USA Today '09 MLB Payroll Gaffe

by gsjefferies93 on Apr 6, 2009 1:17 PM EDT Comment 24 comments

Hello all,

Excited for today. Hope the weather holds off.

Did anyone else seem surprised that we're listed as 17th in MLB payrolls this year? USA today published the stats and I thought that seemed low. I know we dropped somewhat, but not THAT much. Notice any discrepancies on the pay chart?

http://content.usatoday.com/sports/baseball/salaries/teamdetail.aspx?year=2009&team=30

Yep...if it looks like Glaus is coming a bit cheap, I think you're right. Last year Troy made 12.5 mill, and despite his injury, I don't think we're shaving him down to $ 1,213,700 this year. Long story short, our expenditures on personnel are more around 88-90 million, behind the White Sox at 13. Not a HUGE jump, but certainly a $10 million difference.

I am no De Witt apologist by any means, and wish we were up over 100 where we belong. However, if these numbers stick, I see this working to our advantage :-D

0 recs | Comment 24 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

How many probable bonuses?

I Know Miller could easily get another mil, are there any others that will probably happen?

Is it weird that I would rather the payroll be more like the Marlins than the Yankees?

by ForesterShane on Apr 6, 2009 3:04 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

A good question...

And I would prefer we spend Marlins money too.

by gsjefferies93 on Apr 6, 2009 3:22 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Those all look way off

when compared to what Cot’s has, and I trust Cot’s a whole lot more with this type of stuff.

"I just wish that the late Harry Caray were still around so I could hear him mispronounce 'Kosuke Fukudome' every fukun' night" -- Dennis Miller

by fourstick on Apr 7, 2009 12:01 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Cot's Contracts

According to Cot’s, which is normally very accurate, our opening day payroll for 2009 (including obligations to speizio and kennedy) is at 93,612,500.
Link attempt.
“http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=p4ew-fwu2XT1rq82EWtyQZg”

by t7rick on Apr 8, 2009 12:51 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I dont know how to create links. If someone could tell me it would be appreciated.

by t7rick on Apr 8, 2009 12:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

you can also just

simply copy the link from the address bar and paste….like so

http://www.vivaelbirdos.com/2009/4/6/824628/usa-today-09-mlb-payroll-gaffe

nothing additional is needed

"Greene over to Schumaker, on to first! Double Play!!"

by The Ghost of Todd Burns on Apr 9, 2009 12:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

There's a little icon of a chain above the posting area

Write some text, highlight it, and click the link button. A box will pop up asking for the address. Hit “submit” and it will build the link for you.

Here’s the link to the spreadsheet you were trying to do.

by mojowo11 on Apr 8, 2009 7:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Marlins money

of course I’d rather spend Marlins money than our level…but the past 4 years we’ve won just a few more games on average than the Marlins but in 2006 those few made all the difference.

by ADMDrayson on Apr 9, 2009 12:32 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I did some research, and it kind of pisses me off.

And I’m not sure this stuff is worthy of its own post, so I’ll put it in here.

As we all know, the Cardinals’ payroll has declined from $ 99,624,449 in 2008 to $93,612,500 in 2009. Keep in mind, the 2009 payroll does include the money we’re paying Kennedy. The 2009 payroll ranks us at #13 in the MLB. and in 2008 we were ranked 11th.

Despite being ranked only 13th in the majors in payroll, the Cardinals ranked 7th in average ticket prices in 2008 (5th in 2007). The only teams that rank ahead of the Cards in ticket prices are the 2 New York teams, the 2 Chicago teams, Boston, and the Dodgers.

St. Louis ranked 4th in attendance in 2008, behind only the Yankees, Mets, and Dodgers.

So, 7th highest ticket prices + 4th highest attendance = 13th highest payroll

What????

The Godfather himself has decided to grace us with his presence. This is his damn house. He sleeps 20 feet away.

by thegodfather on Apr 9, 2009 7:44 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Cardinals

media contracts are not as lucrative as major market teams.

by spants on Apr 9, 2009 7:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

spants has it right. we've run out these figures before. if you check the total earnings of the team

we’re somewhere around 10, 11, 12 in total earnings, about where our payroll should be.

the truth can't hurt you, it's just like the dark/ it scares you witless, then you see things clear and stark -- macmanus

by tom s. on Apr 9, 2009 7:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Where

are you getting all of these figures? I understand the notion that media contracts for St. Louis will be lower, but I’d like to see the evidence.

The Godfather himself has decided to grace us with his presence. This is his damn house. He sleeps 20 feet away.

by thegodfather on Apr 9, 2009 8:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

The most

recent numbers we had were from 2007 in Fortune magazine. Not every little detail is disclosed, but it gives a rough idea of what each team is spending and bringing in.

No need to be so outraged by the Cardinals spending. We’re lucky to have ANY insight into their finances.

The way that the revenue sharing works, the Cardinals pay into a system that teams like the Phillies get money from. The Phillies are in the 4th largest media market in the U.S. We give them money. Think about how wack that is.

by spants on Apr 9, 2009 8:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Note:

I doubt the Philies are getting revenue sharing funds post-2008 W.S. title, but I could be wrong.

by spants on Apr 9, 2009 8:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Not sure what you guys are talking about

Unless I’m missing something, this is the page you’re talking about. It ranked the Cardinals 7th (tie) in revenue after the 2006 season, at which point they won the world series and attendance jumped up in 2007. The numbers on this site are most likely estimates too, so they could be off.

I’m not “outraged” by their spending, but I have season tickets and I paid well over what they are currently worth for them. That means when I see numbers that suggest the fans are being exploited, I’m annoyed. I was just posting the information for everyone to see.

The Godfather himself has decided to grace us with his presence. This is his damn house. He sleeps 20 feet away.

by thegodfather on Apr 9, 2009 8:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I read the

four question marks as outrage. I guess it needed an exclamation point to qualify for that. :)

Classic underachiever.

by spants on Apr 9, 2009 9:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Lol

I considered writing “what?!?!” until I typed it and it appeared as if I was outraged/yelling. I just added 4 ? marks because apparently my $89 face value tickets aren’t worth $20 each on StubHub. Grumble, grumble….

The Godfather himself has decided to grace us with his presence. This is his damn house. He sleeps 20 feet away.

by thegodfather on Apr 9, 2009 10:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

here's a more recent statement.

forbes

the revenues are remarkably similar among mid-market teams. 6 teams make up the 8-13 spots all between $197 and $192M in total revenue. I think we can agree that a 2-3% difference is minimal. The cards are basically tied with other mid-market teams for revenues. Some spend a lot more — the Mariners — and some spend less — the Astros. But I don’t think their payroll is crazy.

the truth can't hurt you, it's just like the dark/ it scares you witless, then you see things clear and stark -- macmanus

by tom s. on Apr 9, 2009 9:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

oops. i mistated a couple of things going off my "memory" of what teams spend.

there are few teams that spend a lot more than us that earn less than us. the tigers do, though that’s about to be shown to be a hugely bad idea. the astros, white sox, mariners all make about the same amount of money we do and spend somewhat more. the phillies make about the same amount and spend a lot more. the giants make about the same and spend somewhat less than we do.

so the only real outliers are the tigers and the phillies; like I said, i think the tigers spending is unsustainable. the phillies spending may be justified by the expense of competing in the division. the position of MOST of our comparable teams suggest that we should probably find about $5-$10M more in our coffers than we are currently spending.

there are worse offenders even in big markets — the dodgers make a TON of money and are not up there with the best payrolls. the braves probably have a little more to spare.

the truth can't hurt you, it's just like the dark/ it scares you witless, then you see things clear and stark -- macmanus

by tom s. on Apr 9, 2009 9:46 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Good analysis

That’s why I think the Cards organization should be more grateful to the fans who directly pay (through ticket sales/attendance) more than other small market teams’ fans do. I’m really curious how Forbes got these numbers.

The Godfather himself has decided to grace us with his presence. This is his damn house. He sleeps 20 feet away.

by thegodfather on Apr 9, 2009 10:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs