- This topic has 78 replies, 16 voices, and was last updated 1 year, 4 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
This one passes the test, Euro. We’re still 0-4 in extras and 0-5 in 1 run games, but we’re now 2-10 on the road!
Good news from Wrigley…The Dodgers now lead 10-7 in the home half of the 8th. Little Eddie with another RBI to give him 4 for the night. That’s 19 RBI’s and 8 HR’s on the season for Little Eddie. He leads the Dodgers in both of those categories. He’s also scheduled for a random testing immediately after this game…
All jokes aside, this thing with Edman is beginning to get silly stupid. I mean, the Dodgers have players named Ohtani, Betts and Freeman and Tommy Edman leads the Dodger team in both HR’s and RBI’s. It just ain’t right.
I don’t mean to overplay this thing, but I can’t help myself…Will Edman tater-up 40 times this season? He’s currently on pace for 50…Haha!
Uh oh…Cubbies narrow the margin to 10-9 going heading in to the visitor half of the 9th at Wrigley. Hernandez, Freeman and Edman due up for the Dodgers. They’ll pitch around Eddie…
Good to see the Cards got a win. Interesting that Matz was out of the pen as with the day off they must have went back to the 5 man rotation. I’m disappointed it is Matz in the pen though and we are subjugated to more Mikolas in the rotation.
I turned on the Brewers Giants game with our old friend Jordan Hicks on the mound. Wow he looks so different style wise. He has a mustache but long curly hair that sticks well out of his hat.
I was watching the replay on Marquee. Appeared it was going that way. They have a solid offense but the bullpen IMO will let them down in the end.
Flaherty pitched a quality start but lost 2-0 yesterday. 6 IP, 3 ER, 0 BB, 9 K. 96 pitches. He’s 1-2 with 2.63 ERA in 5 starts. He’s making $25M I believe.
Since I’m positive the Cardinals aren’t going anywhere, I might hate the Dodgers more than the Cubs right now. What they’re doing is BAD for the game I love.
I don’t see how the Dodgers are bad for the game for trying to win championships.
Teams that are bad for the game are those that cry poor to get welfare from their fellow baseball owners and the taxpayers.
What the Dodgers themselves are doing isn’t bad. They are doing exactly what they should be doing. However, there’s a good argument that the league should step in and balance the playing field to some degree to increase competitiveness. Baseball is certainly still competitive – at least if you’re a big market or mid-market team. But if you’re a small market team, you are out as soon as the season starts barring a miracle. Just look at how the 10 smallest market teams have done over the past 30 years. I think those 10 teams collectively have won 1 time (Royals). That is probably bad for baseball as a whole, although I think you could make an argument that it’s not.
And now the envelope has been pushed even further by the Dodgers and Mets. It wouldn’t be a surprise if those 2 teams win 6 or 7 of the next 10 World Series. Bought championships might cause casual fans of the sport to turn their attention to sports with more even and thrilling competition like the NBA or NFL.
The Cardinals are one of the 10 smallest market teams.
Prior to this year, the A’s were in one of the largest markets. Miami is in one of the largest markets.
Stop the welfare for teams masquerading as small market teams.
And “small” market teams that are welfare recipients get an extra $70 million from MLB, on top of the $100+ million that all MLB teams get.
If you want to address competitive balance, all teams receiving welfare should be forced to spend 100% of the money they receive from MLB on payroll, and should be forced to make money off their attendance and local TV contracts.
The bottom 15 teams in payroll for 2024, used 33% of mlbs total spent. As long as the East and West divisions dominate budgets, and the postseason, mlb has a sellable product. The bottom 15 budgets are only a concern for their fans. MLB is paying those owners to shut up and take the welfare checks.
There are different ways of measuring it, but by most the Cardinals are mid-market.
I agree teams should be forced to spend the money they are given. Some of them probably do – just not on players. I’m under the assumption most small market teams have slim to negative operating margins. Owners own them because the value of owning a team continues to skyrocket. However, I’m betting many lose money annually on the puts and takes. So yeah, you can force them to spend the handouts on players, but that may mean crappy bathrooms or concession stands or broken pipes or poor coaching. There’s just so much disparity between what the Mets and Dodgers get on their TV deals because of their market and what the Royals or Twins get.
There are different ways of measuring it, but by most the Cardinals are mid-market.
The accepted way of measuring a market is by Metropolitan Statistical Area, and in terms of baseball cities, the Cardinals are in the bottom 10.
You could look at television markets, but the Cardinals are also in the bottom 10 there.
So, I don’t know any accepted way the Cardinals would be considered “mid-market”, except they used to draw fans to the ballpark, so they made more money than teams in larger markets. But that is not “mid-market”, that is “mid-revenue”.
I don’t think any teams are actually losing money, except in Covid 20 & 21.
Let’s say you are an actual small market team getting $170 million from MLB + $20 million in local TV + gate attendance and concessions. Your payroll is $70-120 million. Where is the rest of the money going that you are losing money?
I
don’t see how the Dodgers are bad for the game for trying to win championships
That’s not why they’re bad for the game. They’re bad for the game for buying championships. Do you enjoy knowing you aren’t even in the conversation for top players anymore? Or when you do finally develope top talent they are gone in free agency? That’s the reality.
LA – I was looking at TV Deals, local population, and ballpark attendance. Basically, the stuff that drives revenue. In that respect, the Cardinals are somewhere between 16 and 22. Either one of the largest small market teams or more likely one of the smaller mid-market teams.
I think we just have to agree to disagree on what it costs to run a baseball team. But I think you’re short-changing the costs by a lot. You have players, owners, coaches, stadium workers, grounds crews, equipment for grounds crew, equipment for players, equipment for concessions, building maintenance, building maintenance crews, media workers, equipment for media workers, offices with furniture, minor league facilities with all of these expenses, technology workers, special technology equipment, training equipment, pensions, benefit costs, workers’ compensation (which happens to be very high in baseball), property insurance, payroll taxes, utilities at all your facilities, hotels, flights, busses, player perks, executive perks, etc etc.
JNevel – TV deals are a function of TV market size and the ability of the team to market itself. Local population is Metropolitan Statistical Area.
Ballpark attendance is not market size.
I’m not short-changing anything. Clubs should be able to cover the cost of their ballpark functions and administrative staff strictly from their local TV deals, ballpark attendance and ballpark concessions.
It’s strange that billionaires need welfare to run a profitable business.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.