11/21/24
October 14, 2010
Yankees, Rangers Payroll Gap Largest in Playoff History: The disparity in payrolls between the New York Yankees and Texas Rangers is $152 million, the largest for playoff opponents in Major League history. You could add the entire New York Mets team to the Rangers and they'd still trail the Yankees. "The Rangers could triple every current player's salary, sign Mark Teixeira away from the Yankees, and still have a lower payroll," observes Gossip Sports.
You could add the entire New York Mets team to the Rangers and they'd still trail the Yankees.
Less in payroll, more in team quality.
posted by grum@work at 02:11 PM on October 14, 2010
Since won-loss records are determined by team payroll, why is it the Chicago Cubs are so shitty?
Talent wins games, not paychecks. Throwing money at crap players (Cubs) won't equate to wins, playoff appearances, or championships. Many of the most talented, productive players during any given year are paid relatively small paychecks. Throwing tons of cash at overrated players doesn't equal success either.
In other words, this topic is played out. It's not a stunning, new concept. All that needs to be said is, Good for the Rangers! Being in a position to pick up Cliff Lee mid-season may have been the piece of the puzzle that sends them to a World Series. Then we can respond to the post about the salary gap between them and the Phillies.
posted by dyams at 03:46 PM on October 14, 2010
The salary difference contributes to sustained success, not one year success. The Yankees are going to be successful in five years. No one knows where the Rangers will be (though I have a guess).
Still, this was pretty surprising:
Cliff Lee, C.J. Wilson, Colby Lewis and Tommy Hunter (all of Texas' playoff starting rotation) combined make less than Mariano Rivera the Yankees' closer.
posted by bperk at 04:33 PM on October 14, 2010
Five of the 10 highest paid Rangers were mid or late season acquisitions from other teams: Lee, Molina, Francoeur, Guzman, and Cantu. I think in several of those trades (maybe all) the Rangers actually got cash back in the trades to help pay part of those salaries. So, gap is really greater.
A lot of Rangers' players are young and still (or have been) arbitration eligible, which also keeps some of the pay down.
And if you look at playoff rosters, you would have to subtract Harden, Guzman and Feldman salaries and add a couple of minimum salaries.
Cliff Lee, C.J. Wilson, Colby Lewis and Tommy Hunter (all of Texas' playoff starting rotation) combined make less than Mariano Rivera the Yankees' closer.
The Rangers' entire playoff pitching roster makes less than Sabathia. Of course, if Rangers somehow manage to sign Lee after this year, that will change.
posted by graymatters at 06:08 PM on October 14, 2010
The Yankees are going to be successful in five years
Consider that the Yanks are on the hook for big dollars to AJ Burnett, A Rod, and a number of other aging players on the downhill side of their careers.
That $150 Million margin will need to increase for the Yanks to remain competitive.
posted by cixelsyd at 09:32 PM on October 14, 2010
Talent wins games, not paychecks.
And bigger paychecks can buy more talent.
Since won-loss records are determined by team payroll, why is it the Chicago Cubs are so shitty?
Because they've spent the money foolishly. If I had a million dollars to invest and you had 100,000 and I invested foolishly and you invested wisely you could make more money than I do. But if we invest equally well I will easily make more money than you do. Of course, the most talented team in the world can go on a cold streak, but they still have the best chance to be successful.
In other words, this topic is played out. It's not a stunning, new concept.
Old topic yes. But it's old because its been a problem for a long time. And looking at this matchup shows how huge the discrepancy is. What is old is pointing to a team that's run badly as proof that money doesn't matter. It only proves that money spent foolishly doesn't equal success, nothing more.
The fact is that more money spent doesn't guarantee success, but it certainly helps.
What Yankee fans (and Red Sox) fans should do is defend their payrolls by saying that their teams are doing nothing against the rules, that their owners are trying to win and there's no need to apologize for having more resources.
But to ignore that winning for these teams doesn't involve huge payroll advantages is to be in serious denial. And if the Rangers manage to beat the Yankees, in no way will it change that fact.
posted by justgary at 10:05 PM on October 14, 2010
gary, well said.
Have a look at what the business end of baseball is doing to the game (2009 - 2010 payroll delta mid page).
Teams that are successful developing talent must either shell out huge dollars to retain their young stars or hope to continue developing players for the 6 or 7 big spenders.
How long do you think Cincinnati can afford Joey Votto? Do you think Cincy fans will be happy to see him wearing pinstripes? Can Minnesota keep increasing their payroll 40% to keep the talent they've developed?
From someone who assumes that sports franchises are in business to attempt to win a championship (ok, maybe I am out of touch) , some form of equality needs to be implemented in baseball real soon.
posted by cixelsyd at 11:21 PM on October 14, 2010
How long do you think Cincinnati can afford Joey Votto?
As long as Minnesota could afford Joe Mauer?
Remember when Minnesota was a "small-market team" and were in such dire straights that they were option #2 during the contraction talks (behind Montreal)?
posted by grum@work at 11:31 PM on October 14, 2010
How long do you think Cincinnati can afford Joey Votto? Do you think Cincy fans will be happy to see him wearing pinstripes?
They can afford him until he becomes a free agent. Then he'll sign with the team that offers him the most money. Er, yeah, then he'll be wearing pinstripes.
As long as Minnesota could afford Joe Mauer?
Who knows how long they can afford that contract. If he's a Twin 8 years from now and renegotiating an extension with them I'd be very surprised. Hunch is he's playing for the Yankees or suffers a career ending injury that leaves the Twins f-d after spending like a big market team.
When the Twins or the Reds or basically the majority of MLB pay that kind of money, they better be right. They can't just move on and spend it again.
posted by tselson at 12:11 AM on October 15, 2010
Remember when Minnesota was a "small-market team" and were in such dire straights that they were option #2 during the contraction talks (behind Montreal)?
It didn't help that our buddy Selig was working hard to get the Twins eliminated in order to help his Brewers. Of course, now he says the whole thing was just a myth.
I do hope the new stadium will generate enough additional revenue that the Twins can hold on to Mauer, and have enough left to field a competitive team. With Mauer, Nathan, Morneau and Cuddyer they have almost $59mil tied up next year.
posted by dviking at 01:16 AM on October 15, 2010
What Yankee fans (and Red Sox) fans should do is defend their payrolls by saying that their teams are doing nothing against the rules, that their owners are trying to win and there's no need to apologize for having more resources.
That should be obvious to everyone who follows the sport to any extent. But it always turns into whining from people saying, The Yankees will sign him; he will be wearing pinstripes, etc. Baseball AND baseball players want it this way, so deal with it. My point about the Cubs is just what you said: Having money and throwing it around doesn't guarantee even one year of success. And until the teams that spend the most are the only teams in the postseason, it won't be a big issue.
posted by dyams at 06:27 AM on October 15, 2010
And until the teams that spend the most are the only teams in the postseason, it won't be a big issue.
Major League Baseball creates an environment for the high-paying teams to return year after year. Obviously there are exceptions, but it's not healthy for the sport as a whole when you have fans walking away from the game because of the inequality.
It's a bit of a vicious cycle because the large media markets like New York start with an automatic advantage. The post-season revenue then adds to this war chest, but it's hard to rely on getting to the post-season with any regularity unless you spend in the first place.
The numbers game is deceptive IMO because large payrolls don't always translate to making the playoffs, however once all of the playoff teams are decided, the payroll numbers are very relevant. The Yankees have the top payroll and the Phillies are in the top 5. Any surprise that they are now the favorites?
posted by jeremias at 08:45 AM on October 15, 2010
And again I say, this is all very obvious, but major league baseball and baseball players DON'T CARE OR WANT IT TO CHANGE! I just don't see the sense in rehashing this every time the postseason rolls around, a world series ends, or a player changes teams. All major league baseball and it's players care about is making money and (players) being able to take advantage of the system and sign for as much money as can be offered. Baseball and the players unions created the problem, and it's not going to change. The poor schmuck fans can cry all they want, but it won't make a bit of difference.
I enjoy the game of baseball and always have, but the game has changed (in many ways) for the worse in recent decades. The past two years I have gone to a total of zero major league games due to the fact (just like all of the major pro sports) it's a total rip-off, money-wise. Sports claim to care about the fans, but that's nothing more than ridiculous words that make no sense. Jack up prices for everything and watch while certain teams continue to flounder year in, year out, and the fans in those cities dry up little by little.
posted by dyams at 09:28 AM on October 15, 2010
And until the teams that spend the most are the only teams in the postseason, it won't be a big issue.
I don't know why you'd set the bar there, but it's like saying the BCS is OK because Boise State crashed it. An eight-team playoff system leaves enough room for a few smaller-budget interlopers, and there may be years when all the big teams crap out. But there's still a handful of teams that start each season on second base.
The poor schmuck fans can cry all they want, but it won't make a bit of difference.
It will if fans tire of the sport. Times change. Kids today aren't falling in love with baseball like we did and our parents did. I sat behind a granddad, parents and three young kids in Rays gear at game 5 against the Rangers. The granddad was standing up, hollering and dancing like a little kid. One grandkid was rooting for the Rangers in Rays gear when he wasn't bored out of his skull. His brother spent the last three innings playing a driving game on his PSP.
If you were a kid in Kansas City, Tampa or Oakland, would you embrace a sport in which your favorite players were perpetually being gobbled up by New York, Boston or another big-market team?
posted by rcade at 09:42 AM on October 15, 2010
If you were a kid in Kansas City, Tampa or Oakland, would you embrace a sport in which your favorite players were perpetually being gobbled up by New York, Boston or another big-market team?
Players currently on Yankees or Red Sox roster that were signed as free agents, who's prior team was Kansas City, Tampa Bay, or Oakland:
Yankees: 0
Red Sox: 0
Just saying...
posted by grum@work at 11:38 AM on October 15, 2010
Perhaps that proves rcade's point: if the smaller teams are allowed to become as inept as Kansas City, the system suffers.
I still think hollering about revenue sharing and salary caps is a waste of time: city size = revenue size (as a general rule) and money talks. There's no keeping its effects out of sport. And perfect parity would be boring as hell. It'd be like rooting for random number generators. No dynasties, no villains, no underdogs overcoming impossible odds. You can't get a historic World Series every year, you watch for the chance you might see one.
posted by yerfatma at 01:22 PM on October 15, 2010
The thing I see being overlooked in this (and yes, I agree, played out) discussion is that there are more than 50 really good baseball players so teams other than the Yankees and (my new Liverpool overlord's) Red Sox can sign some of them. Halladay didn't sign for them, Lee didn't get traded to them. Neither of them wins the World Series every year.
posted by billsaysthis at 01:55 PM on October 15, 2010
Just saying...
Come on down Carl Crawford!
No dynasties, no villains, no underdogs overcoming impossible odds. You can't get a historic World Series every year, you watch for the chance you might see one.
I don't really buy that a salary cap (or something similar, I'm not smart enough to know if anything would work) would keep you from having dynasties, villains, or underdogs.
Neither of them wins the World Series every year.
And neither ever will, no matter how much either spends. That's the nature of baseball, nothing more.
posted by justgary at 02:21 PM on October 15, 2010
It's going to be sad to lose Crawford. He's pretty much the face of the franchise.
The NFL has salary caps and there are dynasties (Pats), villains (Cowboys) and underdogs (everyone except the Pats).
posted by bperk at 02:33 PM on October 15, 2010
Come on down Carl Crawford!
It hasn't happened yet.
Carlos Beltran, Vlad Guerrero, and Joe Mauer were all predicted to sign with the Yankees when they were supposed to be free agents.
posted by grum@work at 06:38 PM on October 15, 2010
Yes, I realize that grum. The Yankees certainly can't go after everyone. Point conceded. They generally get who they want, however.
Carl Crawford Says Leaving Rays Is 'High Possibility': "When it comes down to it, you just want to go somewhere where you're comfortable," Crawford said. "And obviously the financial part, you just want to be paid for what you do, I guess."
So he's going 'somewhere' to get paid. A bigger market maybe?
posted by justgary at 07:17 PM on October 15, 2010
So he's going 'somewhere' to get paid. A bigger market maybe?
It's not for everyone, and some are wise enough to know it. Ask Randy Johnson how he liked it in New York.
posted by lil_brown_bat at 07:19 AM on October 16, 2010
Make me want the Rangers to win even more.