Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 31, 2013 9:51:40 GMT -8
www.usatoday.com/sports/mlb/salaries/2013/all/team/all/I was reviewing the 2013 MLB payrolls, and was curious for some feedback on what you guys think about it. It's an interesting debate. For starters, franchises such as Oakland and Tampa Bay have proven you can win your division and contend for a championship without spending a ton of money, as long as you draft & develop well, and maximize the assets you receive in return when trading veterans. Both franchises seem to do this exceptionally better than the Padres do. And let's not even compare the draft track record, please. That being said, is it reasonable to have spent $67M last season? And rank in the bottom 5 or 6 teams in total payroll? Oakland and Tampa Bay are both known for having old stadiums and a lackluster fan support. It's shocking that the Rays continue to draw under 20K per game and rank last or near last in attendance every year despite their success in the last 5-8 years. Oakland annually draws around the low 20K's as well. However, the Padres brought in 30K per game in the early Petco years and have still averaged just under 27K the last three seasons. Not bad for what the product on the field has been. San Diego is a good market, and the Padres received a beautiful new ballpark largely off tax dollars. Would it be too much to ask for the Padres to spend to upgrade the lineup? Wouldn't it be nice to be able to add even a Hunter Pence to the lineup? The Giants traded for him, they gave him $90M over 5 years, and they have a 30-year old OF with a career OBP of .340 and a .815 OPS. The franchise continued to demonstrate their commitment to win. Maybe they even overpaid a little, but in baseball sometimes you have to. I'm sure Bill will show us that Will Venable is every bit as vauable if you look at his road stats in the first half of the season, vs. righties, in ONE season. Who knows. The Padres already have a competitive disadvantage because ownership in LA is going to spend as much as they want every year to chase a championship. Their payroll is THREE times the Padres. We know we can't keep up with that. But to spend the LEAST amount in the division? Unreal.
|
|
|
|
Post by legkick on Jan 1, 2014 20:48:31 GMT -8
Like I said I don't expect them to spend like drunken sailors but I won't set foot in that place for any reason until payroll is either in the 66th percentile (WOW!) or somewhere within viewing distance of the MLB average. When was the last time you attended a Padres home game? They haven't been near MLB average since 1998. I'm not sure you're sufficiently familiar with baseball economics. If you were, you shouldn't compare the Padres with a team like Cincinnati. Cincinnati makes significantly more revenue than the Padres; the Padres' media market is small - blocked by the ocean to the west, Orange County to the north, desert to the east, and Mexico to the south. Cincinnati also has significantly less team debt than the Padres, so of course they can spend more of what they do bring in on players. All that extra money didn't stop Cincy from losing Shin Soo Choo. Also, if you've been paying attention, Cincinnati is retrenching - they've spent significantly less on the free agent market this year than the low budget Padres have. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 2, 2014 8:40:10 GMT -8
John,
I loved what you said here, below. You NAILED it.
Small and medium market teams need to manage their money and do so more wisely. No doubt about it. However, managing money wisely doesn't necessarily mean "don't spend any."
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 2, 2014 8:44:54 GMT -8
Like I said I don't expect them to spend like drunken sailors but I won't set foot in that place for any reason until payroll is either in the 66th percentile (WOW!) or somewhere within viewing distance of the MLB average. When was the last time you attended a Padres home game? They haven't been near MLB average since 1998. I'm not sure you're sufficiently familiar with baseball economics. If you were, you shouldn't compare the Padres with a team like Cincinnati. Cincinnati makes significantly more revenue than the Padres; the Padres' media market is small - blocked by the ocean to the west, Orange County to the north, desert to the east, and Mexico to the south. Cincinnati also has significantly less team debt than the Padres, so of course they can spend more of what they do bring in on players. All that extra money didn't stop Cincy from losing Shin Soo Choo. Also, if you've been paying attention, Cincinnati is retrenching - they've spent significantly less on the free agent market this year than the low budget Padres have. I wouldn't have given Choo that contract, either. He is downright abysmal vs. lefties and likely will be a platoon player in a few years. At least the Reds paid up to keep their biggest star, Votto. Believe it or not, this means something to many fans (the customers), and it creates a sense of stability and commitment. That may have helped Cincy draw 32K a game last season. |
|
|
|
Post by legkick on Jan 2, 2014 11:59:17 GMT -8
The last time I was at a Pads game was 2008 or so. When they first got there, their payroll was indeed fairly close to the league average. Anyway it sure as hell wasn't in the bottom five. I'm well aware of the limitations confronting the Padres. These limitations never stopped Ray Kroc. Funny, too, how they never stopped John Moores from getting and paying good players when he wanted a ballpark and tons of land handed to him downtown. Also, they are making a profit. ALL the low payroll teams make profits. In 2008, the Padres' payroll was 19th, and it was closer to median. However, that was arguably the worst team in the history of Petco. The money was misallocated. Then, the stuff hit the fan, Moores sold, and the team retrenched. Slowly, but surely, the Padres have been spending more and more and more on payroll. Will they ever spend close to median again? Doubtful, unless a Moores/Kroc buys from the current owners, because the team is too debt heavy. You misunderstand the history of Moores' ownership as well. He took over after the fire sale, and was repeatedly pouring money into the team. His purpose was to get a new ballpark for the team. His purpose was NOT to get land handed to him; that was pushed on him by the City and others b/c they couldn't find any developer willing to take it on. It was ironic that the land was the most profitable part of the venture. The good news for the Padres is that their farm system has grown stronger and stronger, and they haven't traded away significant portions of it for bad rentals. Their only hope of competing with the Dodgers is the farm and smart trades. They will always be selling their star players - they only sold on Gonzalez a year early, not bad. Bad side is they haven't sold on Chase Headley when they should have, after his monster 2012 second half. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecron on Jan 2, 2014 12:27:22 GMT -8
I was reviewing the 2013 MLB payrolls, and was curious for some feedback on what you guys think about it. It's an interesting debate. Not sure what kind of feedback I can offer nor whether there's much to debate. The Padres are fleecing their fans. Fowler (who can't afford this team in the first place) said we'd be in the eighties next season. That doesn't mean anything when everyone else is increasing their payroll too (and probably by greater margins). Like I said I don't expect them to spend like drunken sailors but I won't set foot in that place for any reason until payroll is either in the 66th percentile (WOW!) or somewhere within viewing distance of the MLB average. The funny thing, at least to me, is every team in baseball got a $26 million increase this year due to the new TV money kicking in. So, by my simplistic way of thinking, that additional money was simply on par with everyone else. I don't look at it as an increase versus other team payroll's as they got the same raise too. Here's my paraphrase of what Fowler and teams execs should've been quoted as saying, but of course weren't, "we're going to increase our payroll to the $80's next (this) year with the new TV contract money, but so too will all the other teams." "No new expenditures will come directly out of our pockets to go above or beyond, nor will we make up ground against the other teams in payroll."  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 2, 2014 13:14:35 GMT -8
Apparently what the Padres have been doing is working. They should just stay the course.
Nothing wrong with going 75-87 and drawing 27K per game.
|
|
|
|
Post by legkick on Jan 3, 2014 13:04:24 GMT -8
We shall see. I've certainly heard that song before, several times going back to the early seventies. At first, the "experts" were agreeing with you. However, as time goes on and we see it's mostly guys like Logan Forsythe---role players. The experts still agree with me, or more accurately, I agree with the experts. Padres 3rd best farm system in terms of near term valueYou are right that they are relatively short in position player prospects, though. They may have to trade pitching prospects for hitting value. |
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on Jan 5, 2014 21:35:56 GMT -8
I was reviewing the 2013 MLB payrolls, and was curious for some feedback on what you guys think about it. It's an interesting debate. Not sure what kind of feedback I can offer nor whether there's much to debate. The Padres are fleecing their fans. The average payroll per team is approximately 105 million. Does any reasonable fan expect the Padres to compete financially with NY, LA, Boston, etc.? Absolutely not. However, it is entirely reasonable to expect us to be able to compete with, say, Cincinatti, whose payroll (according to the source you cite) was about 110M, which, coincidentally enough, is right around the league average. Small and medium market teams need to manage their money and do so more wisely. No doubt about it. However, managing money wisely doesn't necessarily mean "don't spend any." The idea is to develop your own stars. You can trade most of them for prospects or whatever, but you need to keep at least ONE or two of them. Where's our Jay Bruce? He goes by the name of Adrian Gonzalez and plays for LA. Where's our Mat Latos? He goes by the name of Mat Latos and he pitches for the Reds. The Padres philosophy is to bring in 4A players and hope that they'll perform or at least become fan favorites. Fowler (who can't afford this team in the first place) said we'd be in the eighties next season. That doesn't mean anything when everyone else is increasing their payroll too (and probably by greater margins). Like I said I don't expect them to spend like drunken sailors but I won't set foot in that place for any reason until payroll is either in the 66th percentile (WOW!) or somewhere within viewing distance of the MLB average. As John Kruk said when Seattle signed Cano from the Yankees; "I guess there are no small market teams anymore". |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 6, 2014 9:07:51 GMT -8
We shall see. I've certainly heard that song before, several times going back to the early seventies. At first, the "experts" were agreeing with you. However, as time goes on and we see it's mostly guys like Logan Forsythe---role players. The experts still agree with me, or more accurately, I agree with the experts. Padres 3rd best farm system in terms of near term valueYou are right that they are relatively short in position player prospects, though. They may have to trade pitching prospects for hitting value. Seems like we've been reading about this farm system for some time now. Let's hope we start to see those All Stars churned out sooner, rather than later. |
|
|
|
Post by legkick on Jan 6, 2014 9:59:33 GMT -8
As John Kruk said when Seattle signed Cano from the Yankees; "I guess there are no small market teams anymore". John Kruk is funny, but he's not very smart on these things. Seattle never has been a small market, and even less so with their Nintendo ownership, which helps them get Japanese media interest. Want proof? Seattle just signed a television contract that will get them, on average, $117 million a year. www.forbes.com/sites/mikeozanian/2013/04/16/seattle-mariners-sign-estimated-2-billion-network-deal-with-directv/That is more than the payroll of the average team, and way more than the Padres. For Jonesy, the Padres farm system is not full of potential All-Stars, with the exception of Hedges, who would be more of a defensive catcher. It is full of guys who project to be helpful major leaguers. We'll see what happens and let's hope the experts are right. |
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on Jan 6, 2014 13:59:12 GMT -8
As John Kruk said when Seattle signed Cano from the Yankees; "I guess there are no small market teams anymore". John Kruk is funny, but he's not very smart on these things. Seattle never has been a small market, and even less so with their Nintendo ownership, which helps them get Japanese media interest. Want proof? Seattle just signed a television contract that will get them, on average, $117 million a year. www.forbes.com/sites/mikeozanian/2013/04/16/seattle-mariners-sign-estimated-2-billion-network-deal-with-directv/That is more than the payroll of the average team, and way more than the Padres. For Jonesy, the Padres farm system is not full of potential All-Stars, with the exception of Hedges, who would be more of a defensive catcher. It is full of guys who project to be helpful major leaguers. We'll see what happens and let's hope the experts are right. In 5 years (or less), they are really going to regret that contract. |
|
|
|
Post by legkick on Jan 6, 2014 14:05:20 GMT -8
In 5 years (or less), they are really going to regret that contract. Who? DirectTV or the Mariners? A lot of the argument you see these days is that the broadcasting entities will ultimately regret these contracts on the theory that there is a bubble in this market. Sort of like what is happening in Houston with their TV contract. I don't know enough about the situation; guess it depends on what TV contracts happen in the future. |
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on Jan 6, 2014 14:26:06 GMT -8
In 5 years (or less), they are really going to regret that contract. Who? DirectTV or the Mariners? A lot of the argument you see these days is that the broadcasting entities will ultimately regret these contracts on the theory that there is a bubble in this market. Sort of like what is happening in Houston with their TV contract. I don't know enough about the situation; guess it depends on what TV contracts happen in the future. "They" being the Mariners. |
|
|
|
Post by Deja Vu U Monty on Jan 6, 2014 17:26:40 GMT -8
So, in other words, we won't be in the World Series anytime in our lifetimes???
|
|
|
|
Post by legkick on Jan 6, 2014 18:46:14 GMT -8
a. The farm system doesn't have to be full of high ceiling guys but we don't have more than one or possibly two impact position players. Apparently we have some good looking pitchers. Maybe they should package all of them for a guy who can hit the ball out of the infield. b. At this point the book on Hedges is that he can't hit the broad side of a barn. That might change and let's hope it does because we've already had a catcher like this. His name was Fred Kendall. Another similar guy was Freddy's son, Jason. We're better off with Hundley. A team with so little power at the corners can't afford a punch-and-judy catcher. c. Another term for "helpful major leaguers" is "utility player." d. This team has to spend more not only on the ML roster but also on the draft. a. I'm quite okay with packaging some of the solid minor league arms for a promising power hitter, either outfield or first base. I'm not confident that Josh Byrnes is the GM to pull that off. b. Hedges, here is a scouting report from fangraphs.com, an excellent baseball site: The Year in Review: Injuries held Hedges to just 86 games played during the regular season but he earned a late-season promotion to Double-A after spending most of the year in A-ball. The young catcher showed solid gap power but not even the potent California League could help him hit more than four home runs in 233 at-bats. He got some extra playing time in after the regular season with 15 appearances in the Arizona Fall League.
The Scouting Report: Arguably the best all-around defensive catcher in the minors, there isn’t really anything Hedges doesn’t do well behind the plate. He’s the type of backstop that brings out the best in his pitchers and he controls the running game with aplomb. Hedges’ offensive potential is still open for debate, especially since we can’t read too much into his numbers from the California League. Based on his skills, though, he should be able to provide enough offence to justify playing everyday for the benefit of his glove. The good news is that he makes solid contact and doesn’t strike out a ton. Just don’t expect a high on-base percentage or much power.
The Year Ahead: Hedges should return to Double-A to open the 2014 season but could reach Triple-A in the second half — if he’s not pushed all the way to the Majors. Both projected big league backstops (Nick Hundley and Rene Rivera) are probably better suited to back-up or platoon roles.
The Career Outlook: Hedges should receive a taste of big league action by the end of 2014 and could be ready to take over the starting gig in San Diego at the beginning of 2015. He’ll probably never set the world on fire with his bat but the glove is something special.IMO, the Padres are not better off with Hundley. He's a poor hitter, a mediocre defensive catcher, and one of the worst pitch framers in baseball. I'm much higher on Yasmani Grandal. c. I was thinking mostly of their pitchers, who have #2-#3 ceilings. Also, some solid relief potential. Hitting, I'm hopeful but not optimistic. Maybe Renfroe will be the guy if you like home runs, but I see him currently as a low OBP outmaker. d. JYP, you're behind the times on this one. The draft is now money capped, and the Padres do spend at or near the top of their limit. Where they should try to find bargains is Cuba, Asia and Australia, at least while those players aren't subject to the draft. On the ML roster, they're never going to spend what you think they should. |
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on Jan 6, 2014 20:15:23 GMT -8
a. The farm system doesn't have to be full of high ceiling guys but we don't have more than one or possibly two impact position players. Apparently we have some good looking pitchers. Maybe they should package all of them for a guy who can hit the ball out of the infield. b. At this point the book on Hedges is that he can't hit the broad side of a barn. That might change and let's hope it does because we've already had a catcher like this. His name was Fred Kendall. Another similar guy was Freddy's son, Jason. We're better off with Hundley. A team with so little power at the corners can't afford a punch-and-judy catcher. c. Another term for "helpful major leaguers" is "utility player." d. This team has to spend more not only on the ML roster but also on the draft. a. I'm quite okay with packaging some of the solid minor league arms for a promising power hitter, either outfield or first base. I'm not confident that Josh Byrnes is the GM to pull that off. b. Hedges, here is a scouting report from fangraphs.com, an excellent baseball site: The Year in Review: Injuries held Hedges to just 86 games played during the regular season but he earned a late-season promotion to Double-A after spending most of the year in A-ball. The young catcher showed solid gap power but not even the potent California League could help him hit more than four home runs in 233 at-bats. He got some extra playing time in after the regular season with 15 appearances in the Arizona Fall League.
The Scouting Report: Arguably the best all-around defensive catcher in the minors, there isn’t really anything Hedges doesn’t do well behind the plate. He’s the type of backstop that brings out the best in his pitchers and he controls the running game with aplomb. Hedges’ offensive potential is still open for debate, especially since we can’t read too much into his numbers from the California League. Based on his skills, though, he should be able to provide enough offence to justify playing everyday for the benefit of his glove. The good news is that he makes solid contact and doesn’t strike out a ton. Just don’t expect a high on-base percentage or much power.
The Year Ahead: Hedges should return to Double-A to open the 2014 season but could reach Triple-A in the second half — if he’s not pushed all the way to the Majors. Both projected big league backstops (Nick Hundley and Rene Rivera) are probably better suited to back-up or platoon roles.
The Career Outlook: Hedges should receive a taste of big league action by the end of 2014 and could be ready to take over the starting gig in San Diego at the beginning of 2015. He’ll probably never set the world on fire with his bat but the glove is something special.IMO, the Padres are not better off with Hundley. He's a poor hitter, a mediocre defensive catcher, and one of the worst pitch framers in baseball. I'm much higher on Yasmani Grandal. c. I was thinking mostly of their pitchers, who have #2-#3 ceilings. Also, some solid relief potential. Hitting, I'm hopeful but not optimistic. Maybe Renfroe will be the guy if you like home runs, but I see him currently as a low OBP outmaker. d. JYP, you're behind the times on this one. The draft is now money capped, and the Padres do spend at or near the top of their limit. Where they should try to find bargains is Cuba, Asia and Australia, at least while those players aren't subject to the draft. On the ML roster, they're never going to spend what you think they should. Completely agree about Hedges. He threw out 12 of 22 baserunners in the Fall League. His arm is both strong and accurate. Line drive hitter with little power (now). Hit .273 in the Fall League, but of the catchers I have seen for the Padres (including Hundley and Grandal), Hedges is by far the best defensive catcher. |
|
|
|
Post by legkick on Jan 7, 2014 9:13:43 GMT -8
1. The Padres can't afford yet another mediocre bat. If we had more power at the corners, Hedges would almost certainly be the answer at catcher for his defense alone. However, we don't. 2. I'm not saying that Hundley is the next Johnny Bench (either offensively or defensively), but I think it's fair to give him a full season behind the plate. Another of my many pet peeves is that we always seem to be shuffling guys around. If they think they have something in Will Venable or whoever, put the SOB out there for 500AB. Grandal is trouble city IMO. 3. Renfroe might currently be a "low OBP outmaker," but he's a guy who I think will actually be able to drive in the guys who actually can get on base. 4. Hell I'm behind the times on almost everything. You're right; I'd forgotten about that. 5. I think they should (at least most of the time) be no worse than 21st in MLB in payroll. If that's too much, then I guess I'll never go to another game because I won't go until they are. They sold this substandard ballpark on the premise that San Diego Stadium alone was keeping them from spending money on players. So far---after almost ten years---this has proven to be a lie. 1. Break out of old paradigms, JYP; they don't serve you or the Padres. It is a myth that you need power from the corners and corner outfielders. In today's game, teams like the Padres take power where they can get it. The Padres have power from 2B of all places. The Padres can't afford power from traditional position free agents, but if they can develop some in Liriano and Renfroe that will be great. 2. A team like the Padres needs to shuffle guys around to obtain platoon advantages. That is one of the ways they can compete with bigger market teams, because platoons are still undervalued money wise. However, I do agree that Venable has demonstrated that he at least deserves more at bats this year, to see if last year wasn't a fluke. Unfortunately, that takes away at bats from Denorfia, who has been surprisingly valuable to the team. 3. You have to make contact to drive guys in on a consistent basis, but there aren't many Miguel Cabreras out there. Guys with .300 OBP do not add enough offensive value because what they give with runners on base they take away so much more when they aren't. 5. I can live with an 18-25 range in payroll. Right now, they have a relative advantage over similar teams because of the Fox Sports television contract; that will disappear as the mid- to smaller-market teams get their new TV contracts. Jack Murphy was terrible for the Padres because the lease was heavily in favor of the Chargers. There was no lie. The Padres' player payroll in Petco far exceeds what it would have been in Jack Murphy*. Enough to sign major free agents? No, because the ability to do that is driven by TV contracts, not stadia, and the Padres had an awful contract with Cox before the FSSD deal. *Player payroll in the latter years of Jack Murphy (1981 on) was often higher than revenues supported, because of owners like Ray Kroc and John Moores, Kroc because he had a lot of money, and Moores b/c of the same plus he wanted a new stadium. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 7, 2014 9:18:07 GMT -8
Nice quote on Hedges.. "Just don’t expect a high on-base percentage or much power"
Good defensive catchers grown on trees. They're everywhere.
Find one that can effing hit.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 7, 2014 10:16:34 GMT -8
|
|
