankees into the financial giant that they are now. I was talking about the here and the now.

[witesoxfan]

For the time being there are only 2 ways to win the AL pennant:

The first way is to spend like the Yankees and Red Sox, on both the Major league and Minor League levels.

The second way is to go into the s***ter for a 5 year period, and emerge with the amount of talent that the Rays have built over the last 5-7 years.

Another note: When you spend or draft, at the end of the process, you must possess 2 pitchers with #1 stuff, one of which pitches like a #1, and the other of which pitches like a #2 or #3.

The period between 2004-2008 was special because the Yankees made some really bad contract choices. When the marquee free agents returned to the market it was back to this way. As long as the Yankees have a $200 MM payroll and spend it wisely, these are the only ways to compete with them. It does not matter what you do, The Yankees will always win unless you have somewhere close to the amount of talent that they do.

This is why, IMO there should be a cap of a $150 MM payroll in baseball.

Unfortunately, there is a more level playing field in the NL.

I would love a $150 MM cap. It makes so much sense it's rediculous. I hate the Yankees, they should have no pride in winning a WS with a higher payroll than an NL All-Star team.

 

A $150 million salary cap would accomplish virtually nothing except handicapping two teams that have sustainable competitive advantages over the rest of the league, and that's simply not fair to the Yankees or Red Sox, who are the biggest revenue generators in the majors.

 

There were 6 teams with a payroll over $120 million this season. The White Sox are actually one of the 8 that had their entire roster get paid more than $100 million and I believe they ended up spending about $101 mill with the additions of Jackson and Ramirez.

 

At this point in time, a salary cap really doesn't make sense.

[whitesoxfan99]

A $150 million salary cap would accomplish virtually nothing except handicapping two teams that have sustainable competitive advantages over the rest of the league, and that's simply not fair to the Yankees or Red Sox, who are the biggest revenue generators in the majors.

 

There were 6 teams with a payroll over $120 million this season. The White Sox are actually one of the 8 that had their entire roster get paid more than $100 million and I believe they ended up spending about $101 mill with the additions of Jackson and Ramirez.

 

At this point in time, a salary cap really doesn't make sense.

 

Not to mention that if you add a salary cap the Yankees and Red Sox just use their resources to buy all the top international free agents and go well over slot for every single draft choice in order to build ridiculous farm systems.

[Jack Parkman]

Not to mention that if you add a salary cap the Yankees and Red Sox just use their resources to buy all the top international free agents and go well over slot for every single draft choice in order to build ridiculous farm systems.

I thought of that, and there would be a cap on draft/IFA spending as well. Nullify the East Coast advantages, makes for a better league. It would theoretically halt annual ticket price increases, but that is wishful thinking because the owners would get greedy.

 

[witesoxfan]

I thought of that, and there would be a cap on draft/IFA spending as well. Nullify the East Coast advantages, makes for a better league. It would theoretically halt annual ticket price increases, but that is wishful thinking because the owners would get greedy.

 

Something like this could honestly be the end of baseball. To actually follow through and get this type of plan into action, the owners and commissioner would have to be willing to wait out a 12-24 month lockout, because the MLBPA is not going to be on board for salary restrictions. Economically speaking, does it make sense to go through a lockout when only two teams are spending an exorbitant amount of money on their major league roster?

 

The limit on the draft and international free agency is a bit different, but, again, they already have a policy in place to help restrict some of the overspending. Increasing fines and/or taking away draft picks from teams that go above slot is a possibility, but it ultimately may not stop teams from still doing so. It is also entirely possible that taking those picks away could work out to the higher spending team's advantage, as you could see players who normally go high slip and fall to the teams that spend. They take them in the 3rd round, sign them to even less (but still far above slot), lose their 3rd round pick the following year, but then get their 2nd round pick back at the same time.

 

To actually get a hard cap into place, you would again have to be willing to go through a lockout. Is a lockout really worth curbing amateur signing bonuses?

 

---

 

I also don't think you will see annual ticket price increases stopped simply due to evolving economic conditions. As more people enter the job market, the money supply increases and the value of money diminishes, and people need to receive more money to pay for goods and services. If you want baseball owners to stop increasing ticket prices, you need to convince the Fed to decrease the money supply.

[LittleHurt05]

For the time being there are only 2 ways to win the AL pennant:

The first way is to spend like the Yankees and Red Sox, on both the Major league and Minor League levels.

The second way is to go into the s***ter for a 5 year period, and emerge with the amount of talent that the Rays have built over the last 5-7 years.

Another note: When you spend or draft, at the end of the process, you must possess 2 pitchers with #1 stuff, one of which pitches like a #1, and the other of which pitches like a #2 or #3.

The period between 2004-2008 was special because the Yankees made some really bad contract choices. When the marquee free agents returned to the market it was back to this way. As long as the Yankees have a $200 MM payroll and spend it wisely, these are the only ways to compete with them. It does not matter what you do, The Yankees will always win unless you have somewhere close to the amount of talent that they do.

This is why, IMO there should be a cap of a $150 MM payroll in baseball.

Unfortunately, there is a more level playing field in the NL.

 

Is there though? The Phillies ($140 mil) are favorites to win their 3rd straight NL pennant, and are easily in position to win the next 2 or 3. The Mets & the Cubs were spending way more money than other teams as well, they just did a s***ty job in who they gave the money too. The Reds did it the way the Rays did, while the Giants scouted/developed some great arms, but still can't compete lineup-wise.

[Jack Parkman]

Something like this could honestly be the end of baseball. To actually follow through and get this type of plan into action, the owners and commissioner would have to be willing to wait out a 12-24 month lockout, because the MLBPA is not going to be on board for salary restrictions. Economically speaking, does it make sense to go through a lockout when only two teams are spending an exorbitant amount of money on their major league roster?

 

The limit on the draft and international free agency is a bit different, but, again, they already have a policy in place to help restrict some of the overspending. Increasing fines and/or taking away draft picks from teams that go above slot is a possibility, but it ultimately may not stop teams from still doing so. It is also entirely possible that taking those picks away could work out to the higher spending team's advantage, as you could see players who normally go high slip and fall to the teams that spend. They take them in the 3rd round, sign them to even less (but still far above slot), lose their 3rd round pick the following year, but then get their 2nd round pick back at the same time.

 

To actually get a hard cap into place, you would again have to be willing to go through a lockout. Is a lockout really worth curbing amateur signing bonuses?

 

---

 

I also don't think you will see annual ticket price increases stopped simply due to evolving economic conditions. As more people enter the job market, the money supply increases and the value of money diminishes, and people need to receive more money to pay for goods and services. If you want baseball owners to stop increasing ticket prices, you need to convince the Fed to decrease the money supply.

Look what the lockout did for the NHL. I think the league is arguably more popular now than it was in 2004. I, as a fan, would be willing to go through 1.5 seasons without baseball so that the game is better in the long run. The Yankee/Red Sox dominance of the AL has to stop. I think it is complete bulls*** that you can buy championships in MLB. I hate to say that, but it's true. It would be one thing if the Yankees/Red Sox had this huge economic advantage, but only had a $130 MM payroll. But the two of them combined probably have a payroll approaching $400 MM, which is probably as much as 5-6 smaller market teams in the AL. The current system gives AL teams a slim chance to win anything. There is a reason why Yankees/Red Sox is so huge media wise, and that is because it seems that they have a chance to win a World Series every year. The Yankees make the playoffs basically annually(15 out of the last 16 years)

Under the current system you might as well make it like Euro soccer, where there is the Big Boy league, and the other guys league.

[Jordan4life_2007]

Is there though? The Phillies ($140 mil) are favorites to win their 3rd straight NL pennant, and are easily in position to win the next 2 or 3. The Mets & the Cubs were spending way more money than other teams as well, they just did a s***ty job in who they gave the money too. The Reds did it the way the Rays did, while the Giants scouted/developed some great arms, but still can't compete lineup-wise.

 

But they haven't been spending $140 million annually. That's just for 2010. Since their run started, they've spent $89 million, $98 million and $113 million. The more they win, the more the payroll rises. But it's not like they've just gone out whoring the FA market like the Yankees. They have some of the premier players in the game, players that either came up through the system or were acquired via the system. You have to have some patience, but replicating their model is within reason if you have the right people in place.

[chetkincaid]

Look what the lockout did for the NHL. I think the league is arguably more popular now than it was in 2004. I, as a fan, would be willing to go through 1.5 seasons without baseball so that the game is better in the long run. The Yankee/Red Sox dominance of the AL has to stop. I think it is complete bulls*** that you can buy championships in MLB. I hate to say that, but it's true. It would be one thing if the Yankees/Red Sox had this huge economic advantage, but only had a $130 MM payroll. But the two of them combined probably have a payroll approaching $400 MM, which is probably as much as 5-6 smaller market teams in the AL. The current system gives AL teams a slim chance to win anything. There is a reason why Yankees/Red Sox is so huge media wise, and that is because it seems that they have a chance to win a World Series every year. The Yankees make the playoffs basically annually(15 out of the last 16 years)

Under the current system you might as well make it like Euro soccer, where there is the Big Boy league, and the other guys league.

 

 

This post is spot on. I think it's time for a salary cap as well - even though the Sox are one of the medium to big spenders. Just think... if the Sox went out and got Dunn, Werth, Crawford, and Lee and increased the payroll to 200M, they'd sell out every game too. And the tv ratings would be through the roof.

 

I couldn't imagine being a Pirates or a Royals fan. Small market teams shouldn't be at such a disadvantage.

[LittleHurt05]

But they haven't been spending $140 million annually. That's just for 2010. Since their run started, they've spent $89 million, $98 million and $113 million. The more they win, the more the payroll rises. But it's not like they've just gone out whoring the FA market like the Yankees. They have some of the premier players in the game, players that either came up through the system or were acquired via the system. You have to have some patience, but replicating their model is within reason if you have the right people in place.

 

Yeah, but right now they are able to afford all those players from their system because their payroll is at $140 million. They couldnt have traded those top prospects for Halladay if they couldnt afford to pay him $20 mil a year. I realize that they got to that level through their system, but now they are on a different level than most other teams and can make some financial moves that other NL teams can't, which is why I disagreed that the NL is a much more even playing field.

 

 

[southsider2k5]

This post is spot on. I think it's time for a salary cap as well - even though the Sox are one of the medium to big spenders. Just think... if the Sox went out and got Dunn, Werth, Crawford, and Lee and increased the payroll to 200M, they'd sell out every game too. And the tv ratings would be through the roof.

 

I couldn't imagine being a Pirates or a Royals fan. Small market teams shouldn't be at such a disadvantage.

 

We won a World Series and nothing like that ever happened. Those sort of fan expectations are incredibly unrealistic.

[southsider2k5]

But they haven't been spending $140 million annually. That's just for 2010. Since their run started, they've spent $89 million, $98 million and $113 million. The more they win, the more the payroll rises. But it's not like they've just gone out whoring the FA market like the Yankees. They have some of the premier players in the game, players that either came up through the system or were acquired via the system. You have to have some patience, but replicating their model is within reason if you have the right people in place.

 

Which for the record means they started out spending 20% more than we did before we won our world series.

[Balta1701]

We won a World Series and nothing like that ever happened.

Our total payroll in 2005 was $75 million. By 2006, it was up around $100 million depending on how you count the money coming from the Phils and D-Backs. By 2007, it was $108 on paper, and 2008 it was $120 on paper.

[bigruss]

CF Rios - 12MM

RF Werth - 15MM

LF Crawford - 19MM

DH Dunn - 15MM

1b Viciedo - 1.25MM

SS Ramirez - 1.1MM

2b Beckham - 500K

3b Morel - 500K

C AJ (or vet replacement) - $3MM

 

 

UT Teahen - 5MM

BC Castro - 1.5MM

4OF De Aza - 500K

UT Lillibridge - 500K

 

#1 Lee - 20MM

2 Peavy - 16MM

3 Danks - 10MM

4 Floyd - 5MM

5 Jackson - 8.5MM

 

LR Pena - 1.5MM

LR Linebrink - 5.5MM

MR Infante (or some MiL) - 500K

MR Santos - 500K

SU Thornton - 3MM

CL Putz - 7MM

 

Total- 152.35MM

___________________

I dont think this would ever happen but I got curious and spent a few minutes just looking at possibilites, each contract given out would be give or take a few million (IMO, could be farther off).

 

Trade Teahen and Linebrink and you can probably shave another $5 million off after eating a half their contracts.

 

So how do they make this money up?

 

Attendance:

- Average 2010 ticket price: $38.65

- Average 2010 Attendance: 27,091

- Home Maxium: 40,615

 

- 2011 AVG ticket price (10% hike): $42.515

- Guesstimate 2011 AVG Attendance - 37,000

 

Total increase in revenue: (1573055-1047067.15) * 81 = 42,605,015.85

 

That makes up for quite a bit just in ticket prices, not to mention food and beverages.

 

Combine that with advertising revenue and you make it up.

 

______________

Concerns: Long term contracts and whether players can keep performing at their high level. Attendance doesn't shoot up like expected. Advertising is still sluggish. Draft and development still needs to be upgraded for sustainability.

 

 

 

Like I said, it was just for fun for me to come up with, not really advocating that this is at all possible.

[LittleHurt05]

This post is spot on. I think it's time for a salary cap as well - even though the Sox are one of the medium to big spenders. Just think... if the Sox went out and got Dunn, Werth, Crawford, and Lee and increased the payroll to 200M, they'd sell out every game too. And the tv ratings would be through the roof.

 

I couldn't imagine being a Pirates or a Royals fan. Small market teams shouldn't be at such a disadvantage.

 

I bet Ozzie still uses Mark Kotsay in the rotating DH platoon, even with that roster.

[bigruss]

I bet Ozzie still uses Mark Kotsay in the rotating DH platoon, even with that roster.

 

 

Wait....he's still here....

 

[southsider2k5]

Our total payroll in 2005 was $75 million. By 2006, it was up around $100 million depending on how you count the money coming from the Phils and D-Backs. By 2007, it was $108 on paper, and 2008 it was $120 on paper.

 

Exactly. There were not sell outs every night. There were nothing close to $200 million payrolls.

[Jordan4life_2007]

Yeah, but right now they are able to afford all those players from their system because their payroll is at $140 million. They couldnt have traded those top prospects for Halladay if they couldnt afford to pay him $20 mil a year. I realize that they got to that level through their system, but now they are on a different level than most other teams and can make some financial moves that other NL teams can't, which is why I disagreed that the NL is a much more even playing field.

 

I understand the extension part. But the Blue Jays weren't just going to give Halladay away. It all starts with the Phillies having the pieces the Jays wanted. Just like they had the pieces for Lee and Oswalt. And shockingly enough, according to respected minor league gurus like Keith Law, they still have a top 10-12ish system overall.

 

Which for the record means they started out spending 20% more than we did before we won our world series.

 

What's your point? I wasn't comparing the Phillies and Sox. There is no comparison, really. I was responding to littlehurt's claim that because of the Phillies current payroll that there is no level playing field in the NL. The Mets have been the NL's version of the Yankees for the last few years and they've done next to nothing outside of 2006. How about the Cubs? The Phillies built from within and have capitalized financially on this amazing run they're on right now. It's not just about looking at total payroll and coming to a conclusion that nobody can compete with them. At least not in this case.

Edited October 12, 2010 by Jordan4life

[Milkman delivers]

Exactly. There were not sell outs every night. There were nothing close to $200 million payrolls.

 

Are you talking about the Sox not selling out every night? If so, blame that on the team. They started off very well in 2006, and I believe the attendance was high while they were hot. Then they fell off of the face of the Earth, and had one of the worst seasons any of us had ever seen in 2007. They successfully killed any of the momentum they built with the World Series.

[Jordan4life_2007]

Are you talking about the Sox not selling out every night? If so, blame that on the team. They started off very well in 2006, and I believe the attendance was high while they were hot. Then they fell off of the face of the Earth, and had one of the worst seasons any of us had ever seen in 2007. They successfully killed any of the momentum they built with the World Series.

 

Pretty much. Part of it is the undeniable fact we have a fickle, front-running fanbase. But the opportunity was there to blow right by the Cubs in terms of popularity, ect, and we've failed miserably.