NorthSideSox72 Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 Here's a fun exercise. Let's see who can tell me what these numbers represent... 2012: 8 2011: 11 2010: 10 2009: 1 2008: 12 2007: 2 2006: 11 2005: 13 2004: 2 2003: 25 2002: 15 2001: 8 And that's as far back as the data I was able to find goes. Lamar in particular... tell me what you think these numbers are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleHurt05 Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 Payroll rank of the WS champion Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZionrulZ Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 Here's a fun exercise. Let's see who can tell me what these numbers represent... 2012: 8 2011: 11 2010: 10 2009: 1 2008: 12 2007: 2 2006: 11 2005: 13 2004: 2 2003: 25 2002: 15 2001: 8 And that's as far back as the data I was able to find goes. Lamar in particular... tell me what you think these numbers are. I'm stumped (and at work...no time to research.). Please enlighten the class. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Jan 22, 2013 -> 08:34 AM) Payroll rank of the WS champion Once in 12 years. That is pretty impressive. Even out of the top 10 is more common than in it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 I would imagine a lot of WS winners had players they developed that hadn't hit the real expensive stage yet. Since the Sox have had trouble developing those players, they are going to wind up spending more money per win than teams that do unless they can find bargains on the scrap heap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted January 22, 2013 Author Share Posted January 22, 2013 QUOTE (Lamar Johnson 23 @ Jan 22, 2013 -> 11:03 AM) I'm stumped (and at work...no time to research.). Please enlighten the class. As per the blacked out answer above, those are the payroll ranks for each World Series champion, for years I could get data for. There can be a lot of discussion about what those numbers do and don't mean, but here are a few things I think are obvious. First, spending the most money doesn't necessarily win you anything - the #1 payroll team won the championship just once in 12 years, and only three times in 12 years was it even a top 5 payroll team. Second, while money alone doesn't get you championships, spending SOME money gets you in the discussion. Note that all but one of those seasons, the winner was at least in the top half of baseball for payroll. Spending a whole ton of money is no guarantee of success. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZionrulZ Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 As per the blacked out answer above, those are the payroll ranks for each World Series champion, for years I could get data for. There can be a lot of discussion about what those numbers do and don't mean, but here are a few things I think are obvious. First, spending the most money doesn't necessarily win you anything - the #1 payroll team won the championship just once in 12 years, and only three times in 12 years was it even a top 5 payroll team. Second, while money alone doesn't get you championships, spending SOME money gets you in the discussion. Note that all but one of those seasons, the winner was at least in the top half of baseball for payroll. Spending a whole ton of money is no guarantee of success. Point taken! 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.