 |
| Courtesy of sportsforecasters.com |
The O’Jays had this to say about money: “Some people got to have it, some people really need it. Listen to me y'all, do things, do things, do bad things with it. You wanna do things, do things, do things, good things with it.”
Major League Baseball owners have a lot of money and don’t need it. Eight out of ten MLB team owners probably do bad things with their money. Bad, in baseball terms, means sitting on a pile of dough and not spending it on your baseball team.
Teams and team owners are worth more than their payroll suggests. Many fans scoff at how much teams “overpay” athletes. In reality, proportional to what team owners are worth, they probably could be spending even more!
In 2009, the Steinbrenner family, owner of the New York Yankees, was worth approximately $1.3 billion, according to www.e-sports.com. They are worth more than two-thirds of the other team owners in the league. However, there are nine baseball team owners worth more than the Steinbrenner family. According to ESPN, only four of the nine are in the top half of team payroll rankings.
E-Sports recently reported that as of 2009, the Seattle Mariners’ owner, Nintendo Corporation, was worth $257 billion. Their team payroll was $98 million, which ranks 14th in the majors. The Yankees spent 20.67 percent of the Steinbrenner family’s net worth on 25 major league baseball players. If a team like the Mariners spent 20.67 percent of their owners’ net worth, their player payroll would have been at $53 billion. Do you think they could compete with the Yankees at that affordable price?
Looking at this from a different perspective, ESPN also reports that the Pittsburgh Pirates in 2007-2008 made a profit of $29.4 million after taxes, while competing with the 27th highest payroll in the major leagues (there’s only 30 teams) The New York Yankees in 2005 lost $50 million as a company but still managed to have the highest payroll in baseball.
Now, if you’re an owner who wants to make a dollar or two, you could certainly follow the blueprint the Pirates set out. However, the owners who pocket their money without re-investing in their team fail to realize that fans who pay as much as $75 for a distant bleacher seat are essentially paying the owners pocket change. Whatever happened to taking an entire family to a game for $50-75? Fans of all professional sports expect their team to compete at the highest level. If the money is not distributed in way that encourages competition, what’s the sense of watching that team?
 |
| Courtesy of www.preserveramapo.org |
Ironically, it is the same owners with the “collect and run” mentality who who continuously lobby for a salary cap in Major League Baseball. Their dream is not winning. Their dream is that by diminishing high-spending teams such as the New York Yankees and Los Angeles Angels, high profile stars and free agents would be less inclined to cash in on the biggest paychecks. Therefore, any team could, in theory, put as much money into their team as they would get out.
Different team owners have varying personal agendas. Some of those agendas do not include Major League Baseball. Consequently, there is no purpose in applying a salary cap to aid teams that don’t necessarily need the help. Rather, they prefer to not compete in money wars. Think of the competitive incentives involved in capitalism versus socialism, and you get the general idea.
It’s always a good idea for a sports journalist to talk to fans, so I did. When asked if teams such as the Pirates or Mariners were competing on a level playing field, Bruce M. Whittier assistant principal Shawn Vincent said:
“I think the Pirates and the Royals have the potential to compete. I look to the Minnesota Twins and the Tampa Bay Rays as examples of teams that have hired the right baseball people, made good choices and built up strong systems. It is possible to be highly successful on a short budget.” The Rays have made the playoffs in three of the past four seasons despite a small budget.
Corey McFadden, a PRHS guidance counselor, disagrees with Vincent. He said:
“I don’t think they can compete, obviously not. Pittsburgh hasn’t made playoffs since ’92. Pittsburgh and Seattle are perfect examples of places with a strong fan base but they just don’t take the extra step and follow a model like Tampa Bay. Tampa Bay has a great team and can’t even get 8,000 seats filled.”
Do teams get a bang for the bucks that they pay their players? Let’s consider the numbers.
Journalist Mike DiGiovanna of the Los Angeles Times noted that the Cincinnati Reds signed Ryan Madson to a one-year, $8.25 million contract. Meanwhile, the Philadelphia Phillies signed Jonathan Papelbon to a four-year $50 million dollar contract.
 |
| Courtesy of www.sportsagentblog.com |
Papelbon, “Has six years of closing experience, but his 2011 season (4-1, 2.94 ERA, 31 saves, 0.933 WHIP, 87 strikeouts, 10 walks, three homers in 641/3 innings) was only slightly better than Madson's. And Papelbon, 31, is one year removed from a career-worst 5-7 record, 3.90 ERA and 1.269 WHIP” DiGiovanna writes.
Meanwhile, in Madson’s “First season as a closer, the 31-year-old had a 4-2 record with a 2.37 ERA and 32 saves in 602/3 innings. He struck out 62, walked 16, gave up two homers and had a 1.154 WHIP,” according to DiGiovanna.
What makes Madson’s contract intriguing is that he is signed to a one-year deal. Historically, closers have a small window during which they are successful. Closers are usually fighting for their jobs from year to year, with good reason. Baseball history is full of pitching flameouts: Keith Foulke, Eddie Guardado, Joe Boeowski, Jason Isringhausen, and Eric Gagne in recent years, and several hundred others in the last 50 years.
At a more athletic position, shortstop, the Phillies chose to spend $18 million over three years for Jimmy Rollins, who is clearly on the downside of a great career. Conversely, the Marlins paid $106 million spread out over six years for Jose Reyes, who plays a lot like the young Jimmy Rollins once played. But Reyes has had calf, ankle and ribcage injuries in the past three years -- problems that Jimmy Rollins didn’t face until he was into his thirties. Who is investing their money wisely, the Phillies or the Marlins?
Vincent had this to say about the Reyes contract:
“The team must believe this is a guy that their fans will identify with and support. Maybe they feel the demographic they will entertain can connect with Reyes. I believe it is about more than baseball; I think it is about trying to put a face on their franchise. (Pitching ace) Josh Johnson is great, but he may not match the demographic they anticipate serving.”
McFadden had a different take. “Contracts have gotten so out of hand. When the Red Sox gave contracts to Julio Lugo and J.D. Drew, I just didn’t care anymore,” he said. “I don’t care what they do with their money. In 2000, I could show up on street of Fenway Park and sit for $23 or stand for $12. I haven’t been to a Sox game for 3 years because it’s hard to get a seat less for than $58. No one is worth $106 million, no matter what you do. Doctors or teachers are worth more money.”
Looking at how a team’s spending translates into wins in a cost-per-win ratio, the Yankees spent a little over $2 million per win, ending up with 99 wins. The Pirates spent a paltry $625,653 per win, ending the season with 72 wins. Clearly, the more money a team spends on the payroll, the more likely it is for the team to rack up wins. One could argue that not every team has a big city for fan support. However, each team is placed in a prime American city with large amounts of people residing in the greater metro area. There simply is no reason a team cannot spend to win.
The next time your favorite team has a sub-.500 season, and you still care, look at the owners making executive decisions. Are they pinching pennies? As a famous football guy, Bill Parcells, would say, “The players are what they are.” And so are the owners.
No comments:
Post a Comment