What do you think of baseball's economic divide/system?

[SabresRule]

I was watching 'The Top 5 Reason You Can't Blame' George Steinbrenner for baseball's economic divide, and it got me wondering gow baseball and money have changed over the years.

One of the reasons they mentioned was dumb owners. In other words, Steinbrenner wasn't the only one to spend big, and didn't pull off some idioctic contracts.

(He didn't sign A-Rod to that mega-monster $250 million contract- Texas did)

Sometimes, it's other owner who affect the economy.

Back in December 1991, Bobby Bonilla signed a 5 year contract worth 6.1 million a year
(It's chump change today- back then, it was the equivalent of Dice-K when he signed in December 06)

The fact that the Dodgers went after Kevin Brown for a huge deal wasn't a bad idea, but going after Darren Dreifort was. Maybe if they hadn't been such idiots to go after Dreifort, they keep some of that money to make Sheffield, Beltre, or the others happy.

Then, there's Mike Hampton and his idioctic contract. It wasn't so much the amount of money, but the fact that he went to Colorado. If Willie Mays' glove was where triples died, then Coors Field- pre-humidor- was where pitchers went to die.

(That was around the time when Me-Me originally signed with Boston. We all know what happened this year, but he was lightyears better than Hampton.

To put it mildly, I think Bill, Sandra, and myself could have made better pitchers in Colorado for much cheaper money)

Given how many boneheaded player contracts and owners had a lot to do with the situation as much as Steinbrenner,

how do YOU feel about the baseball's economy and how far it has come?

 

[anders5189]

With Tampa Bay in the playoffs and the Yankees staying home I think we can, for once and all, put to rest the argument that small market teams can't compete.

 

[salsadancer7]

With Tampa Bay in the playoffs and the Yankees staying home I think we can, for once and all, put to rest the argument that small market teams can't compete.

And as much as you hate them, the Marlins winning TWO World Series with litterally a third of the payroll of all of the other playoff teams. It goes to show you that it's ALL about the scouting. You have great scouting in the farm system, you WILL get great ball players.

...whether you can keep them long term is a WHOLE OTHER ISSUE and a thread....

 

[SamCdbs]

Standings with 4 days left:

NL East:

DMA #4
DMA #1

NL Central:

DMA #3

NL West

DMA #2

NL Wildcard

DMA #1
DMA #35

AL East

DMA #13 (also controls DMA #19, which added together would be #8)

AL Central

DMA #3
DMA #15

AL West

DMA #2

AL Wildcard

DMA #7 (with a massive regional claim on 6 states)

One team, which will lose every player worth anything to free agency, and the rest top 10 DMAs.

Baseball's economics? Still broken.

 

[satjay]

I would say that with the high spenders being able to spend...Baaseball smaller spenders still have a chance, due to smart descions with their players.

Yankees 200+ no playofs

Tigers 140 Million...In last place....What a joke of a season, I realzied a while ago that the playoffs were not going to happen, but could have least played competitve baseball

 

[AntAltMike]

AL Wildcard

DMA #7 (with a massive regional claim on 6 states)

The Red Sox are in the third largest baseball television market, measured in terms of total household exposures, since they televise in the following DMAs:

#7 Boston           2,409K TV housholds
#30 Hartford        1,014K
#52 Providence        622K
#71 Portland, ME      411K  
#111 Springfield, MA, 263K
#153 Bangor           145K

It is probably carried in #93 Burlington/Plattsburgh, with 331K households as well.

Versus

#13 Tampa:    1,822K
#19 Orlando   1,466K

#34 Milwaukee:  915K

So the Red Sox are viewed in more television households in the peripheral Providence and Portland DMAs than Milwaukee has in its own market.

 

[HD MM]

Um, guys....

The cities DMA rank isn't directly correlated to their teams' payroll. Take Detroit for instance. They were #2 in total payroll this year.


2008 MLB Team Payroll Rank

- 1 New York Yankees: $209,081,579
- 2 Detroit Tigers: $138,685,197
- 3 New York Mets: $138,293,378
- 4 Boston Red Sox: $133,440,037
- 5 Chicago White Sox: $121,152,667
- 6 Los Angeles Angels: $119,216,333
- 7 Chicago Cubs: $118,595,833
- 8 Los Angeles Dodgers: $118,536,038
- 9 Seattle Mariners: $117,993,982
- 10 Atlanta Braves: $102,424,018
- 11 St. Louis Cardinals: $100,624,450
- 12 Toronto Blue Jays: $98,641,957
- 13 Philadelphia Phillies: $98,269,880
- 14 Houston Astros: $88,930,415
- 15 Milwaukee Brewers: $81,004,167
- 16 Cleveland Indians: $78,970,067
- 17 San Francisco Giants: $76,904,500
- 18 Cincinnati Reds: $74,277,695
- 19 San Diego Padres: $73,677,617
- 20 Colorado Rockies: $68,655,500
- 21 Texas Rangers: $68,239,551
- 22 Baltimore Orioles: $67,196,249
- 23 Arizona Diamondbacks: $66,202,713
- 24 Minnesota Twins: $62,182,767
- 25 Kansas City Royals: $58,245,500
- 26 Washington Nationals: $54,961,000
- 27 Pittsburgh Pirates: $49,365,283
- 28 Oakland Athletics: $47,967,126
- 29 Tampa Bay Rays: $43,820,598
- 30 Florida Marlins: $21,836,500

 

[SandraC]

Yet if you listed the net worth of the each team's owners, George Steinbrenner would be waaaay down the list. His net worth is but a blip on the radar screen compared to the owners of many of the teams.

That's one of the reasons it bugs him to share revenue with teams who have a lot more money than him, but don't spend it on the team.


Sandra

 

[HD MM]

I have 2 takes on this:

1) A superior payroll doesn't necessarily guarantee a World Series victory, but it does allow for much more consistency through the years.

2) A mid-market team such as the A's, Indians, Twins and Rockies benefit from good GM's and scouting. They are able to compete with the larger payrolls, but not on a consistent basis.

The way mid-market teams are able to compete, is by signing prospects at a young age. If these prospects work out, they can compete in a given year. But when it comes time for free-agency, these teams aren't able to pay these budding-stars what other high payroll teams can. These teams lose out on the budding-stars, then have to rebuild and/or start over with another young prospect. For this reason alone, the mid-market team success is much more volatile.

In summary: Money brings consistency. Lack of money allows for turnover which leads to inconsistency.

 

[AntAltMike]

...The cities DMA rank isn't directly correlated to their teams' payroll. Take Detroit for instance. They were #2 in total payroll this year.


2008 MLB Team Payroll Rank

- 1 New York Yankees: $209,081,579
- 2 Detroit Tigers: $138,685,197
- 3 New York Mets: $138,293,378
- 4 Boston Red Sox: $133,440,037
- 5 Chicago White Sox: $121,152,667
- 6 Los Angeles Angels: $119,216,333
- 7 Chicago Cubs: $118,595,833
- 8 Los Angeles Dodgers: $118,536,038

Looks like a pretty strong correllation to me. Seven of the eight highest salaried teams playing the four largest markets.

Detroit is an abberation. They got lucky and made it to the World Series with a payroll of around $80 million and decided to try to play in the upper tier league by resigning their own free agents and buying up a few more. But like when Baltimore tried that in the mid-1990s, it proved to be a loser's gamble.

 

[Paul Wozniak]

Looks like a pretty strong correllation to me. Seven of the eight highest salaried teams play ing the four largest markets.

Detroit is an abberation. They got lucky and made it to the World Series with a payroll of around $80 million and decided to try to play in the upper tier league by resigning their own free agents and buying up a few more. But like when Baltimore tried that in the mid-1990s, it proved to be a loser's gamble.

I would rather see the owner plow some of those profits into trying to upgrade his team, rather than his wallet. This principle worked well for Illitch and the Red Wings before the cap. Smart management, has kept them competitive after the cap. It didn't work out to well for the Tigers this year, but like I said, at least he's putting his money into the team, and not his pocket. I don't believe for a minute all those cries of poverty coming from the smaller market teams, not with all that TV money. Winning usually puts fans in the seats, if it don't, find a city that cares to watch your product. Some cities are just not sports towns. (Tampa Bay comes to mind.)

 

[brainfry]

With Tampa Bay in the playoffs and the Yankees staying home I think we can, for once and all, put to rest the argument that small market teams can't compete.

I'd like to see about three WS champs in a row come from small payrolls so that mismanaged teams like the Reds and Pirates could no longer legitimately cry foul.

 

[SamCdbs]

2) A mid-market team such as the A's, Indians, Twins and Rockies...

Oakland is located in DMA #6, and also controls DMA #20.

Cleveland is DMA #17, and it at least shares DMA #32.

Minneapolis/St. Paul is DMA #15 and it has a regional claim to pretty much every place west of it all the way to the Rockies.

Denver is DMA #18 and it also controls DMA #33.

Baseball's economics. Still broken.

 

[AntAltMike]

Oakland is located in DMA #6, and also controls DMA #20....

A lot of baseball fans look at Oakland and see a managerial success, as they tend to perform better than their modest revenues might otherwise indicate, but it should also be seen as a marketing failure.