Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 3 of 11 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 162
  1. #31
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Myrtle Beach, South Carolina
    Posts
    16,367
    Quote Originally Posted by brett05 View Post
    MLB is proposing that teams spend at least $100 million on their MLB rosters. I am hopeful that the players agree to this and it makes baseball a bit more interesting in several markets.

    https://slackiebrown.com/2021-mlb-team-salaries/
    Here is the problem even with a floor: Salaries are too far gone to make this something even of much value. For example, the worst team in baseball right now is the Baltimore Orioles with a payroll, according to https://slackiebrown.com/2021-mlb-team-salaries/ of 57.4 million.

    So for 100 million dollar payroll, you are looking at 42.6 million. I used Sportrac for this information, here is what I would add to the Orioles for $42.6 million based on that:

    SS Marcus Semien-- 1 year, 18 million
    3B Justin Turner-- 2 years, 34 million (17 million per year)
    SP Chris Archer-- 1 year, 6.5 million
    RP Ryan Stanek-- 1 year, 1.1 million

    So, adding those 4 guys to the Orioles are they anywhere close to a playoff contender, let alone a World Series contender?
    Eichel Tower

  2. #32
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Posts
    5,758
    Quote Originally Posted by ccugrad1 View Post
    Here is the problem even with a floor: Salaries are too far gone to make this something even of much value. For example, the worst team in baseball right now is the Baltimore Orioles with a payroll, according to https://slackiebrown.com/2021-mlb-team-salaries/ of 57.4 million.

    So for 100 million dollar payroll, you are looking at 42.6 million. I used Sportrac for this information, here is what I would add to the Orioles for $42.6 million based on that:

    SS Marcus Semien-- 1 year, 18 million
    3B Justin Turner-- 2 years, 34 million (17 million per year)
    SP Chris Archer-- 1 year, 6.5 million
    RP Ryan Stanek-- 1 year, 1.1 million

    So, adding those 4 guys to the Orioles are they anywhere close to a playoff contender, let alone a World Series contender?
    It makes them more competitive
    My Ignore List: bklynny67, crovash, nastynice, OhSoSlick, spliff(TONE), zmaster52

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    South Dakota
    Posts
    18,462
    The only thing that happened when the NBA did this was a bunch of mediocre players got contracts well over their relative value.

    The problem in sports finances anymore is there's far too much money to go around...and there's far too much money to go around because too many fans have gotten far too comfortable with paying far too much. And yes, I realize in saying that some will say 'well then it's not too much'....but it's shutting some fans out.
    gotta love 'referential' treatment

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Myrtle Beach, South Carolina
    Posts
    16,367
    Quote Originally Posted by brett05 View Post
    It makes them more competitive
    So what would their record be right now with those 4 instead of 45-92? Are they any better than Kansas City and Minnesota at 62-77
    Eichel Tower

  5. #35
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Posts
    5,758
    Quote Originally Posted by ccugrad1 View Post
    So what would their record be right now with those 4 instead of 45-92? Are they any better than Kansas City and Minnesota at 62-77
    You may not like this answer, but it's the correct one:

    I don't know.
    My Ignore List: bklynny67, crovash, nastynice, OhSoSlick, spliff(TONE), zmaster52

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Bethlehem
    Posts
    45,380
    Why would you talk about adding FA to the Orioles when there is no floor in place at this time? Itís not as simple as just adding to make a floor because teams arenít currently operating that way.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack of Blades View Post
    I don't consider Brand New indie. I consider them ****ing awesome and don't belong to a genre.

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Myrtle Beach, South Carolina
    Posts
    16,367
    Quote Originally Posted by koldjerky View Post
    Why would you talk about adding FA to the Orioles when there is no floor in place at this time? Itís not as simple as just adding to make a floor because teams arenít currently operating that way.
    koldjerky, I was talking hypothetically when the idea was posted about a 100 million dollar payroll. I used 4 players that signed via Free Agency this offseason, adding 42.6 million based on one website's information on team payrolls, for the Orioles to get to 100 million and what I was showing is that are they still anywhere close to being a playoff contender, let alone a World Series contender?
    Eichel Tower

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Bethlehem
    Posts
    45,380
    Quote Originally Posted by ccugrad1 View Post
    koldjerky, I was talking hypothetically when the idea was posted about a 100 million dollar payroll. I used 4 players that signed via Free Agency this offseason, adding 42.6 million based on one website's information on team payrolls, for the Orioles to get to 100 million and what I was showing is that are they still anywhere close to being a playoff contender, let alone a World Series contender?
    No but weíre currently not operating that way.

    You put a floor of 100 million and itís doubtful you see teams like the Orioles.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack of Blades View Post
    I don't consider Brand New indie. I consider them ****ing awesome and don't belong to a genre.

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    3,059
    It's a zero sum game from a talent perspective. If teams need to spend money to meet the floor they will either:
    - pay low paid players more -over paying and doesn't help quality of team
    - go after free agents they otherwise wouldn't and likely overpay to get to come to a poor team. This marginally helps the low payroll team but necessarily decreases the quality of the big payroll team that stockpiles high paid players
    - Resign their own young players that hit free agency - this is where a floor could actually help the Oriole type teams become a little more competitive.

    Bottom line: In a zero sum game scenario if bad teams get a little better, great teams must get a little worse or the amount of great teams must decrease given the fact there is only a finite amount of elite talent. Paying players more doesn't make them elite.

  10. #40
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Posts
    5,758
    Quote Originally Posted by zookman65 View Post
    It's a zero sum game from a talent perspective. If teams need to spend money to meet the floor they will either:
    - pay low paid players more -over paying and doesn't help quality of team
    - go after free agents they otherwise wouldn't and likely overpay to get to come to a poor team. This marginally helps the low payroll team but necessarily decreases the quality of the big payroll team that stockpiles high paid players
    - Resign their own young players that hit free agency - this is where a floor could actually help the Oriole type teams become a little more competitive.

    Bottom line: In a zero sum game scenario if bad teams get a little better, great teams must get a little worse or the amount of great teams must decrease given the fact there is only a finite amount of elite talent. Paying players more doesn't make them elite.
    It does make all games more competitive which I believe is the point even if it is incremental
    My Ignore List: bklynny67, crovash, nastynice, OhSoSlick, spliff(TONE), zmaster52

  11. #41
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    789
    Quote Originally Posted by zookman65 View Post
    It's a zero sum game from a talent perspective. If teams need to spend money to meet the floor they will either:
    - pay low paid players more -over paying and doesn't help quality of team
    - go after free agents they otherwise wouldn't and likely overpay to get to come to a poor team. This marginally helps the low payroll team but necessarily decreases the quality of the big payroll team that stockpiles high paid players
    - Resign their own young players that hit free agency - this is where a floor could actually help the Oriole type teams become a little more competitive.

    Bottom line: In a zero sum game scenario if bad teams get a little better, great teams must get a little worse or the amount of great teams must decrease given the fact there is only a finite amount of elite talent. Paying players more doesn't make them elite.

    Except these teams that regularly sit at low payrolls are almost definitely going to sit as close to the floor as possible and most likely won't have players worth keeping hitting free agency right as other money drops off, so the only way they set up to re-sign players in and after arb is if they either over pay mediocre players on 1 and 2 year deals or sign and release players before the season starts just to meet the floor each year.

    I think it would probably help the first few years after it was implemented because they could keep some talent with the higher payroll but salaries will quickly adjust and it will probably go right back to where it was just with some teams throwing money away to reach the floor.

  12. #42
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    3,059
    Quote Originally Posted by jawjr13 View Post
    Except these teams that regularly sit at low payrolls are almost definitely going to sit as close to the floor as possible and most likely won't have players worth keeping hitting free agency right as other money drops off, so the only way they set up to re-sign players in and after arb is if they either over pay mediocre players on 1 and 2 year deals or sign and release players before the season starts just to meet the floor each year.

    I think it would probably help the first few years after it was implemented because they could keep some talent with the higher payroll but salaries will quickly adjust and it will probably go right back to where it was just with some teams throwing money away to reach the floor.
    Yes I agree with your comment especially "throwing money away to reach the floor"

  13. #43
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    13,503
    There will be teams that trade for bad contracts to take on prospects to reach the floor. I don't doubt that at all. But if you're semi decently run, budgeting should allow you to not have to tank and overspend.

    I actually think the opposite happens. Right away teams will have to spend reach the floor and may just throw money at the problem. But I think long term, knowing you have to spend money, teams will plan better. And maybe that's front loading prospect contracts so youre not paying them $500k 3 years and $15 mill in arb. Flatten that out or front load that while you're tanking and have them at a flatter number when you're hoping to be better.

    You'll still see teams tank, I'm not saying that. But you'll see teams who are better at budget planning avoid having to just sign a bad FA to a major deal for 1 or 2 years.

  14. #44
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    48
    Quote Originally Posted by koldjerky View Post
    How many times do these small market teams trade away elite talents because they donít want to pay them?

    It should theoretically stop that from happening and actually cause more parity in the league.
    All teams will trade off elite talent if they know they are far away from competing. Nationals traded away to elite players and let harper/rendon walk for more money.

    I'm a brewers fan and if the for the past 5 years the team had to spend $100 million there is no way they go out and sign yelich long term. They would of let him walk or traded him. Honestly the teams you are trying to prevent them from being cheap will just find another way to manipulate the system.

  15. #45
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Bethlehem
    Posts
    45,380
    Quote Originally Posted by wolf15walk View Post
    All teams will trade off elite talent if they know they are far away from competing. Nationals traded away to elite players and let harper/rendon walk for more money.

    I'm a brewers fan and if the for the past 5 years the team had to spend $100 million there is no way they go out and sign yelich long term. They would of let him walk or traded him. Honestly the teams you are trying to prevent them from being cheap will just find another way to manipulate the system.
    I agree if youíre not close to competing but how often are the As and Marlins of the world selling off pieces when they really donít have to? Thereís a difference between being a poorly run organization and selling off pieces due to bad investments and just teams that Ďcanít affordí players so they trade before they get expensive.

    All teams go through rebuilds and trade off pieces regardless of their financial stature.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack of Blades View Post
    I don't consider Brand New indie. I consider them ****ing awesome and don't belong to a genre.

Page 3 of 11 FirstFirst 12345 ... 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
  •