Author Topic: Good new for the payrolls?  (Read 640 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Slateman

  • Posts: 24479
Good new for the payrolls?
« Topic Start: September 24, 2012, 11:36:59 AM »
http://www.bizofbaseball.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=5731:mlb-on-cusp-of-tv-extensions-with-fox-tbs-that-will-net-800m-annually&catid=57:television&Itemid=122

Quote
With MLB’s national media rights revenues part of the league’s central funds that are distributed evenly to all 30 clubs, each one will see $50 million annually, or an additional $26.28 million each year over the $23.72 million they  now see. That could give each club the ability to be competitive for a star-caliber free agent, and then some.


Interesting.

Offline Jordanz Meatballz

  • Posts: 4556
Re: Good new for the payrolls?
« Reply #1: September 24, 2012, 06:09:18 PM »
Inflation is not the same thing as equal opportunity.

Offline 114D

  • Posts: 85
Re: Good new for the payrolls?
« Reply #2: September 24, 2012, 06:24:05 PM »
Good news for the players and all the teams, I guess.  Doesn't really help the Nats win since every team is getting more $$$.  If anything I'd say it helps the small market teams even things out, so that's not good for us. 

Offline spidernat

  • Posts: 54503
  • The Lerners are Cheap AND Crooked
Re: Good new for the payrolls?
« Reply #3: September 24, 2012, 08:40:30 PM »
This will only help the Lerners help themselves to more money.

Offline mimontero88

  • Posts: 4346
  • #EatFace
Re: Good new for the payrolls?
« Reply #4: September 24, 2012, 10:42:13 PM »
This will only help the Lerners help themselves to more money.

Our payroll right now is a tick under $100 million.  What's wrong with that?

Offline Lintyfresh85

  • Posts: 33836
  • Next year, maybe?
Re: Good new for the payrolls?
« Reply #5: September 24, 2012, 10:45:37 PM »
Our payroll right now is a tick under $100 million.  What's wrong with that?

Did the years of skimping on the payroll and basking in the profits of a easy revenue stream never happen?

Offline mimontero88

  • Posts: 4346
  • #EatFace
Re: Good new for the payrolls?
« Reply #6: September 24, 2012, 10:47:54 PM »
Did the years of skimping on the payroll and basking in the profits of a easy revenue stream never happen?

Did the sucking that happened as a result of that not get us Harper and Strasburg?

Offline Lintyfresh85

  • Posts: 33836
  • Next year, maybe?
Re: Good new for the payrolls?
« Reply #7: September 24, 2012, 10:51:19 PM »
Did the sucking that happened as a result of that not get us Harper and Strasburg?

One more win and we end up with Dustin Ackley.

Lucking into two generational talents does not excuse what occurred. It was never their plan to suck into getting the best pitcher of his generation and the best hitter of his generation. It luckily just played out that way. Any other year we end up with the first pick and you end up with an above average player... but not a superstar.

You're confusing results with the process.


Offline mimontero88

  • Posts: 4346
  • #EatFace
Re: Good new for the payrolls?
« Reply #8: September 24, 2012, 10:51:21 PM »
People worry too much about payroll anyway.  I can't find current payroll rankings but to start the season these are the payroll ranks for the teams that would make the playoffs today.

1.  New York Yankees
5.  Texas Rangers
7.  San Francisco Giants
9.  St. Louis Cardinals
11. Chicago White Sox
16. Atlanta Braves
18. Baltimore Orioles
19. Washington Nationals
21. Cincinnati Reds
30. Oakland Athletics

Offline mimontero88

  • Posts: 4346
  • #EatFace
Re: Good new for the payrolls?
« Reply #9: September 24, 2012, 10:52:17 PM »
One more win and we end up with Dustin Ackley.

Lucking into two generational talents does not excuse what occurred. It was never their plan to suck into getting the best pitcher of his generation and the best hitter of his generation. It luckily just played out that way.



Actually the Lerners have said publicly that they weren't going to spend money on the majors until they fixed the farm and that that was the plan all along.  They knew it had to get worse before it would get better.

Offline Lintyfresh85

  • Posts: 33836
  • Next year, maybe?
Re: Good new for the payrolls?
« Reply #10: September 24, 2012, 10:52:25 PM »
People worry too much about payroll anyway. 

Now you're changing your argument.

Offline mimontero88

  • Posts: 4346
  • #EatFace
Re: Good new for the payrolls?
« Reply #11: September 24, 2012, 10:53:15 PM »
Now you're changing your argument.


Now you're ignoring the fact that I'm making a separate argument and saying I'm changing it instead.

Offline Lintyfresh85

  • Posts: 33836
  • Next year, maybe?
Re: Good new for the payrolls?
« Reply #12: September 24, 2012, 10:53:42 PM »
Actually the Lerners have said publicly that they weren't going to spend money on the majors until they fixed the farm and that that was the plan all along.  They knew it had to get worse before it would get better.

They also knew that a fat high school kid that went undrafted would magically turn into the best pitching prospect in history... and would be available for them to draft #1? And if that's the case... why didn't they do more to assure that they ended up with the #1 pick... and not have to luck into the Mariners winning their last three games to get the pick?

Offline mimontero88

  • Posts: 4346
  • #EatFace
Re: Good new for the payrolls?
« Reply #13: September 24, 2012, 10:55:28 PM »
They also knew that a fat high school kid that went undrafted would magically turn into the best pitching prospect in history... and would be available for them to draft #1? And if that's the case... why didn't they do more to assure that they ended up with the #1 pick... and not have to luck into the Mariners winning their last three games to get the pick?

That is hardly the point.  The point is that the worst case scenario for a baseball franchise is a bad team AND a bad farm.  So they chose to fix the farm first to create a solid base so that when they did fix the major league product it would be sustainable instead of buying a few high-priced veterans and killing the farm system to create a very short window (see Philadelphia Phillies).

Offline Lintyfresh85

  • Posts: 33836
  • Next year, maybe?
Re: Good new for the payrolls?
« Reply #14: September 24, 2012, 10:58:01 PM »
That is hardly the point.  The point is that the worst case scenario for a baseball franchise is a bad team AND a bad farm.  So they chose to fix the farm first to create a solid base so that when they did fix the major league product it would be sustainable instead of buying a few high-priced veterans and killing the farm system to create a very short window (see Philadelphia Phillies).

The Phillies have had a winning record for the past nine seasons, and made the playoffs for the past five.

The Nats would be lucky to have such a "short window".


Offline mimontero88

  • Posts: 4346
  • #EatFace
Re: Good new for the payrolls?
« Reply #15: September 24, 2012, 10:58:43 PM »
The Phillies have had a winning record for the past nine seasons.



And the future couldn't be darker because of their recent decision making.

Offline Lintyfresh85

  • Posts: 33836
  • Next year, maybe?
Re: Good new for the payrolls?
« Reply #16: September 24, 2012, 11:00:59 PM »
And the future couldn't be darker because of their recent decision making.

Your definition of short window and my definition are quite different.

And once again... you've attempted to shift the topic after I've proven your argument null and void.

Offline mimontero88

  • Posts: 4346
  • #EatFace
Re: Good new for the payrolls?
« Reply #17: September 24, 2012, 11:05:45 PM »
Seriously just look at their top 10 prospects list.  It's embarrassing.  It's incredible how screwed they are when their high-priced major league stars falter.

Philadelphia Phillies
1.  RHP Trevor May
2.  LHP Jesse Biddle
3.  C Sebastian Valle
4.  RHP Jonathan Pettibone
5.  RHP Phillippe Aumont
6.  SS Freddy Galvis
7.  RHP Justin DeFratus
8.  RHP Brody Colvin
9.  OF Jiwan James
10. 3B Maikel Franco

Offline Lintyfresh85

  • Posts: 33836
  • Next year, maybe?
Re: Good new for the payrolls?
« Reply #18: September 24, 2012, 11:06:33 PM »
Seriously just look at their top 10 prospects list.  It's embarrassing.  It's incredible how screwed they are when their high-priced major league stars falter.

Philadelphia Phillies
1.  RHP Trevor May
2.  LHP Jesse Biddle
3.  C Sebastian Valle
4.  RHP Jonathan Pettibone
5.  RHP Phillippe Aumont
6.  SS Freddy Galvis
7.  RHP Justin DeFratus
8.  RHP Brody Colvin
9.  OF Jiwan James
10. 3B Maikel Franco

What does that have to do with your assertion that they somehow had a small window (9 years of winning season in a row)?

Offline mimontero88

  • Posts: 4346
  • #EatFace
Re: Good new for the payrolls?
« Reply #19: September 24, 2012, 11:07:42 PM »
Your definition of short window and my definition are quite different.

And once again... you've attempted to shift the topic after I've proven your argument null and void.

Just because something was built the right way doesn't mean it can't be dismantled by bad decision making.  Look at how badly the Phillies have butchered their farm system and turned what looked like a very long sustainable future just a couple of years ago into a disaster in the making in short order.  The point isn't what they did in the past.  They built that the same way the Nationals did.  By sucking.  But they didn't sustain it and now have a short window moving forward.  Don't see how that argument is null and void but I do see that it may be too nuanced for you ;)

Offline Lintyfresh85

  • Posts: 33836
  • Next year, maybe?
Re: Good new for the payrolls?
« Reply #20: September 24, 2012, 11:09:25 PM »
Just because something was built the right way doesn't mean it can't be dismantled by bad decision making.  Look at how badly the Phillies have butchered their farm system and turned what looked like a very long sustainable future just a couple of years ago into a disaster in the making in short order.  The point isn't what they did in the past.  They built that the same way the Nationals did.  By sucking.  But they didn't sustain it and now have a short window moving forward.  Don't see how that argument is null and void but I do see that it may be too nuanced for you ;)

Answer the question... do you consider nine straight winning seasons and five straight playoff runs with one WS title a short window?

Maybe you're not aware of this... but dynasty's like the Braves in the 90's and the Yankees... they don't come around often. Teams age... They don't have a "long window" which I guess in your estimation of time is at least 18+ straight years of winning seasons.

Offline mimontero88

  • Posts: 4346
  • #EatFace
Re: Good new for the payrolls?
« Reply #21: September 24, 2012, 11:11:01 PM »
Answer the question... do you consider nine straight winning seasons and five straight playoff runs with one WS title a short window?

Not at all.  They had a good run and had everything in place to sustain it well into the future as well.  But instead of keeping the farm system loaded they emptied it and now have a much darker future than most would have predicted just two years ago.

Offline Lintyfresh85

  • Posts: 33836
  • Next year, maybe?
Re: Good new for the payrolls?
« Reply #22: September 24, 2012, 11:12:12 PM »
Not at all.  They had a good run and had everything in place to sustain it well into the future as well.  But instead of keeping the farm system loaded they emptied it and now have a much darker future than most would have predicted just two years ago.

Their window was nine years long which included five straight playoff runs and a WS title. You said that constituted a short run.

There's really nothing left to discuss here.

Offline mimontero88

  • Posts: 4346
  • #EatFace
Re: Good new for the payrolls?
« Reply #23: September 24, 2012, 11:13:29 PM »
My point isn't about their window in the 2000s.  That has nothing to do with it.  My point is that because they let their farm system get so weak their success is unsustainable now in the 2010s because of their own self-mutilation.  If the Nationals hadn't strengthened the farm system first and instead just invested in veteran major league talent they would be in the same boat as the current Philadelphia Phillies.

Offline Lintyfresh85

  • Posts: 33836
  • Next year, maybe?
Re: Good new for the payrolls?
« Reply #24: September 24, 2012, 11:14:03 PM »
My point isn't about their window in the 2000s.  That has nothing to do with it.  My point is that because they let their farm system get so weak their success is unsustainable now in the 2010s because of their own self-mutilation.  If the Nationals hadn't strengthened the farm system first and instead just invested in veteran major league talent they would be in the same boat as the current Philadelphia Phillies.

Five time division winners and recent WS winners?