- This topic has 181 replies, 20 voices, and was last updated 5 years, 1 month ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Were the Cards a team that did deferred payments on salaries at any point? Cause the $130M-140M sounds higher than all the public into that we have.
Also, the $150M for stadium revenue sounds a little bit light, but not insanely so. It sounds like the gate revenue basically pays for the team payroll. You’d think if they get half fans for half the year and full fans the rest of the year, that would be about 75% of that revenue or $112.5M. Would the team take a chance on a small loss at that point knowing that revenues would be back up for 2022 and the payroll would be lower naturally? You’d also think that if stadiums are open at only half capacity or lower, payroll will stay at the minimum possible. If lower than a quarter, Waino and Yadi may not be back no matter what.
A quick Google search yielded this:
“The St. Louis Cardinals will pay Matt Holliday $1.4 million on July 15th every year from 2020 to 2029.”
This one may be over. Same with Leake, whose deal ended in 2020.
“The St. Louis Cardinals will pay Jim Edmonds a deferred payment of $300K in 2018 and 2019. The annual payment started in 2010.”
These are good examples of how we don’t always have all the info needed to be exact. None of the standard places like Spotrac mention these deferrals, yet there are plenty of articles on Google about them.
The CBA requires large deferrals to be placed in escrow. The team actually has the cash out flow during the period of the contract.
“severe losses, in addition to last year” – BDW JR
It felt like his planning was for 162 games in 2021. Maybe he’s focused on the worst case scenario, of financial losses, whereas I’ve been thinking owners would want another 60 game schedule, to scale back the losses.
jj, I caught that too. It does seem like they are hoping for 162. Of course, no one team sets the course for MLB. There may be other teams that prefer to pay fewer games and potentially lose less money. The lowest common denominator may win out. Should be interesting to watch. There are so many variables, it is impossible to predict with any level of confidence what will happen.
It felt like his planning was for 162 games in 2021. Maybe he’s focused on the worst case scenario, of financial losses, whereas I’ve been thinking owners would want another 60 game schedule, to scale back the losses.
Unless things are in pandemonium mode still, I don’t see how you say “let’s play 60” again and get away with it. Maybe they will come to that agreement, somehow. If so, I hope it happens early enough that we don’t have the short spring training once again. It cost us a lot of pitchers this year and I’d rather avoid that next year.
I tend to agree with you, stlcard25. Then again, the owners have total power, so who is going to stop them if they decide to play fewer games? They would just concoct some kind of dispute and hang negotiations up as they stall. We saw the plan executed in 2020. Weeks were wasted this summer for no obvious reason (other than for the owners to restrict losses).
stl25 wrote:
I have the Cards at around $100M for 2022, with the buyout for Carlos included.
I am curious how you came to that number. Currently their 2022 obligations are:
Goldy- $26M
Mikolas- $17M
DeJong- $6.167M
Carp- $2M buyout
CMart- $.5M buyout
Arbitration- $20M estimate
League Minimum- $10M estimateTotal- $81.67M
If a vaccine is approved shortly after the first of the year, which is entirely possible, the owners are going to have a hard time justifying a 60 game season. Granted the distribution of the vaccine may take a few months but it is certainly reasonable to expect it completed by early Summer at the latest.
As I stated yesterday, tonight in College Station, TX at the Arkansas-Texas A&M game they are expecting between 50,000 and 60,000 fans. Tonight! Not next April or next May, tonight! I am not saying that is right or wrong, I am just saying that MLB and the other sports are going to have to wrap their head around it when making their decisions.
I am curious how you came to that number. Currently their 2022 obligations are:
I have Yadi coming back. I also tend to be a little more aggressive in the arb money. We will have Gant at Arb3, Flaherty, Bader, Reyes, Brebbia and Hicks Arb2 and Hudson, Gallegos, O’Neill and Webb Arb1. I would be really shocked if those arb salaries combine to be under $20M. If Flaherty can avoid facing the Brewers next year, he might be close to half of that amount just himself.
Our Arb estimate for 2021 is around $9M so I doubled it for 2022. I guess it could be a little higher.
Yadi could certainly come back but I was just basing my numbers on who we know we are obligated to pay at this time. It could all change of course.
Our Arb estimate for 2021 is around $9M so I doubled it for 2022. I guess it could be a little higher.
If you look at those names, I think it could end up quite a bit higher. We will be paying for a premium starting pitcher who could be coming off a great 2021 season, potentially two closers, a Gold Glove (maybe two of them) OFer, two very solid relievers and a guy who will get the benefit of some of the stats that burned Flaherty’s value this year in Hudson, who already has as many wins as Jack does after his 3rd season despite missing next year with TJ. Plus Reyes, who could be starting, and Webb.
My estimate for that group before this year’s MLB TR estimates was about $36M. Now, I admit that my numbers are probably a little aggressive. Still I think it could be $30M. Throw in Yadi and that’s a touch over $100M. I’m just going with what I feel is the safe case for payroll flexibility then. If we are really at $80M then, we had better make one heck of a splash.
You may be right. $30M could be the number. The one guy who’s salary will be suppressed is Hudson since he will be coming off a TJ year.
Regardless we could still be looking at $40M to $50M to spend.
This is what I have been saying regarding potential disparities in revenue because of local covid restrictions or non-restrictions, although I doubt Miami or Tampa will matter since they don’t draw crowds anyway.
One quick note here, because this is being perceived as a shot at Atlanta: this is a real factor going into the off-season. Teams with lenient state and local governments are much more likely to host fans and reap the $. ATL, HOU, TEX, MIA, TB among them. https://t.co/1ywXeJC5Gp
— Jeff Jones (@jmjones) October 31, 2020
For reference, from Baseball Reference:
“In Major League Baseball, 48% of local revenues are subject to revenue sharing and are distributed equally among all 30 teams, with each team receiving 3.3% of the total sum generated.”
So yes, there can be a disparity, but it is not as much as some may think. The more parks are open, the more money the Cardinals get, even if they have zero fans.
It’s funny how they try to link theur payroll with fan attendance now. He hasn’t done that before. The Cardinals have routinely been in the top three in attendance across the whole majors and I figure their store sales are quite high as well but yet we haven’t been in the top three payrolls during any of that time I believe anyway, maybe I’m wrong but I doubt it. I’m not saying having a huge payroll is the answer but neither is spending less and hoping for miracles. Just don’t try to say you are basing your payroll on your attendance when you really haven’t done that before when we were constantly bringing in over 3 million fans with money in their pockets to spend.
BW wrote: These are good examples of how we don’t always have all the info needed to be exact.
Those deferrals were actually on one or pay charts a couple of years ago. I distinctly remember Matt Holliday’s name I am 90 percent sure that Albert was also on the deferral list too. I always wondered why nobody was quoting those numbers when totaling up the spend.
Reductions could increase the possibility that improvements could be made from the outside. Though we don’t know if any savings would be reallocated to players or just applied to offset losses. As noted, however, the odds of moving these contracts are low.
(Note that Jeff Jones does not designate in his tweets pay articles, of which the following is one.)
Included here: the #stlcards will aggressively shop Carlos MartĂnez this winter and are likely to quietly seek out a trade partner for Dexter Fowler as well, though neither move is particularly likely given the size of their contracts and the state of the market.
— Jeff Jones (@jmjones) November 2, 2020
Moving Fowler would be a dream. Like they said, I doubt anyone would take Dexter as he’s way overvalued. The Cards might have to eat $12M and add a prospect to have him go. I’d probably do it.
As for Carlos, I think trading him now would be a mistake as it would likely be a deal that we’d rue at the end of 2021. If they got good value for him, I wouldn’t hate it. But right now I’d imagine it would be a salary dump. Maybe the Mets or Yankees would want him.
I would move both of them if possible and would try to move Carp and Miller also. Eat whatever money you have to eat. I don’t see any of those four contributing much to us in 2021.
Let’s go with Goldy and the kids.
The Athletic created a ranking of all MLB organizations they call The Pressure Index. They assess how likely teams will be to improve this winter. They have these four categories and put teams underneath them.
The rebuilders stay tanking – #25-30
Not doing anything no matter what they say – #18-24
Read the room and be aggressive – #7-17
This is the time – #1-6I guess because Waino and Yadi would count as doing something, the Cards are #13. But putting them in a category called “aggressive” feels wrong. They have the bottom 13 of the 30 teams not making any moves (#18-30).
Another discrepancy that talk on another thread about signing another overseas player reminded me. As far as I can tell, none of these payroll trackers take into account posting fees paid.
For example, the Cardinals had to pay $1.6 MM posting fee to Kim’s former club. This is on top of Kim’s salary. The Cardinals had to pay the money from somewhere and if I was running the team’s accounting, I would apply it to their player payroll budget. But it doesn’t seem to exist in anyone’s calculations.
Did anyone else read Derrick Goold’s reader chat this week?
He offered up a fairly detailed defense of the relationship between the current year revenue and the payroll. He seemed to wave off the relevance of the value of the many assets, which start with the team itself, valued at several billion dollars. It really surprised me that he did not acknowledge the tremendous borrowing power the team’s assets give them – at a time when lending rates are very low.
Did any of you wonder (this way or another way) when reading it?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.