MLB - 1/2 the teams already done
stevek
Posts: 28,996 ✭✭✭✭✭
in Sports Talk
I just took a quick look at the MLB standings and realized that roughly 1/2 of the teams already have no realistic chance of getting into the playoffs - and the season is only at the 25% mark! If MLB can't figure out that something is drastically wrong here then they have got a lot to learn.
Steve
Steve
0
Comments
<< <i>I just took a quick look at the MLB standings and realized that roughly 1/2 of the teams already have no realistic chance of getting into the playoffs - and the season is only at the 25% mark! If MLB can't figure out that something is drastically wrong here then they have got a lot to learn.
Steve >>
Salary cap fixes this problem immediately. Problem is, the player's union is too strong, and Selig is too weak to impose it.
Also, two additional teams (NYY) (NYM) have been inconsistent enough to arguably be included in the aforementioned group.
1 New York Yankees $208,306,817
2 Boston Red Sox $123,505,125
3 New York Mets $101,305,821
4 Los Angeles Angels $97,725,322
5 Philadelphia Phillies $95,522,000
6 St. Louis Cardinals $92,106,833
7 San Francisco Giants $90,199,500
8 Seattle Mariners $87,754,334
9 Chicago Cubs $87,032,933
10 Atlanta Braves $86,457,302
11 Los Angeles Dodgers $83,039,000
12 Houston Astros $76,779,000
13 Chicago White Sox $75,178,000
14 Baltimore Orioles $73,914,333
15 Detroit Tigers $69,092,000
Also keep in mind that the bottom 15 teams (in terms of payroll) comprise of SD, AZ, FL, MN, TEX, WAS, and TOR, who all have records of above .500. Of these, AZ leads its division SD is 1/2 game behind, and FLA leads its division.
Of course, this is where these teams stand today and things may change.
Yes, I'm sure a salary cap would work just fine. Communism is also the best!!
Peace out.
Remember these Chuck Norris Facts
1. When Chuck Norris does a pushup, he isn't lifting himself up, he's pushing the Earth down
2. According to Einstein's theory of relativity, Chuck Norris can actually roundhouse kick you yesterday
3. There are no such things as lesbians, just women who have not yet met Chuck Norris
JS
<< <i>
Yes, I'm sure a salary cap would work just fine. Communism is also the best!!
Peace out. >>
Yeah a cap hasn't worked in the NFL has it? I mean, it's only the most watched sport in the US..because every year, every team has a shot.
And there will always be those teams who vary off of what is expected based on their payroll. Sometimes, a low paying team will do well. And sometimes, a high dollar team will fail.
You show the Giants in that mix...do you really think the Giants would be so far out of contention if Barry Bonds were healthy and playing? I think not. Same with the Cubs...injuries to your team early in the year are devastating.
There is a direct corelation with how much you spend in MLB and how well you do. There will always be minor variances, but as a whole, he who spends the most, wins.
And yeah, a salary cap is communism? No, it creates a fair and balanced playing field for all teams to play from.
I am sorry you can't comprehend that simple idea.
<< <i>
<< <i>
Yes, I'm sure a salary cap would work just fine. Communism is also the best!!
Peace out. >>
<< <i>And yeah, a salary cap is communism? No, it creates a fair and balanced playing field for all teams to play from.
I am sorry you can't comprehend that simple idea. >>
Giving from the rich to the poor who do not put it to good use is communism. It exists in baseball as owners from smaller markets are given money and don't spend it wisely. And before you state that a few million does not help much (which is correct), keep in mind that all of the owners but one (Fat George) agreed to the latest revenue share agreement. Also, MLB cannot force the owners to spend that revenue share money on the field. If they want to buy a new yacht or home with the revenue share $, they can. However, the market will ultimately prove correct.
Remember these Chuck Norris Facts
1. When Chuck Norris does a pushup, he isn't lifting himself up, he's pushing the Earth down
2. According to Einstein's theory of relativity, Chuck Norris can actually roundhouse kick you yesterday
3. There are no such things as lesbians, just women who have not yet met Chuck Norris
These team owners are (obviously) incredibly successful businesspeople, otherwise, how would they have acquired the money to purchase a baseball team?
I think the opposite of what you theorize would happen. If a salary cap of say $85 million were put into place, you'd see the KCs and TBs of the league spend money, because they know the gap between their $70 million and the $85 million is actually viable.
KC's problems stem from poor management for about 7 years after Mr. Kauffman died. We were managed by a group of accountants with their eye on the bottom line, rather than the talent on the field and in the farm system.
Now, that being said, we all have realized (even yankee fans), that the economics are seriously imbalanced. Example, Jeff Weaver received 8-9 million from the yanks....he tanked, but the organization felt nothing financially...heck, they purchased MORE pitchers. You can't tell me that most teams could afford that much of a hit, and still be competitive.
Something must be done in '06 at the next round of negotiations.
<< <i>
Something must be done in '06 at the next round of negotiations. >>
Unfortunately I see this scenario playing out:
the player's union is forced to accept Selig's 50 day, 100 day, lifetime suspension for strikes one, two, and three of steroid violation, because it's either this, or Congress forces baseball to accept the international standard of a 2 year suspension for offense one, and lifetime ban for offense two.
Donald Fehr is so incredibly stubborn that he will not be willing to concede a single point in the next round of negotations for the CBA, citing the steroid testing policy as a huge 'give' (instead of seeing it as something that SHOULD have been done years ago).
There will be no salary cap (unfortunatley) in the forseeable future...there is way too much money and power being thrown around to make it happen.
It's sad, actually. I really like baseball a great deal (my first sports love) but when I see teams spending millions and millions and still unable to compete, it makes it easy to see why the NFL has become America's Pastime.
It still kills me that the league could have broken the player's union back in '94.
<< <i>whoa, the phils are only 5 and half games out going into a series with the Marlins...I think its a little to early to say they are out!
JS >>
Whoa is right! Never count the Phils out until they pull thier own September skid..............
Football teams only depend on revenues from ticket sales for a small portion of their income.(8 games a year)
The TV contracts and merchandise sales account for most of income generated.
Football teams use the NCAA and NFL Europe as their farm systems. Baseball teams all have 4 or more minor league teams. how do you salary cap them?
There is no salary cap in football on the coaches-which do make a difference. same in baseball.
The koolaid the NFL has sold you as to the competitive balance is bull----. The same team has won the Super bowl 3 of the last 4 years and the Cardinals have sucked for years. Baseball has had 2 teams repeat as champions since the 1978 Yankees.
The salary cap does just what the owners want. Makes the fans feel like the big bad players aren't making too much money and allows(MAKES) the owners stick the rest of the money in their pockets. How is this good for a sport?
Think of this example: There is a salary cap in baseball and the Astros are trying to dump Clemens to a team who has to renegotiate his contract. The Yankess have 9 million under the cap and the Pirates have 9.5 million under the cap. Where do you think he is gonna go? The salary cap actually hurts the small markets teams chances of competing for stars.
Look at the up and coming NFL teams-Atlanta-(got better because they drafted Vick), Colts(got better because they drafted Manning) I could go on and on. Nothing to do with salary cap.
By the way the highest paid team sport athlete in 2004-Peyton Manning-a guy in salary a crap league-nuff said.
Putting together a set of 61 Fleer Basketball PSA 7 or better.
Trade references: T,Raf12,Coach Vinny,Iceman,McDee2,Lantz,JSA
<< <i>
By the way the highest paid team sport athlete in 2004-Peyton Manning-a guy in salary a crap league-nuff said. >>
Really? I could have sworn that was Alex Rodriguez, or does the $250 million contract elude you?
Your post goes back and forth all over itself. You say that a cap doesn't mean anything because the patriots have won 3 of the last 4 super bowls. But have you mentioned that over 25% of the world series championships EVER reside in NY? The yankees have 26 (!) world championships out of just over 100 played.
And a cap could work. Have MLB negotiate the local TV deals (like the NFL does for the league), put all that money into a pot, then divide it up evenly.
And how difficult is it to draft a player like Manning or Vick? Neither one was a 'surprise' pick that they've done well. Drafting Brady in the 6th round, now THAT's drafting. I find it funny you mention Manning as the reason the Colts are successful, then turn around and point to his contract as to the cap not being a big deal.
There is too much money by the big market teams (a la Yankees) to be lost if they were to somehow be forced to be smart with their contracts...Queen George spends good money after bad on players, and they can afford to screw up on a HUGE deal (Giambi) and not have it impact them at all.
Baseball is going to eat itself alive if they don't adopt a cap. Fans of the big market teams don't want a cap because then they wouldn't get to see an all-star team take the field every night, and their team's management would be force to be accountable with players and salaries.
Drafting Brady in the later rounds was a great move, but would not have been any different without a salary cap. I am not taking anything away from the Patriots recent domination of the NFL. They have a great coach(who they can pay as much as the whole team if they want), have drafted well and have played the cap "system as well if not better than most teams.
A-rod made 22 million last year, Peyton Manning made 30 million. I think the 250 million contract is crazy, but the Yankees didn't sign him to it. The fact is that an athlete in a salary cap league made 8 million more dollars than the highest paid player in a non salary cap league last season. Also, with such a large portion of the cap spent on one player, future team success is doubtful.
People feel a salary cap is the "cure" for baseball, I just feel that people like football better than baseball (which is fine) so they try to justify it by stuff like the strike, steriods and salary cap.
All a salary cap does is promote mediocrity, prevent trades of players to make your team better(you have to trade contracts), and allow the owners to pocket money instead of competing and being rewarded for winning. What incentive does an owner have to win if he makes just as much money losing? The fans are getting ripped off and spouting accolades of the system. I guess if you don't know sh-t from shinola it doesn't matter to you what you step in.
No other sport has parity built into the game like baseball. Any team can beat any team on a given day more so than the NFL, NBA or even college basketball(another mediocre product that people kneel to)
football-16 games////////// baseball-162 games or approximately 10x as many
12 teams in playoffs/////// 8 teams in playoffs
Football-10 wins-marginal division winner/wildcard most years
A football team that loses 7 games is probably on the outside looking in come playoff time
Every year at least one team will win 12 or more games
Baseball-100 wins-a great season, probably the best record that season.
If a baseball team wins 90 games(loses around 70), they are right in the mix.
Nobody wins 120 games-ever
If fans want every team to be in it all season, Why keep score? Let everyone win. Line up the players and pick new teams every year. Similar to what already happens in the NFL because teams can't keep their good players without going over the salary cap.
In every football or baseball game that is played(with a few exceptions) someone wins and someone loses. It's unavoidable. That's what makes sports great. Appreciate it for what it is.
Putting together a set of 61 Fleer Basketball PSA 7 or better.
Trade references: T,Raf12,Coach Vinny,Iceman,McDee2,Lantz,JSA
What do you say to a kid in say Kansas City who likes the Royals? 'Sorry kid...the economics of the game prevents the Royals from ever contending, so ownership is doing the fiscally responsible thing and being profitable'? Huh? How do you explain to a fan that their team can't be competitive because some big market teams have such an overwhelming advantage?
It's not about 'every team' winning, it's about every team having a chance at winning and being successful. Sure, any given day one team might be another, but over the long term, those teams that spend the most in baseball, win the most.
If you recall earlier in spring training I went on this baord and said that the Mariners were STUPID for signing Adrian Beltre to such a huge contract. How obvious is it when a man has On Base percentages of .310, .303, .290 and then gets a .388, to realize that the following year he is going to be much closer to the three crappy years as he will be to his RIchard Hidalgo-Terry Steinbach-Norm Cash-Brady Anderson type career year?? Yet the Seattle GM falls in love with the one year small sample size(ignores the large body of work) and makes a stupid investment. Fans do the same thing, heck just look where Beltre went in all the Fantasy drafts as he was a top pick in almost every league. Are people that stupid? It happens ALL THE TIME. People have very selective memories, and they ALWAYS only remember the things that support their point of view, and IGNORE the evidence that refutes it(just like you read on this board constantly).
Gm's also don't know how to evaluate a player too. They do the same mistakes as fans...they fall in love with the wrong statistical measurements and they put the wrong money in the wrong players. They think a pitcher who wins 18 with a bad ERA 'knows how to win', so they figure they put him on their team (that doesn't score the same amount of runs) and what happens?? Reality slaps him in the face when the run support isn't there anymore and he wins 9 games. The blame falls on the 'unpredicatability' of the pitcher, when in reality pitchers are actually fairly easy to handicap, but people look at things like that and make inaccurate assumptions. Their 'easy out' is pitchers are unpredictable, thus the decline in 'performance'. Yet they will not even bother to check that he gave up the same amount(and type) of hits, and walks as he did the previous season, yet it was things that were out of his control to determine a poor evaluation stat like WINS.
The small market teams will draw fans if they spend money and win. The Expos used to be a big draw until their ownership started geting rid of everyone. Toronto was a big draw too. The Yankees are really the only team that spends an unlimited amount of money. Yet having a single dominant team is actually good for a sport as the other fans now have something to 'hate' and it brings up the 'David vs. Goliath' scenarios that are the lifeblood of sports excitement. The Yankees have always been that single dominant team, even during the glory days.
What people don't realize is that during the glory days there were teams that were guaranteed to finish at the bottom of the division(league). Plus there were no divisions, so you had to be the best in the league to go to the WS. Just think of those teams that were buried in EIGTH place in June with no chance to catch somebody like the Yankees, yet baseball somehow managed to survive and thrive during those years. Go ahead and check the perennial bottom feeders of the 50's. In the 1950's Washington's average finish was 34 games out of first place. Kansas City, Philadelphia(AL), and STL/BAL were neck and neck with Washington in the entire 50's as guaranteed bottom feeders...heck, one of those teams finished 60 games out of first one year. Come June, none of those teams had even a remote chance to sniff post season.
P.S. There are still fans that don't realize that a 3.40 ERA in the AL is better than 3.10 ERA in the NL. I bet people on this board would argue that point right now(and I GUARANTEE it would be a person who's favorite team is in the NL! It never fails!). The pitcher you would rather have the following year on your team is the 3.40 AL guy, even though his ERA was higher. Some guys used to debate that with me, but I buried them with so much evidence that it is practically tatooed on their fore heads by now.
There's a little rant, enjoy.
Uh yea...because there was no salary cap back then either. Of course there was the reserve clause which kept players from moving around, but teams with money could still buy players, have the best scouts, sign the best rookie players by offering the biggest signing bonuses, etc. Even before then, the Yankees bought Babe Ruth because they had the money. If you want a league whereby the Yankees and a few other teams do what they do...well you've already got it. I'd rather have a league like the NFL, whereby most teams each new season have some kind of decent shot at the playoffs. And every team gets to basically "keep" most of their star players.
The old reserve clause was bad for the players but only a lunatic would say that today's players are underpaid. Fair is fair, so a salary cap structure similar to the NFL would make for a better, more competitive and interesting MLB.
Steve
Putting together a set of 61 Fleer Basketball PSA 7 or better.
Trade references: T,Raf12,Coach Vinny,Iceman,McDee2,Lantz,JSA
Why are you so against a cap jamie? Surely it doesn't impact you directly....?
I just philosophically can't agree with a system which hinders someones ability to earn money because of a ceiling. A salary cap works great for the stars, they get their money with or without it, the guys who suffer are the average players who get what's leftover after the stars have been paid. The owners set up the system so that they can't lose money, thus have no financial incentive to put a quality product on the field. As a fan I don't like it ,because the result is a mediocre product. Just my opinion.
Putting together a set of 61 Fleer Basketball PSA 7 or better.
Trade references: T,Raf12,Coach Vinny,Iceman,McDee2,Lantz,JSA
<< <i>Big market blinders? I'm a Brewers fan and went to the game last night and watched them beat the Yanks. >>
How was attendance last night? I love Miller Park. I'm a die hard Cubs fan, but i love to drive up to see the Brewers play. I see the Brewers got smart this year and decided to play the Cubs during the week so rude Cub fans did not invade Milwaukee on the weekends. I was there last year for the Labor Day game against the Cubs and it seems like 80% of the fans there were Cubs fans.
Remember these Chuck Norris Facts
1. When Chuck Norris does a pushup, he isn't lifting himself up, he's pushing the Earth down
2. According to Einstein's theory of relativity, Chuck Norris can actually roundhouse kick you yesterday
3. There are no such things as lesbians, just women who have not yet met Chuck Norris
Putting together a set of 61 Fleer Basketball PSA 7 or better.
Trade references: T,Raf12,Coach Vinny,Iceman,McDee2,Lantz,JSA
<< <i>
I just philosophically can't agree with a system which hinders someones ability to earn money because of a ceiling. A salary cap works great for the stars, they get their money with or without it, the guys who suffer are the average players who get what's leftover after the stars have been paid. The owners set up the system so that they can't lose money, thus have no financial incentive to put a quality product on the field. As a fan I don't like it ,because the result is a mediocre product. Just my opinion. >>
It almost sounds like you are an agent.
The average salary in MLB is over $ 2 million. And what' wrong with a MLB player making, say, *just* $500,000 a year to play a game they supposedly love?
MLB is going to collapse on itself if they don't figure out a way to implement a cap. You see teams like KC for example, that can't/won't spend money on payroll because they have no attendance, and would be a losing proposition.
It's a system of haves and have nots. Those teams flush with revenue can afford to spend gobs of money, which covers up any mistakes they might have made.
The player's union and agents have far too much power in MLB - and the commissioner is a stooge for (among other things) not getting a cap done.
There's a reason the NFL has overtaken MLB as America's sport - because unlike in baseball, fans of every team in the NFL feel they are on an even playing field.
Haves and have nots?-I believe the team that won the last World Series hadn't won one in like 84 years!!-Are they a have or a have not?
Look at the standings today and you can make a legit case for over 1/2 the teams having a shot at post season. That seems reasonable to me.
After 7 games next NFL season look at the standings and if your honest, about the same number of teams will be in it and more teams make the playoffs in the watered down NFL system.
Again everyone is entitled to their own opinion, I just don't believe introducing a salary cap into baseball will cure anything but quiet the people who have been shouting about it. The play on the field and the good and bad management of teams will still determine which teams win or lose. Which is what has always happened in baseball if people just step back and examine the history and data.
Putting together a set of 61 Fleer Basketball PSA 7 or better.
Trade references: T,Raf12,Coach Vinny,Iceman,McDee2,Lantz,JSA
<< <i>
Haves and have nots?-I believe the team that won the last World Series hadn't won one in like 84 years!!-Are they a have or a have not?
>>
Uhm are you joking? They had a payroll of over $130 million! I would say a definite HAVE, as well as the fact they'd been in the playoffs for awhile.
<< <i>
Look at the standings today and you can make a legit case for over 1/2 the teams having a shot at post season. That seems reasonable to me. After 7 games next NFL season look at the standings and if your honest, about the same number of teams will be in it and more teams make the playoffs in the watered down NFL system.
>>
Hmm 7 games into the NFL season is nearly HALFWAY through. Flawed analogy. Talk to me at the all star break and see how many teams have a chance.
How about this? How about the salary cap making it affordable again for families to go to a game? How about if teams can again be profitable due to the revenue sharing, then the owners don't have to gouge people going to the game?
Attendance in baseball has actually been going up the past three years.
My flawed logic you mentioned
60/162 games--37% of season
7/16 games played--43% of season
Because of the difference in games played I attempted to get as close as possible to apples to apples-The All Star break is after the midpoint of the season.
Putting together a set of 61 Fleer Basketball PSA 7 or better.
Trade references: T,Raf12,Coach Vinny,Iceman,McDee2,Lantz,JSA
<< <i>How does a salary cap make it affordable to go to a game? The most expensive tickets in pro team sports are in basketball and football (salary cap leagues) The least expensive are baseball-even less than hockey-except of course for this last season.
Attendance in baseball has actually been going up the past three years.
My flawed logic you mentioned
60/162 games--37% of season
7/16 games played--43% of season
Because of the difference in games played I attempted to get as close as possible to apples to apples-The All Star break is after the midpoint of the season. >>
The reason football tickets are so high is teams have only 8 games at home...baseball has by far the most at 81.
If you had a cap in baseball, the gross amount of money being spent on salary is going to go down...it would be easy to pass that savings on to the fans.
Hi Ax - If I may complement that thought above. The Royals actually have a great attendance, when it is figured on a "per capita" basis. Can't really penalize an area for being small in population terms. The attendance is so good that contraction has never been mentioned by MLB for the KC area. Remember, for ever 1 KansasCitian, there are 12 New Yorkers (according to recent census reports)....round it to 10....so when we have 20,000 attendance, it's the same as 200,000 in NY.
We won't spend alot, due to the current economic policies in baseball....why should David and Dan Glass (owners) spend 60-70 million, and lose money, when in reality, it might buy 10-15 more wins in a year, at least right now....that could change once our farm system is in place again......it's taken 15 years to rebuild it.
<< <i>You see teams like KC for example, that can't/won't spend money on payroll because they have no attendance, and would be a losing proposition.
Hi Ax - If I may complement that thought above. The Royals actually have a great attendance, when it is figured on a "per capita" basis. Can't really penalize an area for being small in population terms. The attendance is so good that contraction has never been mentioned by MLB for the KC area. Remember, for ever 1 KansasCitian, there are 12 New Yorkers (according to recent census reports)....round it to 10....so when we have 20,000 attendance, it's the same as 200,000 in NY.
We won't spend alot, due to the current economic policies in baseball....why should David and Dan Glass (owners) spend 60-70 million, and lose money, when in reality, it might buy 10-15 more wins in a year, at least right now....that could change once our farm system is in place again......it's taken 15 years to rebuild it. >>
I wasn't intending to make any swipes at anyone. I know that population and spending are going to affect attendance.
And I agree...why should the smaller market teams go out and try to bust the bank to win those few extra games? It's like people criticizing Tampa Bay for only spending $40 million...when they are in a division with boston and NY? So let's say they spend $80 million...how many wins are they going to have? 80? Where's the financial responsibility in that?
A salary cap would let these teams spend more and have a better chance at winning. Will it fix everything? No, but it would indeed allow more teams to be much more competitive.
I agree, plus, by allowing more teams to be more competitive, for a longer period of time in a season, it would allow for more interest, fans, and revenue for MLB....just as it has in the NFL.
...yes the 2 leagues are different, but the business models are similar, in that each league NEEDS all the other teams IN the league, in order for the respective league (NFL or MLB) to survive and thrive.....the NFL has been better at this over the past 10 years.
This is my last response on this subject, I'm sure you and everyone else has tired of it. I know I have.
Your assertion that a cap would lower ticket prices is not entirely accurate. A salary cap not only puts a ceiling on spending, but it also puts a minimum on it. Let's say 50 million is the "cap' number, that would mean roughly 15-20% of the teams would have to raise their payroll, most of these are the teams you hope to "help' with a cap. By raising their payroll they would, by your logic, have to raise the ticket prices. Guess that don't work. The number of games played doesn't matter, because football is not dependent on stadium revenues to support the team. In fact games could be played in empty stadiums and the teams would make money. So why are the ticket prices higher? Because they get what they can for them, it's called capitalism.
Thanks for your comments and not taking personal shots. I don't disagree with you that baseball has work to do on it's image and how it markets the game. I'm not even against a salary cap if that is what the majority of fans want. I just don't feel a cap will have the effect that people think it will and the amount of "even playing field" in all the sports is roughly the same. When (if) the Twins make the postseason this year and the Yankees don't(sorry Gemmy), will fans see the disadvantage of overpaying aging players that you can't unload, and the longterm effect it can take on a teams ability to be competitive? Probably not.
Fans control the outcome with their feet, their wallets and their viewing habits. The numbers currently allow baseball to continue on it's current path.
Putting together a set of 61 Fleer Basketball PSA 7 or better.
Trade references: T,Raf12,Coach Vinny,Iceman,McDee2,Lantz,JSA
Putting together a set of 61 Fleer Basketball PSA 7 or better.
Trade references: T,Raf12,Coach Vinny,Iceman,McDee2,Lantz,JSA
SD