Jump to content

My Red Sox should sign this man!


Swiss

Recommended Posts

When will Bud Selig, the owners, and the MLBPA realize that baseball would be a lot more popular everywhere except Boston, New York, and Anaheim if everybody had an equal chance to sign top international free agents?

oh ,my god ,i strong recommend you to have a visit on the website ,or if i'm the president ,i would have an barceque with the anthor of the articel .
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 75
  • Created
  • Last Reply

In other news, does anyone dig the stripes on the uniform he's wearing in the first vid?

I love it.

Spoiler

 

New York Rangers. Stanley Cup Champions - 1928, 1933, 1940, 1994. Saskatchewan. Cold. 1905-2022.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When will Bud Selig, the owners, and the MLBPA realize that baseball would be a lot more popular everywhere except Boston, New York, and Anaheim if everybody had an equal chance to sign top international free agents?

200px-MillionDollarMan.JPG

Money, money, money, money, money....

On 4/10/2017 at 3:05 PM, Rollins Man said:

what the hell is ccslc?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When will Bud Selig, the owners, and the MLBPA realize that baseball would be a lot more popular everywhere except Boston, New York, and Anaheim if everybody had an equal chance to sign top international free agents?

St. Louis and Chicago say hello. As a matter of fact, so do all the major league cities, because attendance is on the rise. There's not as much correlation between payroll and success as you think, either. Nobody gets to cry poor when the 14-million-dollar Marlins were even so much as a wild card longshot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When will Bud Selig, the owners, and the MLBPA realize that baseball would be a lot more popular everywhere except Boston, New York, and Anaheim if everybody had an equal chance to sign top international free agents?

200px-MillionDollarMan.JPG

Money, money, money, money, money....

That reminds the immortal words of the Spanish writer Francisco de Quevedo:

"Poderoso caballero es don Dinero".

(Powerful gentleman, that is Mister Money).

pennants.png


It's great to be young and a Giant! - Larry Doyle

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When will Bud Selig, the owners, and the MLBPA realize that baseball would be a lot more popular everywhere except Boston, New York, and Anaheim if everybody had an equal chance to sign top international free agents?

St. Louis and Chicago say hello. As a matter of fact, so do all the major league cities, because attendance is on the rise. There's not as much correlation between payroll and success as you think, either. Nobody gets to cry poor when the 14-million-dollar Marlins were even so much as a wild card longshot.

St. Louis and Chicago are also fairly large-revenue cities, but I can't see either of them ponying up $25 mil just for the right to negotiate with this dude. I would say there's about a 90% chance that he signs with the Yankees, Red Sox, or Angels, and about a 1% chance he signs with anybody other than those teams, the Cards, Cubs, ChiSox, or Dodgers.

My point isn't that it's impossible for low-revenue teams to compete in any given season. My point is that large-revenue teams have a major competitive advantage, which makes the game (and especially the off-season) substantially less fun for 2/3 of the teams out there. And while it's true that revenue has a low correlation to wins in any given season, try correlating average payroll to wins over a 5-year or 10-year stretch. The correlation in this case is extremely high, which is a strong indicator that it's very difficult for a team to remain consistently competitive without being a big spender.

oh ,my god ,i strong recommend you to have a visit on the website ,or if i'm the president ,i would have an barceque with the anthor of the articel .
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My point is that large-revenue teams have a major competitive advantage, which makes the game (and especially the off-season) substantially less fun for 2/3 of the teams out there. And while it's true that revenue has a low correlation to wins in any given season, try correlating average payroll to wins over a 5-year or 10-year stretch. The correlation in this case is extremely high, which is a strong indicator that it's very difficult for a team to remain consistently competitive without being a big spender.

I'm sure people in Oakland and the Twin Cities would rather have a busy October than a busy December.

Speaking of that correlation, let's do this. Let's get the numbers for, oh let's go with five years, and see how things stack up. To MS Excel!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When will Bud Selig, the owners, and the MLBPA realize that baseball would be a lot more popular everywhere except Boston, New York, and Anaheim if everybody had an equal chance to sign top international free agents?

St. Louis and Chicago say hello. As a matter of fact, so do all the major league cities, because attendance is on the rise. There's not as much correlation between payroll and success as you think, either. Nobody gets to cry poor when the 14-million-dollar Marlins were even so much as a wild card longshot.

St. Louis and Chicago are also fairly large-revenue cities, but I can't see either of them ponying up $25 mil just for the right to negotiate with this dude. I would say there's about a 90% chance that he signs with the Yankees, Red Sox, or Angels, and about a 1% chance he signs with anybody other than those teams, the Cards, Cubs, ChiSox, or Dodgers.

My point isn't that it's impossible for low-revenue teams to compete in any given season. My point is that large-revenue teams have a major competitive advantage, which makes the game (and especially the off-season) substantially less fun for 2/3 of the teams out there. And while it's true that revenue has a low correlation to wins in any given season, try correlating average payroll to wins over a 5-year or 10-year stretch. The correlation in this case is extremely high, which is a strong indicator that it's very difficult for a team to remain consistently competitive without being a big spender.

The issue today is that the small market teams are taking in revenue sharing money and not spending it on improving the product on the field. Also, instead of finding new and innovative ways to make money most of these small market teams are just sitting on their hands and waiting for the revenue sharing check to come in the mail.

Yes, I do believe a handful of teams (NYY, NYM, BOS to a lesser extent the LA teams) have a big monetary advantage BUT after that most of the teams are basically on a level playing field. Any team with a new stadium could have a payroll in the $85-95M range.

1997 | 2003

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When will Bud Selig realize that baseball...

Stop there. The answer is never. Selig will NEVER give a crap about what the fans want.

Just keep praying for a new commissioner...and hope its not Bob DuPuy.

ScreenShot2011-12-09at052105PM.png

Tomorrow's just your future yesterday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Speaking of that correlation, let's do this. Let's get the numbers for, oh let's go with five years, and see how things stack up. To MS Excel!

Do you have those numbers? I'm asking because I'm actually curious to see... I said that because I read an article somewhere a few months ago that mentioned this exact point, but I can't for the life of me remember where it was or find it again. I'm pretty sure that the correlation is fairly high (.65 to .8 range).

oh ,my god ,i strong recommend you to have a visit on the website ,or if i'm the president ,i would have an barceque with the anthor of the articel .
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I found this Newsday blog from yesterday on Matsuzaka, which speculates that the posting price might be significantly lower than previously thought... A couple of questions: 1) how reliable is Newsday in their coverage of the Mets? 2) Anyone know who this Ken Davidoff guy is? Is he reliable?

I suppose the reasons for a lower posting price would be that everyone thought that the Yankees were going to "get" Matsuzaka, and therefore, just threw in lowball offers, just to show that they "tried" to get him. Either the Yankees knew this, and also threw in a lowball offer too, or the Yankees didn't bid at all... Just some speculation on my part if this turns out to be true...

Moose

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 teams have placed bids. Speculation is that they're the Yankees, Red Sox, Cubs, Rangers, and Mets.

On January 16, 2013 at 3:49 PM, NJTank said:

Btw this is old hat for Notre Dame. Knits Rockne made up George Tip's death bed speech.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2006 payrolls, wins, followed by cost per win.

01	NYY	$194,663,079 	97	$2,006,835.87 
02 BOS $120,099,824 87 $1,380,457.75
03 LAA $103,472,000 89 $1,162,606.74
04 CHW $102,750,667 90 $1,141,674.08
05 NYM $101,084,963 97 $1,042,113.02
06 LAD $98,447,187 88 $1,118,718.03
07 CHC $94,424,499 66 $1,430,674.23
08 HOU $92,551,503 82 $1,128,676.87
09 ATL $90,156,876 79 $1,141,226.28
10 SFG $90,056,419 76 $1,184,952.88
11 STL $88,891,371 83 $1,070,980.37
12 PHL $88,273,333 85 $1,038,509.80
13 SEA $87,959,833 78 $1,127,690.17
14 DET $82,612,866 95 $869,609.12
15 BAL $72,585,582 70 $1,036,936.89
16 TOR $71,915,000 86 $836,220.93
17 SDP $69,896,141 88 $794,274.33
18 TEX $68,228,662 80 $852,858.28
19 MNN $63,396,006 96 $660,375.06
20 WSH $63,143,000 71 $889,338.03
21 OAK $62,243,079 93 $669,280.42
22 CNC $60,909,519 80 $761,368.99
23 ARZ $59,684,226 76 $785,318.76
24 MLW $57,568,333 75 $767,577.77
25 CLE $56,031,500 78 $718,352.56
26 KAN $47,294,000 62 $762,806.45
27 PTT $46,717,750 67 $697,279.85
28 COL $41,233,000 76 $542,539.47
29 TMB $35,417,967 61 $580,622.41
30 FLA $14,998,500 78 $192,288.46

Rankings,


TEAM $/WIN PAY WINS
NYY 1st 1st 1st
CHC 2nd 7th 28th
BOS 3rd 2nd 10th
SFG 4th 10th 21st
LAA 5th 3rd 7th
CHW 6th 4th 6th
ATL 7th 9th 17th
HOU 8th 8th 14th
SEA 9th 13th 18th
LAD 10th 6th 8th
STL 11th 11th 13th
NYM 12th 5th 2nd
PHL 13th 12th 12th
BAL 14th 15th 26th
WSH 15th 20th 25th
DET 16th 14th 4th
TEX 17th 18th 15th
TOR 18th 16th 11th
SDP 19th 17th 9th
ARZ 20th 23rd 22nd
MLW 21st 24th 24th
KAN 22nd 26th 29th
CNC 23rd 22nd 16th
CLE 24th 25th 19th
PTT 25th 27th 27th
OAK 26th 21st 5th
MNN 27th 19th 3rd
TAM 28th 29th 30th
COL 29th 28th 23rd
FLA 30th 30th 20th

Finally, if you take those and make a differential between payroll rank and wins rank, you get


16 Oakland Athletics (lost ALCS)
16 Minnesota Twins (lost ALDS)
10 Detroit Tigers (A.L. Champions)
10 Florida Marlins
8 San Diego Padres (lost NLDS)
6 Cincinnati Reds
6 Cleveland Indians
5 Toronto Blue Jays
5 Colorado Rockies
3 New York Mets (lost NLCS)
3 Texas Rangers
1 Arizona Diamondbacks
0 New York Yankees (lost ALDS)
0 Philadelphia Phillies
0 Milwaukee Brewers
0 Pittsburgh Pirates
-1 Tampa Bay Devil Rays
-2 Chicago White Sox
-2 Los Angeles Dodgers (lost NLDS)
-2 St. Louis Cardinals (World Champions)
-3 Kansas City Royals
-4 Los Angeles Angels
-5 Seattle Mariners
-5 Washington Nationals
-6 Houston Astros
-8 Boston Red Sox
-8 Atlanta Braves
-11 San Francisco Giants
-11 Baltimore Orioles
-21 Chicago Cubs

0 means you got what you paid for, positives are bargains, negatives are money pits.

I think this proves two things.

1) There's not much of a connection between payroll and success

2) Oh God, the Chicago Cubs are :censored:ing awful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I found this Newsday blog from yesterday on Matsuzaka, which speculates that the posting price might be significantly lower than previously thought... A couple of questions: 1) how reliable is Newsday in their coverage of the Mets? 2) Anyone know who this Ken Davidoff guy is? Is he reliable?

I suppose the reasons for a lower posting price would be that everyone thought that the Yankees were going to "get" Matsuzaka, and therefore, just threw in lowball offers, just to show that they "tried" to get him. Either the Yankees knew this, and also threw in a lowball offer too, or the Yankees didn't bid at all... Just some speculation on my part if this turns out to be true...

Moose

Newsday is the best at covering the Mets

ecyclopedia.gif

www.sportsecyclopedia.com

For the best in sports history go to the Sports E-Cyclopedia at

http://www.sportsecyclopedia.com

champssigtank.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Speaking of that correlation, let's do this. Let's get the numbers for, oh let's go with five years, and see how things stack up. To MS Excel!

Do you have those numbers? I'm asking because I'm actually curious to see... I said that because I read an article somewhere a few months ago that mentioned this exact point, but I can't for the life of me remember where it was or find it again. I'm pretty sure that the correlation is fairly high (.65 to .8 range).

Okay, I finally have all the numbers from 2001 to 2006. As expected, the Yankees lead the majors in spending and winning. They are trailed in spending by Boston, but trailed in winning by Oakland. I'll have the data posted later.

Humorous quirk: the 2003 Tigers overpaid for 49 wins.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to Buster Olney, the Red Sox may have won the bidding with a bid of between $38 to $45 million.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2656687

I wasn't sure at first, but considering he opens the door to the Japanese market for the Red Sox, I don't think it's a bad investment if he ends up being even close to as good as expected.

IUe6Hvh.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to Buster Olney, the Red Sox may have won the bidding with a bid of between $38 to $45 million.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2656687

I wasn't sure at first, but considering he opens the door to the Japanese market for the Red Sox, I don't think it's a bad investment if he ends up being even close to as good as expected.

This blog from Baseball Digest Daily states:

If you've heard a Daisuke Matsuzaka rumor, it's most likely bogus. I have heard everything from the Red Sox bidding $38-$45 million, the Rangers bidding $30 million, the Angels winning the bidding, and then the Angels not bidding at all! So until we have more concrete information, I will refrain from giving more details.

An excelent point... I'm not believeing anything until I see an official MLB release, but that's just me...

Moose

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.