Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 5 of 15 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 212
  1. #61
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    10,400
    vCash
    1500
    Most posters think the primary purpose of "the plan" is to build a winner. It's not.

    THe primary purpose is to conserve $$$$, winning is secondary. It is still possible, but it is secondary. With other teams it is the other way around. For some teams (not many) the $$$$ aspect has little relevance.

    The Mets' master plan plan is from the Wilnotpons, not necessarily from Alderson alone.

    I'm starting to think that baseball is moving in a new direction regarding salaries. Lock up one or two young stars for 4-6 years for a reasonable salary, and then plug in low cost high return players elsewhere. When guys reach their late 20s early 30s and look for the mega deal, cut them loose for prospects and start over. Three or four teams will shell out the big bucks and have good teams, everyone else is in a constant changing mode.

    With the second wildcard, you don't have to shoot for first place anymore, or even second. You need to shoot for for 85 - 87 wins. You can do that with with a good (not great) team with good depth and a little luck.

    When you think it through, the second wild card may actually work to keep salaries down.

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Hill Valley, 1985.
    Posts
    7,792
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by jomota View Post
    Most posters think the primary purpose of "the plan" is to build a winner. It's not.

    THe primary purpose is to conserve $$$$, winning is secondary. It is still possible, but it is secondary. With other teams it is the other way around. For some teams (not many) the $$$$ aspect has little relevance.

    The Mets' master plan plan is from the Wilnotpons, not necessarily from Alderson alone.

    I'm starting to think that baseball is moving in a new direction regarding salaries. Lock up one or two young stars for 4-6 years for a reasonable salary, and then plug in low cost high return players elsewhere. When guys reach their late 20s early 30s and look for the mega deal, cut them loose for prospects and start over. Three or four teams will shell out the big bucks and have good teams, everyone else is in a constant changing mode.

    With the second wildcard, you don't have to shoot for first place anymore, or even second. You need to shoot for for 85 - 87 wins. You can do that with with a good (not great) team with good depth and a little luck.

    When you think it through, the second wild card may actually work to keep salaries down.


    I don't. I have never believed for one second that winning is anything more than a secondary ambition, pre Madoff or post Madoff.

    Baseball needs a salary cap is the worst way. It will continue to lose ground to football and college football, and it deserves to do so.

    I agree with the rest of your post, but nothing will keep down salaries.

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    21,540
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by jomota View Post
    I'm starting to think that baseball is moving in a new direction regarding salaries. Lock up one or two young stars for 4-6 years for a reasonable salary, and then plug in low cost high return players elsewhere. When guys reach their late 20s early 30s and look for the mega deal, cut them loose for prospects and start over. Three or four teams will shell out the big bucks and have good teams, everyone else is in a constant changing mode.

    With the second wildcard, you don't have to shoot for first place anymore, or even second. You need to shoot for for 85 - 87 wins. You can do that with with a good (not great) team with good depth and a little luck.

    When you think it through, the second wild card may actually work to keep salaries down.
    Yeah i get that impression too.

    The dynamic of baseball is changing because like you mentioned you don't even need to be that good in the regular season to make it to the playoffs.

    Contracts are changing too because teams are going to be hesitant to give out 10+ year mega deals to players in or around their 30s (aside from the occasional superstar like Pujols). In the post steroid era natural declines happen faster which will affect the length of contracts. The annual money isn't going anywhere but up but i don't see teams carrying as much bloated FA contracts.

    Even the Yankees are experiencing that currently with shedding payroll to get under the luxury tax and the eventual decision to re-sign Cano next offseason. I think baseball is shifting where teams are going to look more to build internally, have certain larger market FA, and look to reduce the length of these draconian contracts.

    Unless the player is in his prime and one of the best players in the league at the time (see Giancarlo Stanton in 2017)
    Last edited by metswon69; 01-18-2013 at 08:18 AM.

  4. #64
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Hill Valley, 1985.
    Posts
    7,792
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by metswon69 View Post
    I don't know where you get 59 million from..

    http://realdirtymets.com/2012/12/11/...rosterpayroll/

    And that doesn't include the buyout for Santana which is included in the 2013 budget so it's closer to 80 million committed to 2013.

    Actually it's $55M spent as of now. The rest is speculative. Where you're getting $80M from, I have no idea.

    The figures are: $55M, $66M and $71M.

    Where this article gets to $100M is anyone's guess. They are not spending $100M THIS YEAR on baseball players, no way on earth. Unless that's the assumed nonsense budget SA spun at the beginning of the year.

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    21,540
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Marty Mcfly View Post
    Actually it's $55M spent as of now. The rest is speculative. Where you're getting $80M from, I have no idea.

    The figures are: $55M, $66M and $71M.

    Where this article gets to $100M is anyone's guess. They are not spending $100M THIS YEAR on baseball players, no way on earth. Unless that's the assumed nonsense budget SA spun at the beginning of the year.
    It's not speculative because the Mets have to fill out the 25 man roster and the minimum salary is 490,000 dollars even for most rookies.

    That only lists 14 roster spots.
    Last edited by metswon69; 01-18-2013 at 08:21 AM.

  6. #66
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Hill Valley, 1985.
    Posts
    7,792
    vCash
    1500
    https://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?...MQ&output=html

    Cots shows Johan @ $25.5M this year, and $5M next year.

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    21,540
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Marty Mcfly View Post
    https://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?...MQ&output=html

    Cots shows Johan @ $25.5M this year, and $5M next year.
    They already said they included Santana's buy out as part of the 2013 payroll.

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Hill Valley, 1985.
    Posts
    7,792
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by metswon69 View Post
    It's not speculative because the Mets have to fill out the 25 man roster and the minimum salary is 490,000 dollars even for most rookies.

    That only lists 14 roster spots.


    Spots they have yet to fill. So it is speculative. Right now the Mets are committed to $55.5M. Not a cent more.

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Hill Valley, 1985.
    Posts
    7,792
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by metswon69 View Post
    They already said they included Santana's buy out as part of the 2013 payroll.
    They're wrong. JS is owed $30.5M total.

    08:$19M, 09:$20M, 10:$21M, 11:$22.5M, 12:$24M, 13:$25.5M, 14:$25M club option ($5.5M buyout)

  10. #70
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    21,540
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Marty Mcfly View Post
    Spots they have yet to fill. So it is speculative. Right now the Mets are committed to $55.5M. Not a cent more.
    Yes but they have to fill out the rest of the roster.

    They can't go into the season with only 14 roster filled spots.

    It's an expected expenditure.

  11. #71
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    21,540
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Marty Mcfly View Post
    They're wrong. JS is owed $30.5M total.

    08:$19M, 09:$20M, 10:$21M, 11:$22.5M, 12:$24M, 13:$25.5M, 14:$25M club option ($5.5M buyout)
    Who's wrong?

    Sandy Alderson?

    He was the one who said it.

    http://www.capitalnewyork.com/articl...l-playing-loop

    He also confirmed that the $9 million in 2014 option buyouts for Jason Bay and Johan Santana are considered part of the 2013 payroll.

  12. #72
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Hill Valley, 1985.
    Posts
    7,792
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by metswon69 View Post
    Yes but they have to fill out the rest of the roster.

    They can't go into the season with only 14 roster filled spots.

    It's an expected expenditure.

    Of course not, but I'm simply stating where we are today.

    Those projections seem pretty accurate so we're looking at a $70M-$75M payroll, which people told me would never happen in NY, but curiously fits in pretty well with last years payroll, and the loss made on it....

    What a coincidence....

  13. #73
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Hill Valley, 1985.
    Posts
    7,792
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by metswon69 View Post
    Who's wrong?

    Sandy Alderson?

    He was the one who said it.

    Spindy, he's a master at it spinning this and that. He also has on a number of occasions claimed he did not know what payroll was exactly, so to me, SA is not the most reliable source with regard to payroll.

    Cot's have no reason to mislead. Why would we not believe their contract info is correct? that snippet I just posted has been up there since the day JS signed, no-one has called it into question yet.
    Last edited by Marty Mcfly; 01-18-2013 at 08:33 AM.

  14. #74
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Hill Valley, 1985.
    Posts
    7,792
    vCash
    1500

  15. #75
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    21,540
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Marty Mcfly View Post
    Spindy, he's a master at it spinning this and that. He also has on a number of occasions claimed he did not know what payroll was exactly, so to me, SA is not the most reliable source with regard to payroll IMO.

    Cot's have no reason to mislead. Why would we not believe their contract info is correct? that snippet I just posted has been up there since the day JS signed, no-one has called it into question yet.
    Again see the quoted article.

    http://realdirtymets.com/2012/12/11/...rosterpayroll/

    Here is an estimated breakdown at how things look with the projected 25 man Roster/Payroll for 2013 Minus the reported deferred salary amounts of $5M to Johan Santana, $3M to David Wright and $15M to Jason Bay
    And Cot's isn't always correct about final payroll breakdowns.

Page 5 of 15 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •