Author Topic: Chelsea Janes on the Padres: interesting take  (Read 402 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline welch

  • Posts: 16298
  • The Sweetest Right Handed Swing in 1950s Baseball
Chelsea Janes on the Padres: interesting take
« Topic Start: February 23, 2023, 10:26:55 AM »
Chelsea Janes has a fascinating article on the against-convention strategy of the Padres owner: spend more to win and winning, he hopes, will bring in enough money to support the spending. This year, the Padres will pay in to MLB's profit sharing. This is contrary to the complaints of other small-market teams, to those teams that insist they cannot compete without a hard salary cap.

Perhaps something the Lerners could have emulated.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2023/02/23/san-diego-padres-small-market-mlb-payroll/?itid=sf_sports_top-table_p001_f001

Offline imref

  • Posts: 42525
  • Re-contending in 202...5?
Re: Chelsea Janes on the Padres: interesting take
« Reply #1: February 23, 2023, 10:40:42 AM »
Padres are going to be an interesting team to watch. Maybe the best offensive lineup in baseball, but that starting rotation is iffy.  The Athletic is reporting they are likely to use a 6-man rotation because they've got two relievers that can't yet pitch deep (Nick Martinez and Seth Lugo).

Offline Five Banners

  • Posts: 2242
Re: Chelsea Janes on the Padres: interesting take
« Reply #2: February 23, 2023, 10:41:40 AM »
Chelsea Janes has a fascinating article on the against-convention strategy of the Padres owner: spend more to win and winning, he hopes, will bring in enough money to support the spending. This year, the Padres will pay in to MLB's profit sharing. This is contrary to the complaints of other small-market teams, to those teams that insist they cannot compete without a hard salary cap.

Perhaps something the Lerners could have emulated.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2023/02/23/san-diego-padres-small-market-mlb-payroll/?itid=sf_sports_top-table_p001_f001

Goes towards the notion that no one buying and running a baseball team in the modern era should get any “small“ favoritism. It’s one thing to strategically curtail things on the big spending side for the sake of competition. It’s quite another thing to claim to be in a major league market but then cry poor and demand subsidy on ongoing basis.

Get out of the business if you don’t want to compete and want to insist on the revenue hammock, it really is that simple.

Offline HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 21606
Re: Chelsea Janes on the Padres: interesting take
« Reply #3: February 23, 2023, 11:30:41 AM »
Chelsea Janes has a fascinating article on the against-convention strategy of the Padres owner: spend more to win and winning, he hopes, will bring in enough money to support the spending. This year, the Padres will pay in to MLB's profit sharing. This is contrary to the complaints of other small-market teams, to those teams that insist they cannot compete without a hard salary cap.

Perhaps something the Lerners could have emulated.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2023/02/23/san-diego-padres-small-market-mlb-payroll/?itid=sf_sports_top-table_p001_f001

All of their high priced players are still in their primes. I wonder how he'll feel in the out years when the team is rebuilding and the fans are no longer buying tickets

Offline Natsinpwc

  • Posts: 25690
Re: Chelsea Janes on the Padres: interesting take
« Reply #4: February 23, 2023, 12:59:21 PM »
If everyone spent more money there would still be losing teams.

Offline Five Banners

  • Posts: 2242
Re: Chelsea Janes on the Padres: interesting take
« Reply #5: February 23, 2023, 01:08:40 PM »
If everyone spent more money there would still be losing teams.

Which is why having the natural course of things where payrolls reflect development realities and having cyclical “all in“ spending at the right time seems a better priority rather than normalizing a revenue hammock and crying poor. Of course, now that it looks like there’s enough of a block that has normalized the practice and can band together and torpedo CBA provisions, I wouldn’t count on too much changing anytime soon, barring the unforeseen.

Offline IanRubbish

  • Posts: 556
Re: Chelsea Janes on the Padres: interesting take
« Reply #6: February 28, 2023, 02:06:28 AM »
Padres fans should be thanking the Spanos family for taking the Chargers out of town.  This isn't about those contracts which are unlikely to pay off when the players are 37,38+, but making the team the West Coast version of the Cardinals.  Never in their history have they received this much attention.

One of the reasons the NBA's small markets are mostly places like Memphis, San Antonio, OKC, Salt Lake, Portland, Sac, Orlando, etc is because they don't want to go to metros smaller than Denver and then have to compete with MLB and NFL.   In San Diego, the Hosmer signing, their first big FA contract in years, came the year after the Chargers left, the Machado contract one year after that.

Where I think the Nats have gone wrong is that the debacle of Snyder ownership opened up a big opportunity to take some of the DC area's sports $, but they've squandered that opportunity.

Online JCA-CrystalCity

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 39415
  • Platoon - not just a movie, a baseball obsession
Re: Chelsea Janes on the Padres: interesting take
« Reply #7: February 28, 2023, 09:05:31 AM »

Where I think the Nats have gone wrong is that the debacle of Snyder ownership opened up a big opportunity to take some of the DC area's sports $, but they've squandered that opportunity.

PB69 can chime in because it is his observation, but there's a good argument that no team in baseball was hurt more by the COVID impacts on the 2020 season than the Nats.  Beyond the obvious lack of a chance to celebrate a fresh win and with events that could happen on schedule and the boost in attendance, it did seem at the time that the Nats / Caps combo was taking a lot of the mind space of local fans.  Add in not getting a real season of an emerging Soto (who went absolutely nuts in the 60 game season), it put the Nats mostly out of sight out of mind.

The short season started the Soto / Ted Williams comparisons. He was putting together a season to rival Judge's 2022 overall.  Still would have likely had to deal with Stras and Harris's injuries, but it might have even prevented Robles bulking / blimping up during the shut down, too. 

As for 2021, they also got crushed at the start of the year by COVID spread in the clubhouse.  I think something like 10 players were down for opening day, and the first week of the season had to be rescheduled.  No crowd when they came back, and it took a while for Schwarber, Bell, etc... to get going.  Even Corbin looked impacted negatively.  After his first 2 starts, he was actually effective through the end of June.  He really wasn't awful until July-August.

So, yes, there was some space for the Nats to dominate coverage locally, but fate had a good chunk to do with their failure to capture it, perhaps as much as mismanagement.

Offline HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 21606
Re: Chelsea Janes on the Padres: interesting take
« Reply #8: February 28, 2023, 09:20:26 AM »
PB69 can chime in because it is his observation, but there's a good argument that no team in baseball was hurt more by the COVID impacts on the 2020 season than the Nats.  Beyond the obvious lack of a chance to celebrate a fresh win and with events that could happen on schedule and the boost in attendance, it did seem at the time that the Nats / Caps combo was taking a lot of the mind space of local fans.  Add in not getting a real season of an emerging Soto (who went absolutely nuts in the 60 game season), it put the Nats mostly out of sight out of mind.

The short season started the Soto / Ted Williams comparisons. He was putting together a season to rival Judge's 2022 overall.  Still would have likely had to deal with Stras and Harris's injuries, but it might have even prevented Robles bulking / blimping up during the shut down, too. 

As for 2021, they also got crushed at the start of the year by COVID spread in the clubhouse.  I think something like 10 players were down for opening day, and the first week of the season had to be rescheduled.  No crowd when they came back, and it took a while for Schwarber, Bell, etc... to get going.  Even Corbin looked impacted negatively.  After his first 2 starts, he was actually effective through the end of June.  He really wasn't awful until July-August.

So, yes, there was some space for the Nats to dominate coverage locally, but fate had a good chunk to do with their failure to capture it, perhaps as much as mismanagement.

Even in they got a full season in 2020 and missed covid in 2021, Rizzo's farm still isn't producing the kind of talent the team needed to sustain a run. The only difference that I could see would be that Soto would be an even bigger local star and his trading would alienate even more people. I think the Padres right now are where the nats were at the end of the 2010s. I think they'll probably get a ring, but I also think they will have a very hard and painful fall when those contracts become less about buying players in their prime and more about overpaying guys well past their primes 

Offline nfotiu

  • Posts: 5041
Re: Chelsea Janes on the Padres: interesting take
« Reply #9: February 28, 2023, 09:37:06 AM »
Forbes estimates the Padres lost 32 million last year.    Their park was close to full.    They've added, what, 50 million in payroll this year?   Their local tv deal that's currently 50-70 million/year is likely to get lost or reduced due to its impending bankruptcy.   They could easily lose 100 million this year even with a packed ball park.

Owners that don't put much effort into winning are bad for leagues, but owners who don't care about spending with no realistic hope of even breaking even aren't great for a league either.   Same goes with Cohen.

Offline HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 21606
Re: Chelsea Janes on the Padres: interesting take
« Reply #10: February 28, 2023, 10:38:52 AM »
Forbes estimates the Padres lost 32 million last year.    Their park was close to full.    They've added, what, 50 million in payroll this year?   Their local tv deal that's currently 50-70 million/year is likely to get lost or reduced due to its impending bankruptcy.   They could easily lose 100 million this year even with a packed ball park.

Owners that don't put much effort into winning are bad for leagues, but owners who don't care about spending with no realistic hope of even breaking even aren't great for a league either.   Same goes with Cohen.

There is no salary cap. The Yankees and Phillies still have higher payrolls than the Padres. I'm sure small market owners hate the precedent, but I don't think it's bad for a sport for a team to drive itself into the red to win when larger market teams are routinely spending similar amounts

Offline nfotiu

  • Posts: 5041
Re: Chelsea Janes on the Padres: interesting take
« Reply #11: February 28, 2023, 11:10:00 AM »
There is no salary cap. The Yankees and Phillies still have higher payrolls than the Padres. I'm sure small market owners hate the precedent, but I don't think it's bad for a sport for a team to drive itself into the red to win when larger market teams are routinely spending similar amounts

If you have owners that don't care about profitability, and there is no salary cap, then what keeps salaries in check?   Out of control spending by owners in other sports is what drove long labor stoppages to get salary caps.   The majority of owners aren't going to be happy if they have to lose money to have a chance of winning.

Is it even sustainable in San Diego?   Or does he get tired of losing money and leaves a bad team with 100s of millions in dead money to be someone else's problem?

Offline UMDNats

  • Posts: 18063
Re: Chelsea Janes on the Padres: interesting take
« Reply #12: February 28, 2023, 11:20:26 AM »
You have to love a smaller market owner actually trying to win than just crying poor year after year while they get richer and richer.

Offline HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 21606
Re: Chelsea Janes on the Padres: interesting take
« Reply #13: February 28, 2023, 11:29:08 AM »
If you have owners that don't care about profitability, and there is no salary cap, then what keeps salaries in check?   Out of control spending by owners in other sports is what drove long labor stoppages to get salary caps.   The majority of owners aren't going to be happy if they have to lose money to have a chance of winning.

Is it even sustainable in San Diego?   Or does he get tired of losing money and leaves a bad team with 100s of millions in dead money to be someone else's problem?

It doesn't have to be sustainable. It's a temporary ramping up to win. I'm positive that they will still have equity in the team even with a few years of losses. The alternative is accepting that only a handful of teams are allowed to ever sign stars. I'm sure Angelos and Nutter are furious though

Offline Natsinpwc

  • Posts: 25690
Re: Chelsea Janes on the Padres: interesting take
« Reply #14: February 28, 2023, 11:31:50 AM »
There is no salary cap. The Yankees and Phillies still have higher payrolls than the Padres. I'm sure small market owners hate the precedent, but I don't think it's bad for a sport for a team to drive itself into the red to win when larger market teams are routinely spending similar amounts
Fangraphs has the Padres ahead of the Phillies. But point taken.

https://www.fangraphs.com/roster-resource/breakdowns/payroll

Offline Natsinpwc

  • Posts: 25690
Re: Chelsea Janes on the Padres: interesting take
« Reply #15: February 28, 2023, 11:45:40 AM »
For forty years everyone says the high salaries will kill pro sports but it never happens. People still want to watch even though the way they watch may change.  Someone like Soto will still have a limited number of teams interested. Phillies? No. Padres? Probably not. Yankees? I doubt it. So Boras can talk about resetting the market but it’s just talk. Unless there are multiple bidders willing to go high it’s just another big contract. I have no problem with what the Padres are doing. If they have a good five year run the fans will stay for a while. Nice location for the stadium as people have noted.

Offline nfotiu

  • Posts: 5041
Re: Chelsea Janes on the Padres: interesting take
« Reply #16: February 28, 2023, 12:00:58 PM »
For forty years everyone says the high salaries will kill pro sports but it never happens. People still want to watch even though the way they watch may change.  Someone like Soto will still have a limited number of teams interested. Phillies? No. Padres? Probably not. Yankees? I doubt it. So Boras can talk about resetting the market but it’s just talk. Unless there are multiple bidders willing to go high it’s just another big contract. I have no problem with what the Padres are doing. If they have a good five year run the fans will stay for a while. Nice location for the stadium as people have noted.

Attendance is trending down and most teams don't get significant numbers of people watching on TV.   

If the high salaries are supported by cable carriage fees that are going away, public stadium funding and a few owners who don't mind losing money to win, then that seems like a house of cards that will fall at some point.

Offline HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 21606
Re: Chelsea Janes on the Padres: interesting take
« Reply #17: February 28, 2023, 12:04:25 PM »
Is the sport healthier if just the Yankees and Dodgers can spend? That's essentially how European soccer works and there isn't even a pretense of parity there

Offline nfotiu

  • Posts: 5041
Re: Chelsea Janes on the Padres: interesting take
« Reply #18: February 28, 2023, 12:32:30 PM »
Is the sport healthier if just the Yankees and Dodgers can spend? That's essentially how European soccer works and there isn't even a pretense of parity there
I'm not sure.   There is a lot I like about European soccer.   Relegation and promotion, Champions leagues, Domestic cups, give all the teams something to play for.   They have a concept of  developing home grown talent.   And financial fair play rules make some effort to try to not spend more than they are making.   Although, it doesn't seem to stop a Russian or Saudi oligarch from buying a team and pumping a bunch of money into them.

By and large though, European soccer is very popular, doesn't rely on public funded stadiums and make tv money from eyeballs actually watching their sport.    Clubs have more of a tie in to the community and don't have the threat to move to blackmail local taxpayers.

It's a lot more fun experience to watch a middling Serie A club than it is to go watch a regular season mlb team who is out of it. 

Offline HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 21606
Re: Chelsea Janes on the Padres: interesting take
« Reply #19: February 28, 2023, 12:36:53 PM »
I'm not sure.   There is a lot I like about European soccer.   Relegation and promotion, Champions leagues, Domestic cups, give all the teams something to play for.   They have a concept of  developing home grown talent.   And financial fair play rules make some effort to try to not spend more than they are making.   Although, it doesn't seem to stop a Russian or Saudi oligarch from buying a team and pumping a bunch of money into them.

By and large though, European soccer is very popular, doesn't rely on public funded stadiums and make tv money from eyeballs actually watching their sport.    Clubs have more of a tie in to the community and don't have the threat to move to blackmail local taxpayers.

It's a lot more fun experience to watch a middling Serie A club than it is to go watch a regular season mlb team who is out of it. 

Financial fair play rules mostly lock in haves and have nots. European soccer has promotion, relegation, and championships based on regular season play. They have domestic and international cups in season. They own youth clubs as well as clubs in other sports. That’s a lot to keep fans interested. Baseball has none of that, financial restraints on the smallest clubs is just going to make more fans tune out

Offline Natsinpwc

  • Posts: 25690
Re: Chelsea Janes on the Padres: interesting take
« Reply #20: February 28, 2023, 01:01:59 PM »
Would be interesting to know the trends in MLB TV subscriptions and how much revenue is generated from that. Assume that is shared equally among the teams.


Online JCA-CrystalCity

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 39415
  • Platoon - not just a movie, a baseball obsession
Re: Chelsea Janes on the Padres: interesting take
« Reply #21: February 28, 2023, 01:31:37 PM »
Financial fair play rules mostly lock in haves and have nots. European soccer has promotion, relegation, and championships based on regular season play. They have domestic and international cups in season. They own youth clubs as well as clubs in other sports. That’s a lot to keep fans interested. Baseball has none of that, financial restraints on the smallest clubs is just going to make more fans tune out
A thing that is really disappointing about Euro leagues is how expected and common it is for lower teams to sell players to bigger fish.  It's just pure cash deals, in contrast to deals like the Soto or Scherzer/Turner trades.  It's like "oh boy, you have a competent goalkeeper who gets you to your domestic league final.  Let's see what Arsenal pays for him!"  I think Euro football, especially the EPL, has less turnover at the top of the league than MLB.  It's big 6 clubs until somebody comes up with cash and buys their way in (Newcastle). Even Manchester City was an afterthought until they got huge investment. Padres are basically following the City path to the top, without the revenues. In the EPL, I think there's been one of the lesser clubs (Leicester) win in the past 20 years. In baseball, other than the Red Sox and Dodgers (3 titles), I don't think there's been a top 5 revenue team win the world series since 2010 (I don't think Cards or Barves are top 5, but maybe the Cubs).  Giants 3 times, Royals, Nats, Houston twice . . . Even if you count the Cards, Barves, and Cubs as "royalty" that is still a heck of a lot more diversity in winners than the EPL.

Offline Natsinpwc

  • Posts: 25690
Re: Chelsea Janes on the Padres: interesting take
« Reply #22: February 28, 2023, 01:38:17 PM »
“Hanging on in desperation is the English way” is what I think of when I see the loyal fans of these EPL teams that have no chance.

Offline Dave in Fairfax

  • Posts: 2016
Re: Chelsea Janes on the Padres: interesting take
« Reply #23: February 28, 2023, 03:01:11 PM »
It's even less competitive in the Bundesliga. There have been 56 teams/clubs in the league. Of these, only 12 have ever won a championship. One team, FC Bayern München, has won 31 of 59 championships. No other team has more than five.