GatewayRedbirds.com

A Message Board Dedicated to Discussing St. Louis Cardinals Baseball!
It is currently January 20 19, 7:01 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 50 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: MLB Payroll Spending
PostPosted: December 18 18, 5:33 pm 
Offline
'Burb Boy
User avatar

Joined: July 9 06, 11:33 am
Posts: 19305
Location: Out of the Loop


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: MLB Payroll Spending
PostPosted: December 19 18, 7:49 am 
Offline
Perennial All-Star
User avatar

Joined: October 8 14, 11:41 am
Posts: 3944
If I'm another owner I'm doing whatever I can to silence these ass holes.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: MLB Payroll Spending
PostPosted: December 21 18, 2:24 pm 
Offline
Official GRB Sponsor of Larry Bigbie

Joined: April 17 06, 9:16 pm
Posts: 26764
Location: No. 16 on the Cards Top 15 Prospect List
This is a good enough place to drop this info.

With the signing of Andrew Miller, the Cardinals are certainly coming closer to a complete roster and payroll. There might be a few other additions, though none are likely to be very significant from a payroll perspective. So, where are we? Cot's hasn't updated their spreadsheets yet with Miller's salary. But, we know the cost and that's good enough.

Pre-Miller - $151M in payroll commitments, which includes estimates for Ozuna, Wacha, and Leone.
Post-Miller - $162M in payroll commitements.

Main Cardinals page: https://legacy.baseballprospectus.com/c ... cardinals/
Cardinals 2019+ Payroll Spreadsheet: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... j4/pubhtml

That's the highest opening day payroll for the Cardinals in history. It represents about a $3M increase over last year. (I think that '18 payroll is a bit more than they intended. They added Holland on the last day to a pretty pricey one year, eat-it kind of deal. To say they showed hesitancy to add that kind of additional payroll to a reliever is an understatement.)

Fun facts: Since Opening Day 2015, the Cardinals have added $40M worth of payroll. It took the Cardinals from 2003-2015 to gain $40M in payroll. I can't find another stretch of Cardinals payroll since 2000 when they added that much payroll (total or by % increase) in such a short period of time.
* In 2000, it took 5 seasons to add 1.33% payroll. From $63M to $92M in 2005. It should be noted that we didn't eclipse $92M for another 3 seasons.
* From 2005, it took us 10 seasons to add 1.33% to payroll. $92M to $122M in 2015.
* Technically, we added just over 1.33% from '14-17, but '14 was a season when we were able to cut payroll substantially from '13 and then it rose to just above '13 levels again in '15. It's more an outlier than part of the trend.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: MLB Payroll Spending
PostPosted: December 22 18, 3:52 pm 
Offline
All-Star
User avatar

Joined: November 14 14, 5:23 am
Posts: 2231
Location: Cherokee
cardsfantx wrote:
I'd just get rid of arbitration all together...after your first 3 seasons, you're a FA.

Would get all these young guys a shot at FA in their prime, and the teams would have a decision to make...try and lock them up to a team friendly deal after only a year or 2 (like we've done with Wong, Craig, DeJong, etc), or let them test FA.

Agreed, and I'd get rid of the draft too.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: MLB Payroll Spending
PostPosted: December 30 18, 9:45 am 
Offline
There's someone in my head but it's not me
User avatar

Joined: April 18 06, 5:08 pm
Posts: 42390
Location: Somewhere back in my long ago


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: MLB Payroll Spending
PostPosted: December 30 18, 9:52 am 
Offline
-go birds
User avatar

Joined: February 5 10, 9:54 am
Posts: 28416
plenty of room for harper


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: MLB Payroll Spending
PostPosted: December 30 18, 5:27 pm 
Offline
Everyday Player

Joined: September 2 17, 10:18 am
Posts: 159
go birds wrote:
plenty of room for harper


Yep, the Cardinals could sign Harper and still be comfortably under the luxury tax. After the 2019 season more contracts will fall off the books, and the payroll could fall back down a bit (even with a potential Goldschmidt extension). The front office keeps talking about payroll muscle, so they should have plenty of ability to spend.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: MLB Payroll Spending
PostPosted: December 30 18, 7:09 pm 
Online
The Last Word

Joined: June 21 06, 8:45 am
Posts: 19148
I don't see why the luxury tax matters. Almost all teams are under the luxury tax. That doesn't mean that they can or will spend to that level. People tend to mis-represent the purpose of the luxury tax.

If the Cards believe it is financially prudent to spend on Harper, then they'll do it.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: MLB Payroll Spending
PostPosted: December 31 18, 10:18 am 
Offline
Replies Authoritatively
User avatar

Joined: April 7 13, 9:45 am
Posts: 5984
Location: Chicago, IL
Fat Strat wrote:
If the union wanted to close this gap between payroll and income, they would fight to get more money for younger players rather than fighting to secure it for long time veterans. I've long thought that a club benefited too much from the pre-arb and early arb years. In years 1-4 or so, a great player at the height of his performance will make less total than a typical 30 year old backup infielder will make in one season. In pre-arb years, a full-time starter with multiple All Star appearances will be paid just as much as the 25th man or a Rule 5 guy.

This would sound backward to the already backward players union, but if they wanted to guarantee money for veteran players, then they need to fight to increase salaries for the young players. Then, the gap between paying Lance Lynn (or whoever) and just rolling with Jon Gant (or whoever) won't seem so attractive.


Yes, this X 1000000.

The question is if the MLBPA--which is the players themselves--can suck that up. If you're an association whose leadership is a bunch of guys pushing or over 30, and the membership is largely guys already in their arb years or later, then how do you get them to vote for more money for kids who are in the minors now while voting for less money for themselves? How do you get them to vote on the health of the game in the future over their own contract/salary needs in the very short term?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: MLB Payroll Spending
PostPosted: December 31 18, 10:40 am 
Offline
Replies Authoritatively
User avatar

Joined: April 7 13, 9:45 am
Posts: 5984
Location: Chicago, IL
Hoot45 wrote:
Popeye_Card wrote:
Fat Strat wrote:
If the union wanted to close this gap between payroll and income, they would fight to get more money for younger players rather than fighting to secure it for long time veterans. I've long thought that a club benefited too much from the pre-arb and early arb years. In years 1-4 or so, a great player at the height of his performance will make less total than a typical 30 year old backup infielder will make in one season. In pre-arb years, a full-time starter with multiple All Star appearances will be paid just as much as the 25th man or a Rule 5 guy.

This would sound backward to the already backward players union, but if they wanted to guarantee money for veteran players, then they need to fight to increase salaries for the young players. Then, the gap between paying Lance Lynn (or whoever) and just rolling with Jon Gant (or whoever) won't seem so attractive.


Agree 100%. MLB is obviously different in regards to how long it takes to develop a player, but they lag far behind the other major sports in regards to veteran:newbie pay ratio.

I agree 100% as well. I still staunchly defend the argument that a decline in spending is less a consequence of collusion and more a result of tanking and stacking pre-arbitration all stars.


I think it's a question of something else. How many GMs now are ex-players and/or ex-managers? Guys like Dallas Green and Joe Torre don't run front offices any more. How many GMs are Ivy League Business School guys? Those guys rule the front offices now. They're not sentimental about a player who Plays The Game The Right Way and hustles and has given us service and can mentor the young guys. If they have the choice between:
A: 23 years old, still room to grow, will probably produce 2 WAR this year, but might produce 0 or 4, costs $500K
or
B: 33 years old, no room to grow, will probably produce 2 WAR this year, but might produce 0 or 4*, costs $12MM
then what are these business school dudes gonna do every single time?

The game is managed from a front office perspective in a completely different way. When we were young old red-assed Baseball Men ran front offices and those guys are out now.

*Now factor in the likelihood that a 23 year old breaks out and doubles his projection v the likelihood that a 32 year old with 8 years of MLB data to track does the same. It's more likely the 23 year old beats expectations.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 50 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 28 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group