Why is he correct? If there's an overall budget, over runs in one are are going to impact other areas. As fans, we may think winning is the goal, as owners, I'm guessing they preface it as winning within the budget
It would be foolish to cut costs on team payroll because of ballpark overruns and vice-versa. Both are separate investments intended to return money to the Lerner family and should not be viewed as one affecting the other. If money was a limited resource then hard choices would need to be made, but clearly there is no lack of funds. The money they are spending on the ballpark is almost certainly tied to enhancing revenue returns, adding signage and concessions, as was done in 2007/8. The money spent on payroll increases attendance and the chances for making the playoffs, less of a sure thing, but still very much done with revenue returns in mind.
On the other hand, while all of that makes economic sense, we are dealing with the Lerner family, and this exact situation came up in 2006 when ballpark development was noted as a factor in low payroll for 2007. I'm not convinced that this was an honest statement from the team or just their excuse for making big $$$ on the old revenue sharing formula while fielding a crap team, but that was the official company line.
The team's ownership believes that spending on the new park and on player development should take almost complete priority over 2007 payroll. "We'll get through next season somehow. And we may not be as bad as people think," one team source said. "Then, '08 will be a whole new world."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/22/AR2006122201353.html
