southsider2k5 Posted February 13, 2012 Author Share Posted February 13, 2012 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 12, 2012 -> 04:23 PM) Phil Rogers argues that the Marlins current spending binge is not only unsupportable in the long term (which I think we all had guessed), but that it might be a prelude to Loria trying to sell the Marlins in a year or two, and buying the Mets after cashing out from the Marlins. That might be the best Rogers write up I have seen in a long time. Honestly I can't believe none of the national writers have wrote that story yet, when it is so completely obvious (at least up until the Mets part). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 13, 2012 -> 10:22 AM) That might be the best Rogers write up I have seen in a long time. Honestly I can't believe none of the national writers have wrote that story yet, when it is so completely obvious (at least up until the Mets part). I'll be honest, I was expecting the end result to be a 2006 style selloff, not a Cubs style sell-the-team-and-let-the-next-guy-clean-up move, but the latter makes a lot of sense when the payroll has doubled and there's a shiny new ballpark. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted February 13, 2012 Author Share Posted February 13, 2012 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 13, 2012 -> 09:23 AM) I'll be honest, I was expecting the end result to be a 2006 style selloff, not a Cubs style sell-the-team-and-let-the-next-guy-clean-up move, but the latter makes a lot of sense when the payroll has doubled and there's a shiny new ballpark. The biggest issue will be they have to figure out how to keep people coming to the games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleHurt05 Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 Buster Olney @Buster_ESPN Sources: There is a settlement in the David Ortiz case, for the midpoint of $14.575 m. He had wanted 16.5m, club had offered 12.65m. Who pays that type of money for a guy who can't play the field??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve9347 Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Feb 7, 2012 -> 03:17 PM) That seems kind of long, right? That's what she said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiliIrishHammock24 Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 Tim Brown @TBrownYahoo Source: Yoenis Cespedes has agreed to terms with the Oakland A's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiliIrishHammock24 Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 Buster Olney @Buster_ESPN Sources: Oakland has agreed to terms with Yoenis Cespedes, 4 years, $36 million. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 13, 2012 -> 10:38 AM) The biggest issue will be they have to figure out how to keep people coming to the games. That might be a job for the next owner. If Loria can push that stadium close enough to full in his first year and then immediately sell, he could probably convince some fairly normal business man that the revenue growth he just had was sustainable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted February 13, 2012 Author Share Posted February 13, 2012 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 13, 2012 -> 12:21 PM) That might be a job for the next owner. If Loria can push that stadium close enough to full in his first year and then immediately sell, he could probably convince some fairly normal business man that the revenue growth he just had was sustainable. The Cubs were an easy sell because they sell 40k tickets a night. No one is going to buy that team if they have a $100 million payroll and 10k showing up a night. I seriously doubt someone who made billions of dollars in life is going to be dumb enough to not know the history of that franchise, especially if the crowds start disappearing if the team does end up in 3rd or 4th again this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleHurt05 Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 13, 2012 -> 12:31 PM) The Cubs were an easy sell because they sell 40k tickets a night. No one is going to buy that team if they have a $100 million payroll and 10k showing up a night. I seriously doubt someone who made billions of dollars in life is going to be dumb enough to not know the history of that franchise, especially if the crowds start disappearing if the team does end up in 3rd or 4th again this year. Even if the Marlins are competing, there is no guarantee that the stadium will stay packed if Miami fans have taught us anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 13, 2012 -> 01:31 PM) The Cubs were an easy sell because they sell 40k tickets a night. No one is going to buy that team if they have a $100 million payroll and 10k showing up a night. I seriously doubt someone who made billions of dollars in life is going to be dumb enough to not know the history of that franchise, especially if the crowds start disappearing if the team does end up in 3rd or 4th again this year. After watching what has gone down with franchises like the Dodgers and Cubs, not only do I think that the Marlins would still be sellable after 1-2 seasons in their new park because of some businessman being convinced that he can fill the stadium, I'm also not sure it's a losing move financially...given how rapidly franchise values have been shooting up. Even if the new owner were to be losing money on the payroll, he could be making up that ground in franchise value. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted February 13, 2012 Author Share Posted February 13, 2012 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 13, 2012 -> 12:44 PM) After watching what has gone down with franchises like the Dodgers and Cubs, not only do I think that the Marlins would still be sellable after 1-2 seasons in their new park because of some businessman being convinced that he can fill the stadium, I'm also not sure it's a losing move financially...given how rapidly franchise values have been shooting up. Even if the new owner were to be losing money on the payroll, he could be making up that ground in franchise value. Nothing about the financial situations of these two franchises is similar to what is being seen in Florida. You are talking about two historically major MLB franchises. Two original NL cornerstones, both of which have long histories drawing big crowds to their stadiums. Even with the disaster that the Dodgers were under McCourt, they drew 2.935 million fans last year, marking the first time they were under 3 million fans since 2000. The Marlins have one year over three million in their HISTORY. 1993. Even if their last WS year they were at 1.3 million fans. They haven't been over two million fans since 1997. The Cubs haven't had an attendance mark as low as the Marlins 2.3 million they drew for their last WS title in 1997 since 1997. They haven't been under 3 million fans since 2003. There is nothing similar about these teams situations. You are taking teams that have historically drawn tons of fans and applying somewhere they has never drawn fans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoodAsGould Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 13, 2012 -> 12:55 PM) Nothing about the financial situations of these two franchises is similar to what is being seen in Florida. You are talking about two historically major MLB franchises. Two original NL cornerstones, both of which have long histories drawing big crowds to their stadiums. Even with the disaster that the Dodgers were under McCourt, they drew 2.935 million fans last year, marking the first time they were under 3 million fans since 2000. The Marlins have one year over three million in their HISTORY. 1993. Even if their last WS year they were at 1.3 million fans. They haven't been over two million fans since 1997. The Cubs haven't had an attendance mark as low as the Marlins 2.3 million they drew for their last WS title in 1997 since 1997. They haven't been under 3 million fans since 2003. There is nothing similar about these teams situations. You are taking teams that have historically drawn tons of fans and applying somewhere they has never drawn fans. You arent taking into account being part of an elite group of 30 owners of a major league baseball club. A huge part of the value of a franchise is being part of that club over the actual profit you make from it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted February 13, 2012 Author Share Posted February 13, 2012 QUOTE (GoodAsGould @ Feb 13, 2012 -> 01:34 PM) You arent taking into account being part of an elite group of 30 owners of a major league baseball club. A huge part of the value of a franchise is being part of that club over the actual profit you make from it. That value would be killed if you were losing tons of money with no hope of fixing the issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Chappas Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 Does the large Cuban population in South Florida have the disposable income to attend Marlin baseball games that they are using this readily disposable income on now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoodAsGould Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 13, 2012 -> 01:57 PM) That value would be killed if you were losing tons of money with no hope of fixing the issue. Eh the Marlins and Pirates proved if you really want to make money put nothing into the roster and you profit... after a few years they'd be able to do that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted February 13, 2012 Author Share Posted February 13, 2012 QUOTE (GoodAsGould @ Feb 13, 2012 -> 02:14 PM) Eh the Marlins and Pirates proved if you really want to make money put nothing into the roster and you profit... after a few years they'd be able to do that. Except the Marlins can't do that now. Look at their backloaded deals. Tell me how they are getting rid of those guys? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 13, 2012 -> 03:17 PM) Except the Marlins can't do that now. Look at their backloaded deals. Tell me how they are getting rid of those guys? My answer is still "do waht they did with Lowell/Delgado". Package a guy with him that the trading team really wants...they're the only ones who legitimately pulled it off. Stanton + Buehrle to the Yankees, Johnson + Reyes to Boston. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted February 13, 2012 Author Share Posted February 13, 2012 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 13, 2012 -> 02:23 PM) My answer is still "do waht they did with Lowell/Delgado". Package a guy with him that the trading team really wants...they're the only ones who legitimately pulled it off. Stanton + Buehrle to the Yankees, Johnson + Reyes to Boston. Johnson will be a FA after 13. I can't see that working. Stanton would be the one guy that might work with because of his pre-arb status. And you are also talking about way bigger contracts here and a much more budget conscious NYY and BOS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted February 13, 2012 Author Share Posted February 13, 2012 JeffPassan Jeff Passan A roster analysis shows top 5 payrolls in MLB this year: Yankees ($204M), Phillies ($170M), Red Sox ($167M), Angels ($140M), Tigers ($132M). JeffPassan Jeff Passan Estimated bottom 5 MLB payrolls: Astros ($61M), Royals ($58M), Padres ($53M), A's ($51M), Pirates ($46M). JeffPassan Jeff Passan Average payroll looks to be a little more than $97M. Eleven teams are at or higher than $100M, and another three are around $98M. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted February 13, 2012 Author Share Posted February 13, 2012 JonHeymanCBS Jon Heyman #yankees, #pirates still talking aj. deal likely to get done w/ bucs paying $13-15M of $33M, & giving up 2 non-roster guys Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiliIrishHammock24 Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 Cubs/Soler expected to agree on deal for 3 or 4 years at $27.5M http://www.csnchicago.com/blog/cubs-talk/p...18036273395-915 f*** f*** f*** f*** f*** f*** f*** Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleHurt05 Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 QUOTE (JoeCoolMan24 @ Feb 13, 2012 -> 10:34 PM) Cubs/Soler expected to agree on deal for 3 or 4 years at $27.5M http://www.csnchicago.com/blog/cubs-talk/p...18036273395-915 f*** f*** f*** f*** f*** f*** f*** No thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted February 14, 2012 Author Share Posted February 14, 2012 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 13, 2012 -> 08:02 AM) ChiTribSports ChiTribSports Jose Canseco to try out for Mexican League team MTBoyer Matt Boyer News 11 has also confirmed Canseco would like to parlay this Mexican League opportunity into a reality show or movie deal if possible Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleHurt05 Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 14, 2012 -> 08:34 AM) MTBoyer Matt Boyer News 11 has also confirmed Canseco would like to parlay this Mexican League opportunity into a reality show or movie deal if possible Someone has watched a few too many episodes of Eastbound & Down Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts