Stearns year end comments

[markedman5]

Via.zoom today......check out Rosiaks Twitter feed

 

[JimH5]

Stearns' willingness and openness to talk about his mistakes is a good thing. I'm glad he's trying to find out why their offense was so much worse than their projection.

 

His claim that this year's payroll was among the two highest in club history simply isn't true. The MLBPA accepted massive cuts this year to accommodate the owners' true claim that revenues would be lower due to empty stadiums and a short season.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

Stearns' willingness and openness to talk about his mistakes is a good thing. I'm glad he's trying to find out why their offense was so much worse than their projection.

 

His claim that this year's payroll was among the two highest in club history simply isn't true. The MLBPA accepted massive cuts this year to accommodate the owners' true claim that revenues would be lower due to empty stadiums and a short season.

 

Pretty sure he was referring to the prospective payroll coming into the season.

[MrTPlush]

I’m really sick of them hyping up the payroll as some kind of crippling size and then comparing it to how big the payroll was nearly a decade ago the last time we were competitive.

[long ball]

FWIW, Cots appears to have the payroll for 2019 and 2020 as roughly the same and by far the highest in club history. (obviously what was actually paid in 2020 was different than the projected $144mm in player benefits)

 

https://legacy.baseballprospectus.com/compensation/cots/national-league-central/milwaukee-brewers/

 

I also think we are likely to see a pretty uninspiring offseason.

[JimH5]

He was. But actual payroll came in at a much lower number.

 

His comment seemed like one to brace fans to possibly limit expectations on team spending next year. We'll never know how much money they made or lost in 2020--and maybe we shouldn't--but it's a common refrain for owners and front offices to posture payroll commitments as though they are digging through the couch cushions to afford players without evidence on how strained their budgets really are.

 

This year, when they announced that they wouldn't lay off anyone in baseball operations, I gave high praise to the ownership group--and I'm not ripping them now. I'm just calling out a statement as being made in error.

[brewmann04]

Maybe try to stay away from the re threads

[JosephC]

FWIW, Cots appears to have the payroll for 2019 and 2020 as roughly the same and by far the highest in club history. (obviously what was actually paid in 2020 was different than the projected $144mm in player benefits)

 

https://legacy.baseballprospectus.com/compensation/cots/national-league-central/milwaukee-brewers/

 

I also think we are likely to see a pretty uninspiring offseason.

 

I can only assume that you are looking at the CB Tax numbers which is the wrong way to do it because that doesn't use the actual yearly salaries. For big contracts, the CB Tax averages out all years of the contract, so the Yankees could pay Garrett Cole 69 million dollars this year and then just 1 million next year to get under the "cap" and reset their tax...except the tax calculation does not allow that (in this example, the tax number on Cole would be 35 million for both seasons). Putting it in Brewer terms, Yelich made 12.5 million dollars this year but the CB tax is at 23.888 million, so there is an 11+ million dollar difference right there.

 

If you look at the actual opening day payroll, the Brewer's started 2019 with a 122.5 million dollar payroll and this year it would have been 102.5 million (actually would have been a couple million less because you could subtract 4 players and about 2 million if they had been playing with a 26 man roster instead of a 30 man roster).

 

That said, Cots shows the Brewers as running higher opening day payrolls in 2014 and 2015, but even so...I believe Stearns might be correct when he says this would have been the team's 2nd highest opening day payroll. The 102.5 million number is only about 1.7 million than the previous 2nd highest payroll which was back in 2015. However, benefit increases that occured from 2015 to 2020 could very easily have exceeded the approximate 1.7 million dollar difference which would indeed have made this the Brewers 2nd highest opening day payroll had there been normal circumstances.

 

But the opening day payroll was cut approximately 20 million from 2019 to 2020. In fairness, Attanasio has been pretty good about adding payroll during the season through trades. We'll never know how much he would have added if it would have been a normal season. Certainly not 20 million dollars worth, but certainly maybe enough to silence some of the critics regarding the opening day payroll cut (of which I was one).

[Eye Black]

I also think we are likely to see a pretty uninspiring offseason.

I get the feeling this offseason will be slightly more interesting than last (which is admittedly a low bar). I don’t think they’ll make many notable free agent acquisitions, but I think there will be a surprise trade or two.

[DHonks]

Let's not forget that the Brewers have the lowest (or among the lowest) media revenues in the league. They rely more on ticket sales than almost all other teams.

[nate82]

Let's not forget that the Brewers have the lowest (or among the lowest) media revenues in the league. They rely more on ticket sales than almost all other teams.

 

Brewers have the 2nd lowest TV revenue in the league at $28m for 2020 and only the Marlins have a smaller TV revenue at $20m. Both the Marlins and the Brewers TV deals have completed after this season.

 

I am not sure the Brewers will get much more than what they are already receiving. At best I think the Brewers could get what the Indians received and could get a boost of $12m more a season but I don't think that is going to happen. I think the Brewers may only get $7m more a season if I were Mark A. I would completely drop Fox Sports and see if I can get a deal with either Youtube, Amazon, Hulu or Apple. Completely drop cable and go with a streaming service this may alienate some now but I think future wise this will pay off more for the Brewers.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

Let's not forget that the Brewers have the lowest (or among the lowest) media revenues in the league. They rely more on ticket sales than almost all other teams.

 

Brewers have the 2nd lowest TV revenue in the league at $28m for 2020 and only the Marlins have a smaller TV revenue at $20m. Both the Marlins and the Brewers TV deals have completed after this season.

 

I am not sure the Brewers will get much more than what they are already receiving. At best I think the Brewers could get what the Indians received and could get a boost of $12m more a season but I don't think that is going to happen. I think the Brewers may only get $7m more a season if I were Mark A. I would completely drop Fox Sports and see if I can get a deal with either Youtube, Amazon, Hulu or Apple. Completely drop cable and go with a streaming service this may alienate some now but I think future wise this will pay off more for the Brewers.

 

At the rate those Sinclair-owned regional networks are being dropped by providers, they may not be anywhere by next spring. Sinclair has really dropped the ball on finding compromises with providers.

[Fear The Chorizo]

Honestly, teams trying to renegotiate an improved TV/media deal for game broadcast rights in this current climate couldn't ask for worse timing. Stinks for the Brewers.

 

This offseason is going to be very quiet across the league in terms of large free agent signings - wouldn't surprise me to see a pile of salary dump trades that actually include some good veteran players currently on teams that got hammered more financially than others, especially if Opening Day 2021 isn't looking like it will include full stadiums of fans.

[patrickgpe]

the one thing, that I haven't seen mentioned yet, is that I think ALL teams will be reducing payroll to make up for 2020 losses. I would be shocked if we saw an offseason like last year, and maybe more similar to the 2017 offseason. Also by declining Braun's team option, the team saved 16MM right there. Yes there will be increases in arbitration eligible players. The other thing I wonder if they do trade Hader, for cost cutting measures, and give the 9th to Williams.

[MrTPlush]

I think TV viewership is up this season...for obvious reasons. I would imagine TV viewership in general for any program is up quite a bit in this climate. I don't think they will find any negative effects because of COVID.

 

Brewers are going to get way more than $7mil a year increase in a new TV contract...their TV deal is very outdated. The Royals/Pirates are good comps at about $44mil a year. The Royals have a shorter term deal of 7 years which is similar to what we are just completing. Both of those teams started their deal this year so that would be fairly accurate comps. Of course many teams have found themselves agreeing to deals of 20-25 years. If they went that route that may give them a bit more yearly. Of course the downside is the TV deal might be really outdated and undervalued towards the end. $44mil a year would be an increase of $16mil.

 

Declining the option on Ryan Braun saved $11mil. His option was only $15mil and I believe he gets the $4mil buyout regardless of who declines the option.

[patrickgpe]

Declining the option on Ryan Braun saved $11mil. His option was only $15mil and I believe he gets the $4mil buyout regardless of who declines the option.

i knew it was a 4 MM buyout, but i was thinking it was 20 for some reason. you are correct.

[pacopete4]

Have they declined the option? Didn't sound like it in the presser. He said he believes Braun will take a couple months to decide on if he is going to return.

[MrTPlush]

Have they declined the option? Didn't sound like it in the presser. He said he believes Braun will take a couple months to decide on if he is going to return.

 

No, not officially. I noticed I didn’t phrase it right, but figured it’s kind of irrelevant in the grand scheme...the option will get declined even if a mutual reunion were to happen this offseason. Doubt they are feeing nice after a rough financial season to hand him $11mil.

 

The better question is are we actually going to save $11mil or will Braun return...thus eating most of that planned savings.

[Fear The Chorizo]

I think TV viewership is up this season...for obvious reasons. I would imagine TV viewership in general for any program is up quite a bit in this climate. I don't think they will find any negative effects because of COVID.

 

It's not so much where TV ratings are at in the midst of a pandemic that is preventing fans' butts in arenas/stadiums (from what I can tell ratings in general are down across the board for sports broadcasts), it's the uncertain long term revenue outlook for sports leagues right now that is going to lead to individual TV rights deals needing to be negotiated to be handcuffed. Specific to baseball, the potential for a work stoppage after next season also looms large for any service provider looking to broadcast 2022 games. If I'm the Brewers or any team needing to re-up a TV deal this offseason, I try to find a way to negotiate a very short term deal for game broadcast rights, perhaps even via a streaming service, until both revenue uncertainty due to COVID and the coming fight between the players' union and ownership are addressed and resolved.

[TURBO]

Let's not forget that the Brewers have the lowest (or among the lowest) media revenues in the league. They rely more on ticket sales than almost all other teams.

 

Brewers have the 2nd lowest TV revenue in the league at $28m for 2020 and only the Marlins have a smaller TV revenue at $20m. Both the Marlins and the Brewers TV deals have completed after this season.

 

I am not sure the Brewers will get much more than what they are already receiving. At best I think the Brewers could get what the Indians received and could get a boost of $12m more a season but I don't think that is going to happen. I think the Brewers may only get $7m more a season if I were Mark A. I would completely drop Fox Sports and see if I can get a deal with either Youtube, Amazon, Hulu or Apple. Completely drop cable and go with a streaming service this may alienate some now but I think future wise this will pay off more for the Brewers.

 

That would be a huge mistake... You think any of those services will pay more than fox sports?

[bjkrautk]

Also, doesn't MLB have exclusivity for online (edit: Video-) streaming of MLB games? Yes, I realize the distinction between a streaming TV bundle like Youtube TV and purely online streaming services (like Youtube, Amazon Prime, or MLB.tv) is painting with a fine brush, but I think the league's position on the matter shuts down this kind of opportunity.

[nate82]

 

That would be a huge mistake... You think any of those services will pay more than fox sports?

 

Yes I do as their viewership is far more wider than that of Fox Sports. Fox Sports is a regional thing and you can only have subscribers that live in that region while the other services are global and can be seen by more audiences and thus the team(s) can ask for more and get more than what they could get from Fox Sports.

 

I don't see the Brewers getting a huge raise if they go with Fox Sports at best you are looking at a $10m increase. I just don't see Fox Sports giving the Brewers much more than that as the viewership in the region the Brewers are in is very limited. You are basically limited to the state of Wisconsin and that is it. The advertising dollars coming in is just not enough for Fox Sports to give the Brewers a huge bump in a deal.

[TURBO]

Well, if they go that route, they will be cutting off a huge segment of the population that refuse to use, or just don't want to use those streaming services. Lots of the older population, which I'm guessing is a huge chunk of the Brewers viewership don't use streaming, and still have cable.

[owbc]

Judging by who advertises on FS Wisconsin, the Brewers' TV audience skews older and isn't worth much in terms of advertising dollars. The real value is in the subscription fees, since if you want to watch in-market MLB you have to have a very expensive cable subscription.

 

Even if Mark A wanted to do something different I doubt he has the power to do it. If he went to MLB and said he wanted to take a lower value, non-exclusive deal that would allow the Brewers to be available in-market on MLB.tv he probably would get laughed at. But from a fan perspective it would be awesome.

[trwi7]

 

That would be a huge mistake... You think any of those services will pay more than fox sports?

 

Yes I do as their viewership is far more wider than that of Fox Sports. Fox Sports is a regional thing and you can only have subscribers that live in that region while the other services are global and can be seen by more audiences and thus the team(s) can ask for more and get more than what they could get from Fox Sports.

 

I don't see the Brewers getting a huge raise if they go with Fox Sports at best you are looking at a $10m increase. I just don't see Fox Sports giving the Brewers much more than that as the viewership in the region the Brewers are in is very limited. You are basically limited to the state of Wisconsin and that is it. The advertising dollars coming in is just not enough for Fox Sports to give the Brewers a huge bump in a deal.

 

Yeah, going to YouTube TV or whatever is still just going to be local viewership. It's not like the Brewers sign a contract with YouTube TV and Brewers games are going to be broadcast in Denver.