Does anyone else think we just pocket the money we are saving?

[logan82]

I agree the Brewers are probably a team that will be building towards a 85 win total every year. Some years we will get guys having good years or make a big mid-season acquisition and be up around 90 wins and other years we will have injuries or big under performing guys and be around 80 wins. Even this year we would have been projected to be around 85 wins if we had signed CC. Cc over Looper is big, but we probably would have traded Cameron and not signed Looper or Hoffman.

 

Edit: I was going to say 85 wins seems a tad high, but it looks like Russ just used it as an example. It shouldn't be surprising if the Cardinals and Cubs are projected with more wins for 2010 than the Brewers. The Cardinals and Brewers were projected with equal wins or us with one win better than the Cardinals before the 2009 season. We are probably projected to be worse at SS, CF, and all our rotation spots right now than we were before the start of the 2009 season. Bush, Parra, and Gallardo were all worse than expected so I would think their 2010 projections to be worse than their 2009 projections. Escobar/Gomez 2010 will have a lower projection that Hardy/Cameron 2009. The only spots where I think we will get higher projections will be 1B, LF and possibly 3B. Who we pick up to fill our rotation will be the one place we can improve. Looper was expected to be at least average so we will need somebody better than average.

[wishicouldhit]

The cardinals will always be in the race as long as they have larussa as a manager, if they arent able to resign Holliday it may be a close race between them and the brewers. I think it is safe to say that the crew will have 85-90 next season if they are able to add a couple of pitchers. Hopefully with the acquisition of two good SP's (and they produce), I would assume there record to be close to 90 wins.

Does anyone know the date to the start of free agency???

[joepepsi]

The Brewers had probably the worst possible scenario from their rotation last year yet still won 80 games. They were 15th in runs allowed. They gave up 103 more runs than the Rockies, who were middle of the pack at 7th in RA. That's a 10 win difference right there, correct? If the Brewers' pitching staff moves back to the middle of the pack in RA in 2010, they have a good chance to win 90 games.

[Tbadder]

My intial reaction to this thread is--good idea. I just don't see that much help out there. What if they put the lionshare of the savings in player development and scouting--maybe a stronger foreign presence, etc. It's almost certain that we regress somewhat offensively, and I doubt we can progress that much pitching wise to overcome the difference and then tack on the additional 5 to 10 wins they'll need.

[wishicouldhit]

i would have to agree with joepesi

Considering we only have 2yrs left of prince, this just may be our "window". I dont think DM will hinder the future on signing pitchers to long term deals if they are not worth it (see: 2009 Lowe). But there are several average pitcher out there that can and depth and bring the rotation to mid pack, if not better.

 

I should also bring up the organizations habit of pocketing money, it just doesn't happen. Remember the 10 mil that went towards Gagne, Melvin knew he had the money so he spent it. Same will be the case this year, the payroll will be around 85 not matter what.

[rluzinski]

The Brewers probably don't have money to aquire 2 good starting pitchers. They can get 2 slightly below average ones or 1 good one. As I already showed, if they can aquire a 4.0 ERA starting pitcher and have no significant inuries, they could have a league average rotation. Assuming league average pitching/ defense (about 725 runs given up) and the same offensive output as last yeat (785 runs), we can throw that into the basic form of the pythagorean equation:

 

162 x [785^2 / (785^2 + 725^2] = 87 wins

 

You can have a very good offense and average defense/pitching and still not project to 90 wins.

[MessiahRp]

My issue is that if we pocket it, its not as if we're going to stash it away until next year and then use it. Next year's financial numbers will likely be related solely to next year, not what we saved this year and that's where pocketing it will probably be useless to the competitiveness of this team down the road. Especially if by not making attempts at free agency they appear as if they have given up and casual fans jump off the ticket buying bandwagon... then you will have cost yourself revenue to use for next year as well.

 

Rp

[Thurston Fluff]

The cardinals will always be in the race as long as they have larussa as a manager,

 

That didn't help them stay in the race in either 07 or 08. Even good managers need good players. A little luck never hurts either. They had some performances from players this year they cannot reasonably expect again and had to trade a lot of good young talent to get where they were. They don't have those two things in perpetuity.

[logan82]

The only thing I would give LaRussa credit for is recognizing the whether he would be able to win games with a team. Whether he is a good manager is a distant second to actually putting good players on the field.

[Thurston Fluff]

I reserve the right to be wrong on this but a back of the envolope estimate suggests that defense won't be a liability or a strength. Average to a bit above average, perhaps?

 

Weren't they pretty well above average last year? If they improve even a little on that then they may be well above average.

 

One thing that spending to get to 85 wins does is keep fans interested. That may actually go a long way to making more money for the team than it spends. Assuming the team's wins are spread roughly evenly throughout the seaosn 85 win teams are in the playoff race into September. That is all revenue that will not come in if the team pockets the money and is out of it in June.

[JohnBriggs12]

The Brewers probably don't have money to aquire 2 good starting pitchers. They can get 2 slightly below average ones or 1 good one. As I already showed, if they can aquire a 4.0 ERA starting pitcher and have no significant inuries, they could have a league average rotation. Assuming league average pitching/ defense (about 725 runs given up) and the same offensive output as last yeat (785 runs), we can throw that into the basic form of the pythagorean equation:

 

162 x [785^2 / (785^2 + 725^2] = 87 wins

 

You can have a very good offense and average defense/pitching and still not project to 90 wins.

I agree with your general premise but not completely.. The Brewers probably have $15 million to spend on starting pitching. That's not enough to get the top guy Lackey, and there's a dropoff to the next level of guys, but the next level (of which there are a healthy number) aren't below average. I'd say most in group the next group that includes Washburn, Marquis, Wolf, Myers, Pineiro, Davis, Garland, Penny, Bedard, Harden and Pavano, are average to slightly above average starting pitchers and most in that group had better than average years in 2009. Contrasted with what the Brewers 4 beyond Gallardo did, that is a significant difference. That group being as large as it is should result in their prices remaining reasonable especially with so many teams not able to take on salary. I think if the Brewers could land 2 (ideally one lefty and one righty), from that second group, the rotation should be significantly better. I'm concerned about the offense though slipping with not only the departure of Cameron for the light hitting Gomez but the loss of Lopez who got on in front of Braun and Fielder at better than a .400 clip. The key guy as I see it next season is Weeks. That's nothing new though. Weeks has been the key guy for a while because he's such a variable it's hard to know what to expect from him.

[Invader3K]

Somewhat related to the discussion of team finances:

 

 

Major League Baseball executive vice president Rob Manfred responded strongly to revenue sharing figures thrown out by Scott Boras at last week's general managers' meetings indicating that Boras's numbers "have no basis in reality" and that Boras is living in "fantasy land." Manfred reacted to the uber-agent's suggestion that there are Major League teams who receive up to $80 million from a baseball central fund before they even sell a single ticket.

[endaround]

Somewhat related to the discussion of team finances:

 

 

Major League Baseball executive vice president Rob Manfred responded strongly to revenue sharing figures thrown out by Scott Boras at last week's general managers' meetings indicating that Boras's numbers "have no basis in reality" and that Boras is living in "fantasy land." Manfred reacted to the uber-agent's suggestion that there are Major League teams who receive up to $80 million from a baseball central fund before they even sell a single ticket.

 

Such a reaction means Boras is more right than not. So it maybe $70m and not $80m, the point still holds.

[Thurston Fluff]

Such a reaction means Boras is more right than not. So it maybe $70m and not $80m, the point still holds.

 

I guess you're seeing something I'm not. I've seen Boras make some statements that were off base in the past. Like last year when he said the FA market wouldn't be hampered by the economy because baseball isn't effected by the economy like other businesses are. The market proved otherwise. In all Boras makes statements that help his clients. What helps his clients is to have fans demand teams pay huge sums of money to get free agents on their team. The best way to make fans demand that is to say they all get huge sums of money thrown their way without having to do anything.

[RobertR]

From what I can tell, Boras is in the ballpark. The national media contract alone is worth $34.5 M per team. Toss in merchandising, MLBAM, and XM radio and it adds up. Toss in any substantial revenue sharing for teams like the Pirates, Rays, and Marlins, and I'm sure that some teams, not all, are getting $80 million in shared funds, although the average is obviously lower for teams in better markets.

 

And, yeah, I believe the Pirates are kind of running a scam on their fans, although they at last seem to be pointed in the direction they should have been pointed in 10 years ago with a concentration on assembling young talent instead of paying just enough to have a 75 win team so that they could say, we're only 8 games out at the All Star Break, if we get hot we could get in it. And, of course, those 8 games turned to 16 to 20 games back by the end of the year.

 

In any case, I'm sure that there is substantial shared revenue and that even the Marlins could sustain a $50 million payroll if they chose. Even while running a farm system, etc.

 

Robert

[Roderick]

From what I can tell, Boras is in the ballpark. The national media contract alone is worth $34.5 M per team. Toss in merchandising, MLBAM, and XM radio and it adds up.

Has anyone ever seen any figures on how much my $14.95 per season to mlb.com for radio (video) produces for teams?

 

I think teams like the Brewers just need to hold out another ~ 15 years and all the media content will be considered "internet", of which Selig made sure was split equally over all franchises. Then teams will be almost on the same footing as the Yankees.

[nate82]

Has anyone ever seen any figures on how much my $14.95 per season to mlb.com for radio (video) produces for teams?

 

I think teams like the Brewers just need to hold out another ~ 15 years and all the media content will be considered "internet", of which Selig made sure was split equally over all franchises. Then teams will be almost on the same footing as the Yankees.

Ehhhh the Yankees also have their own internet service where fans can watch and listen to games online that live in New York who can't watch it on MLB's network. For the MLB network to truly be beneficial to the teams the blackout rules would have to go away.

[logan82]

For the MLB network to truly be beneficial to the teams the blackout rules would have to go away.

 

I for one would pony up the money is the blackout restrictions were removed. It is really easier to watch the Brewers games live out of market than in market.

[joepepsi]

For the MLB network to truly be beneficial to the teams the blackout rules would have to go away.

 

I for one would pony up the money is the blackout restrictions were removed. It is really easier to watch the Brewers games live out of market than in market.

The fallacy of baseball's blackout rules is the idea baseball is as good on TV as in person. It's not. I find football and basketball are actually better on TV than in person. But baseball is still best enjoyed in the stands, relaxing with a cool beverage and the tasty aroma of grilled, salted meats in the air. Blackouts don't persuade fans to go to the game. It tells them to find something else to do on a warm summer evening.

[endaround]

The blackouts for baseball aren't for tickets, its for local and national TV rights

[RobertR]

It's worth pointing out that baseball is a $6 billion a year industry. Obviously it's not spread around entirely equally, but the rough average is $200 million per team. Player payroll is well short of that.

 

Robert

[nate82]

It's worth pointing out that baseball is a $6 billion a year industry. Obviously it's not spread around entirely equally, but the rough average is $200 million per team. Player payroll is well short of that.

 

Robert

The NFL is even worse. Not sure on the NBA and NHL though but I'm willing to bet it is a lot worse than baseball's discrepancy.

[knowitall]

Yes - I think the Brewers pocket too much money - just blogged about it. $80 million is way too low for this year again.

[Invader3K]

Yes - I think the Brewers pocket too much money - just blogged about it. $80 million is way too low for this year again.

You make an interesting point with this line: What am I missing here? We were 9th in attendance this year, drawing over 3 million fans, yet we rank 17th in payrollof all teams. That gives us about the 3rd lowest fan attendance/payroll ration in the big leagues, making us slightly less cheap than only the Marlins and Padres. Where is all this money going???

[endaround]

Mark Attanasio gets a huge pass. He's made more money operating the Brewers than the Seligs likely ever did due to revenue sharing. The Brewers have been one of the most profitable teams since he took over.