DeWitt responds to S.I.'s Heyman

by glamboomer on Jun 5, 2007 1:34 PM EDT

Apparently, Bill DeWitt doesn't like to be second-guessed in the national media...

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/writers/jon_heyman/06/05/scoop.tuesday/index.html

Nothing really new here, other than Heyman's surprise at being taken to task by the Cardinals owner..
What do you all think?
I suspect that, as with most things, the answers lay somewhere in the middle....

0 recs | Comment 16 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

That's a decent article

It was nice of him not to sandbag DeWitt after DeWitt called him up with a response. I could see a lot of writers taking pot-shots using DeWitt's words against him.

And for the most part, DeWitt is right about the personel moves. Last offseason wasn't the off-season to spend money. Next off-season is.

There are a lot of quality MLB outfielder coming availible on the market this year that could enhance the Cardinals offense moreso than falling under the weight of Alfonso Soriano or Carlos Lee.

The pitching staff will also get an upgrade with hopefully a fully-strengthed Carpenter, Mulder, Wainwright, Reyes in 2008. Adding perhaps a Mark Buerhle or another FA arm would make that a potentially scary rotation to face.

DeWitt could have dumped another $20 million into the team's payroll and hoped that the Cardinals repeated. However, that wasn't the smart move looking at the team from where it stands now. The smart move was to bridge the gap to Rasmus being called up, letting Wainwright and Reyes continue to get their feet wet, see what Thompson has in that arm (which is now being dubbed by TLR as Chris Carpenter Jr.).

I still think, if Chris Carpenter hadn't been injured, this team would be only 1 or 2 games out of first place.

Interested in pre-1990 Cardinals games on tape

by Hardcore Legend on Jun 5, 2007 1:45 PM EDT 0 recs

Agree...

DeWitt didn't become a billionaire by making stupid financial decisions. Sure, a better chance to repeat would be nice, but I've agreed all along that last season's FA class was light and what meat was there (Soriano, Lee) wasn't worth the ridiculous contracts they got. We'll see how the Cubs and Astros like those bloated contracts a couple years from now, especially if they don't win a World Series in the next couple seasons. As much as I miss Soop, especially with this relief-rotation, I still can't fault the Brass for failing to beat a 41 million dollar deal. Soop would certainly be our "ace" now, but he just aint worth that kinda bread in the big picture. I'm going to reserve any harsh judgements for DeWitt and Co. till after next off-season, which will be a much better crop. If they sit on their hands again, well, then I'll agree with the "cheapskate" smack. Until then, I'm willing to believe that he has a real plan, a smart plan, for 08 and beyond. I'd much rather have them set up the team to be potential contenders in the future than to have blown the bank on one repeat longshot this year.

by rockin redbird on Jun 5, 2007 3:02 PM EDT up 0 recs

Not to mention that ludicrous Zito contract

I'm still baffled by that. And I have a feeling the Matsuzaka deal will not look too good toward the end of its run.

by Valatan on Jun 6, 2007 11:15 AM EDT up 0 recs

It's funny

There's a reason DeWitt is a "billionaire" and owns a baseball team, and Heyman works for a second-rate sports magazine.

We've gone over and over the rebuttals to his "rebuttals" of DeWitt's responses. There was simply no one available who was worth the money they were getting, that would not have put us in a bind in the future. It's not about DeWitt being cheap, it's about other owners (hendry) being fools.

Don't Panic!!!

by SleepyCA on Jun 5, 2007 1:50 PM EDT 0 recs

They should've sucked it up...

and signed Lilly or Suppan, then traded Reyes for a bat or another starter. Making a run at the Big Unit would also have been advisable, although he seemed to want to go home.

I said it before the season started that the over/under for quality starters from the Wells-AW-AR trifecta was 1.5. To think that all three would click was nothing more than wishful thinking.

by guayzimi on Jun 5, 2007 5:36 PM EDT up 0 recs

Oh no, he didn't!

The sportswriter accused Cardinal fans of wearing clothes that clash.

Heyman, your metrosexuality is showing...

by liam on Jun 5, 2007 2:16 PM EDT 0 recs

Franchise value

I'm no economist, but what does this supposed "franchise value" have to do with the payroll level?

It's not like DeWitt can say, "Well, we're worth $463 million, so our payroll can be (Heyman's arbitrary figure).

People don't go into business to lose money.

The 26th Man

by 26thMan on Jun 5, 2007 3:13 PM EDT 0 recs

That's an interesting point

I'm not sure that 'franchise value' equates to money lying around or probable profit for next calendar year. I would assume it is more in line with what can be made should DeWitt sell the Cardinals.

I'd be more interested to see what the payroll is in relation to money made in calendar year.

Interested in pre-1990 Cardinals games on tape

by Hardcore Legend on Jun 5, 2007 3:37 PM EDT up 0 recs

Sales Tax

What is the sales tax on somethng like selling a franchise?

by BigJawnMize on Jun 5, 2007 4:05 PM EDT up 0 recs

Franchise value kinda like equity?

And if it is kinda like equity, a smart business person doesn't borrow against it unless that businessperson can get a return on the investment. The long-term contracts doled out for Lee, Soriano, et. al. look kinda risky in the long term.

matty fred is a web log.

by matty fred on Jun 5, 2007 5:56 PM EDT up 0 recs

The point is

the losses DeWitt claims are a small fraction of the profit he would make from its sale. It's like painting your house. It shows up as a loss on the ledger but increases the value of your house.

by Stanfan6 on Jun 5, 2007 5:03 PM EDT up 0 recs

Yes, but it increases your house for awhile

buying players only increases your value if they are still there when you sell.

Interested in pre-1990 Cardinals games on tape

by Hardcore Legend on Jun 5, 2007 8:41 PM EDT up 0 recs

I kind of agree

The value of the team is not based directly on the quality of the team. The Pirates and Cubs have the same record and are both traditionally losers, but don't have the same value. The Cubs have higher revenue than the Pirates and past results show that will continue. The Cardinals' revenue has increased substantially from when DeWitt bought the team. That is what has driven the team's value up.

Granted, the increases in attendance and TV money were driven by on field play. However, if they finish in last place this year, the team's value won't be hurt much because of the trend of high revenue they have shown recently. If they continue to field a poor team, then fan intrest in the team will fall and its revenue and value will follow.

I actually agreed with most of the team's moves last offseason so I'm not arguing with what they did. My point is that payroll has stayed relatively static the last three years and the teams play has suffered (I know we won the WS but it wasn't a great team). It makes sense for DeWitt to spend the money nessecary to put a winning team on the field in order to protect his investment.

by Stanfan6 on Jun 6, 2007 5:02 AM EDT up 0 recs

For the argument that we should have

resigned Suppan. Looper has put up almost identical stats for a much cheaper price.

by El Hombre on Jun 5, 2007 11:00 PM EDT 0 recs

Yeah Loop

has really proven to be the ace of the rotation, with Carp out, Mulder out, Reyes turning to crap, and yeah he's really stepped it up, though he's still kind of expensive, compared to Supp no but still great move by Dunc to ove him to the rotation

Andy Kaufman lives!

by kyle man on Jun 6, 2007 12:48 PM EDT up 0 recs