Jump to content
Sports Guy

Payroll expectation for 2022

2022 Payroll  

50 members have voted

  1. 1. What range do you expect the 2022 payroll to be in?

    • 40 million or less
      8
    • 41-50 million
      10
    • 51-60 million
      16
    • 61-70 million
      12
    • 70+ million
      4


Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, Sports Guy said:

I don’t know why we wouldn’t look at the whole picture?

Ownership will take all money owed into account.  That 18.5M is part of the payroll for 2022 and we should treat it as such.

That would be fine if everyone used $18.5 million for those obligations to Davis, Cobb and any other payments that are due in 2022 to players no longer on the roster. The problem is that I've seen different numbers attached to those obligations, so we're starting at different points, making it hard to compare estimates. But if I look at that 2022 nut as totaling $18.5 million, my guess is an opening-day payroll of $59 to $62 million. Call it $60 million.

By the way, if I were setting a budget or target or whatever it is the Orioles do when they make their plans for player payroll (I'm assuming there is a planning exercise -- maybe there isn't), I wouldn't count that $18.5 million as part of my MLB payroll. Those are sunk costs the Orioles will have to pay in 2022 -- like stadium rentals, debt service, Warehouse rentals, operating costs of practice and training facilities, employee pensions, etc. -- over which the team has no discretion and no way to avoid or reduce, and which won't help the team compete in 2022. If I were the Orioles considering a budget or target for 2022 player payroll, I'd be seeking answers to these questions as I confer with Elias and others: (1) what is the on-field performance we're shooting for in 2022 as part of our rebuilding plan, (2) what players should be retained at what cost, and what kinds of players (or, later on, what specific players) should be acquired to get to that level of performance, and at what likely salaries, and (3) can the Orioles afford to pay that much, or do affordability issues require that the plan be scaled back? I would also explore the possible cost of back-up plans if things don't work out.

I think the $18.5 million should be irrelevant to the first two questions. The fact that Dad or Brady or Buck or Duquette or whoever incurred some very large 2022 payment obligations to departed players shouldn't change the CEO's plans for the Orioles' 2022 player payroll to go forward with the rebuild. The $18.5 million is relevant to the third question, about affordability: if Elias says I think I can come up with a hell of a team if I can have a payroll of about $150 million, that's probably not going to work. But the payroll levels that I and others are throwing around are, based on the limited information that's available, perfectly affordable for the Orioles to incur while paying interest on the team's debt, meeting its other expenses, and turning a profit. That's true with or without the $18.5 million obligation owed to the Crusher and Cobb and whoever (or whatever the right amount is). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, OriolesMagic83 said:

I can't see the MLBPA decreasing the luxury tax, at least w/o a strike.  Who knows, maybe they would settle for a system that increases player revenue.  I was thinking a system that increases salary minimums for veteran players (money would obviously have to come from somewhere).  NBA has a system like this. 

You seem to be missing the point. Or maybe I'm not making it very well.

Decreasing the luxury tax from $210M to $180M only (or heavily disproportionately) impacts only superstar players by limiting the maximum they can be paid.

There aren't many of those. The move is mostly symbolic

While at the same creating a $100M minimum payroll for all teams vastly increases the money available to be paid to everyone else. The rank and file.

This would positively impact many more (arguably the vast majority of ) players.

So as proposed... MANY more players would benefit, than would be hurt. And each player has an equal voice. And I think they're good enough at simple math to understand this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, OriolesMagic83 said:

$15 mill for prearb guys sounds high, since the O's like to give guys $10k raises or something similar.  Even if the $4-14 M figure is low, it reinforces my idea that Santander/Mancini should be traded/non tendered.  I can only think that Stowers is in the AFL because Elias thinks he will be a ML outfielder next year.  I could see the O's replacing Santander/Mancini w/ a cheap stopgap for $2 mill or less.  Looks like the best hopes for next year's team is a Cashner type signing that actually works and a veteran reliever, obviously not top tier.  At least one somewhat dependable 2b/SS/3B player needs to be signed and the O's could patch a lineup around them. 

You are probably right. I was thinking 30 prearb guys on the 40 man times $500k for the MLB minimum but a lot of those guys will be making less while they aren't on the active roster.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, owknows said:

You seem to be missing the point. Or maybe I'm not making it very well.

Decreasing the luxury tax from $210M to $180M only (or heavily disproportionately) impacts only superstar players by limiting the maximum they can be paid.

There aren't many of those. The move is mostly symbolic

While at the same creating a $100M minimum payroll for all teams vastly increases the money available to be paid to everyone else. The rank and file.

This would positively impact many more (arguably the vast majority of ) players.

So as proposed... MANY more players would benefit, than would be hurt. And each player has an equal voice. And I think they're good enough at simple math to understand this.

The veteran/All-Star/MVP type players have an outsize voice in the MLBPA.  Notice the big emphasis on pushing what the top contract ever received by a position player or pitcher, whether yearly or the full contract.  Less emphasis is placed on the fact that overall salaries are falling.  But at least the top players are making $35 mill/yr instead of $30 mill/yr.  It's so hard to make it on $30 mill/yr.  I think what would be good for baseball is a much larger pool of revenue shared and a much narrower band of payrolls.  I don't see why the minimum payroll couldn't be $100 mill+ and the max around $180 mill.  There could be a lot of mediocre free agents getting big 1 year deals to meet the payroll minimum.  Having near the same payroll has worked well for the NFL.  It seems like it would do away with the tanking everyone hates. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, spiritof66 said:

That would be fine if everyone used $18.5 million for those obligations to Davis, Cobb and any other payments that are due in 2022 to players no longer on the roster. The problem is that I've seen different numbers attached to those obligations, so we're starting at different points, making it hard to compare estimates. But if I look at that 2022 nut as totaling $18.5 million, my guess is an opening-day payroll of $59 to $62 million. Call it $60 million.

By the way, if I were setting a budget or target or whatever it is the Orioles do when they make their plans for player payroll (I'm assuming there is a planning exercise -- maybe there isn't), I wouldn't count that $18.5 million as part of my MLB payroll. Those are sunk costs the Orioles will have to pay in 2022 -- like stadium rentals, debt service, Warehouse rentals, operating costs of practice and training facilities, employee pensions, etc. -- over which the team has no discretion and no way to avoid or reduce, and which won't help the team compete in 2022. If I were the Orioles considering a budget or target for 2022 player payroll, I'd be seeking answers to these questions as I confer with Elias and others: (1) what is the on-field performance we're shooting for in 2022 as part of our rebuilding plan, (2) what players should be retained at what cost, and what kinds of players (or, later on, what specific players) should be acquired to get to that level of performance, and at what likely salaries, and (3) can the Orioles afford to pay that much, or do affordability issues require that the plan be scaled back? I would also explore the possible cost of back-up plans if things don't work out.

I think the $18.5 million should be irrelevant to the first two questions. The fact that Dad or Brady or Buck or Duquette or whoever incurred some very large 2022 payment obligations to departed players shouldn't change the CEO's plans for the Orioles' 2022 player payroll to go forward with the rebuild. The $18.5 million is relevant to the third question, about affordability: if Elias says I think I can come up with a hell of a team if I can have a payroll of about $150 million, that's probably not going to work. But the payroll levels that I and others are throwing around are, based on the limited information that's available, perfectly affordable for the Orioles to incur while paying interest on the team's debt, meeting its other expenses, and turning a profit. That's true with or without the $18.5 million obligation owed to the Crusher and Cobb and whoever (or whatever the right amount is). 

Highly unlikely the brothers view this the same way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, OriolesMagic83 said:

The veteran/All-Star/MVP type players have an outsize voice in the MLBPA.  Notice the big emphasis on pushing what the top contract ever received by a position player or pitcher, whether yearly or the full contract.  Less emphasis is placed on the fact that overall salaries are falling.  But at least the top players are making $35 mill/yr instead of $30 mill/yr.  It's so hard to make it on $30 mill/yr.  I think what would be good for baseball is a much larger pool of revenue shared and a much narrower band of payrolls.  I don't see why the minimum payroll couldn't be $100 mill+ and the max around $180 mill.  There could be a lot of mediocre free agents getting big 1 year deals to meet the payroll minimum.  Having near the same payroll has worked well for the NFL.  It seems like it would do away with the tanking everyone hates. 

Any idea who the O's rep is?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, wildcard said:

Deferred salary for 2022

5.7m Davis

2m Cobb

1.5m Trumbo

1m  O'Day

1m Cashner

11.2m Total

Just want to point out that this excludes the money that has to go into escrow to fund Davis’ deferred payments related to the 2020 season.   Since 2020 was a truncated season, the deferred compensation for that year is about $2.2 mm rather than $6 mm.   Plus, the amount paid into escrow isn’t the full $2.2 mm, but an amount calculated to grow (at 5% per annum) into $2.2 mm by the time it’s payable to Davis.   So figure maybe $1.5 mm in 2022 dollars paid into the escrow.   Technically it’s not a payroll expense in 2022, but it’s cash the O’s can’t spend on something else.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Just want to point out that this excludes the money that has to go into escrow to fund Davis’ deferred payments related to the 2020 season.   Since 2020 was a truncated season, the deferred compensation for that year is about $2.2 mm rather than $6 mm.   Plus, the amount paid into escrow isn’t the full $2.2 mm, but an amount calculated to grow (at 5% per annum) into $2.2 mm by the time it’s payable to Davis.   So figure maybe $1.5 mm in 2022 dollars paid into the escrow.   Technically it’s not a payroll expense in 2022, but it’s cash the O’s can’t spend on something else.   

And he has $42M of deferred comp built into the original contract that's supposed to start in '23. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll take SG's 16 including Akin & Zimm for $15 M, keep Mancini and Santander for $10 M so 18 guys @ $25 M. I would add 2 SPs (E Rod, M Harvey) to eat innings with Means; 1 of Villar/Iggy/Galvis and an improved 3B (Harrison/Castro) for about $25 M so 22 guys @ $50 M. Deferred at $11 M and the last 4 at minimum so about $63 M for 26 guys.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Aristotelian said:

And he has $42M of deferred comp built into the original contract that's supposed to start in '23. 

Yes, but the ‘23 payments were funded in 2018 if I understand this correctly.   The 0’s already had to pay into escrow as follows:

7/1/18 -funded the $6 mm deferred compensation related to 2016

7/1/19- Funded $6 mm related to 2017

7/1/20 - funded $6 mm related to 2018

7/1/21 - funded $6 mm related to 2019

So, $24 mm of the $38.2 mm in deferred payments is funded already.    The rest is funded as follows:

7/1/22 - fund $2.2 mm related to 2020 (wouid have been $6 mm if they had played the full season in 2020)

7/1/23 - fund $6 mm related to 2021

7/1/24 - fund $6 mm related to 2022

After that, all the funds due to Davis get paid from the escrow fund, unless that fund hasn’t grown by the assumed 5% per annum, in which case the O’s have to make up the difference when the payments are due.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Yes, but the ‘23 payments were funded in 2018 if I understand this correctly.   The 0’s already had to pay into escrow as follows:

7/1/18 -funded the $6 mm deferred compensation related to 2016

7/1/19- Funded $6 mm related to 2017

7/1/20 - funded $6 mm related to 2018

7/1/21 - funded $6 mm related to 2019

So, $24 mm of the $38.2 mm in deferred payments is funded already.    The rest is funded as follows:

7/1/22 - fund $2.2 mm related to 2020 (wouid have been $6 mm if they had played the full season in 2020)

7/1/23 - fund $6 mm related to 2021

7/1/24 - fund $6 mm related to 2022

After that, all the funds due to Davis get paid from the escrow fund, unless that fund hasn’t grown by the assumed 5% per annum, in which case the O’s have to make up the difference when the payments are due.

Thanks for clarifying, I could not find a clear answer in any of the media articles on his contract and the restructure. I wonder what the idea is behind the escrow payments. Seems like the payment isn't actually deferred as far as the O's are concerned, and Davis has to wait longer to get his money. Isn't that a lose-lose for both sides?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It looks like for 2021 Cots showed Tyler Wells at 570,500 lowest.   I think some of how more of the pay could get transferred to younger, more productive players is that getting bumped 10-15%, which might be an extra couple million assuming the roster will have about 15-18 minimum guys.

Between 2016 and 2017 last CBA, looks like the minimum increased about 6% from 507.5 to 535.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/256187/minimum-salary-of-players-in-major-league-baseball/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Aristotelian said:

Thanks for clarifying, I could not find a clear answer in any of the media articles on his contract and the restructure. I wonder what the idea is behind the escrow payments. Seems like the payment isn't actually deferred as far as the O's are concerned, and Davis has to wait longer to get his money. Isn't that a lose-lose for both sides?

The escrow payments are a CBA requirement for all deferrals longer than 2 years, and they serve three main purposes: (1) they give the player some level of assurance that the deferred money will actually be there when it’s due, (2) it keeps teams from overcommitting future cash, and (3) it’s not taxable to the player until it’s actually received.   Many deferred compensation plans are structured in a similar way, not just in MLB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Frobby said:

The escrow payments are a CBA requirement for all deferrals longer than 2 years, and they serve three main purposes: (1) they give the player some level of assurance that the deferred money will actually be there when it’s due, (2) it keeps teams from overcommitting future cash, and (3) it’s not taxable to the player until it’s actually received.   Many deferred compensation plans are structured in a similar way, not just in MLB.

Got it. I always thought the deferral was a way for teams to save money in the short term and spread out payments but it sounds like it is actually more of a benefit to the player (especially #3). From that standpoint it actually sounds like a way to increase the net after tax dollars going to the player without costing any more to the team. From that standpoint it's surprising you don't hear about these more often. Good to know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Aristotelian said:

Got it. I always thought the deferral was a way for teams to save money in the short term and spread out payments but it sounds like it is actually more of a benefit to the player (especially #3). From that standpoint it actually sounds like a way to increase the net after tax dollars going to the player without costing any more to the team. From that standpoint it's surprising you don't hear about these more often. Good to know.

Well, it is still both.   Because of the 5% per annum discount factor, and the 2-year delay in escrowing the funds, it still helps the team with short term cash flow compared to paying up front.   There may be some tax advantages for the team, too, but I’m not sure.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



Orioles Information


Orioles News and Information

Daily Organizational Boxscores
News

Tony's Takes

Orioles Roster Resource

Orioles Prospect Information

2021 Top 30 Prospects List

Prospect Scouting Reports

Statistics

2021 Orioles Stats

2021 Orioles Minor League Stats

Baseball Savant Stats






  • Posts

    • Recent NBA picks don't matter that much to an incoming coach.  They're attributed to the coach that they worked under, not the school IMO.   Texas Tech... their athletic budget is 2/3 of Maryland's and theyre in the red according to publicly available data.  Compare that to Maryland, 5 million in the black. They cannot outbid Maryland and don't have as many built in recruiting advantages.  And they've already proven that they can't necessarily keep a successful coach, or replace said departure with a splashy hire.   FSU... ehh.  It's a football school, they have older facilities, a $30 million deficit in the athletic department, and if Hamilton leaves/retires I really don't think they're beating Maryland for a job.  I 100% agree that they have been more successful recently.  But no championships, and their only f4 was in the 70s.  Not exactly a powerhouse history.   And as I said, other analysts like Jeff Goodman, Rob dauster, John Fanta, Matt Norlander have gone on record saying his is anywhere from a top-15 to top-25 HC position.  And those guys are not affiliated with Maryland.
    • Now is a good time to start this discussion. Heading into this season, what players have value or the potential to create trade value? It's obvious we probably have another year or two of selling a couple pieces. Below is my best guess as to who Elias would be willing to move for the right price. Cedric Mullins - Has a high price tag obviously. However, we know this year is a wash competitively, could be better next year, but most likely not play off bound. That would leave Mullins here for 24 and 25 to realistically compete for the playoffs. If we can get back multiple pieces in a trade now that could help us compete by that time AND can be controlled several years beyond, it's worth listening. Will he cheaper in the meantime as you avoid Mullins arbitration years. Good sell high candidate too John Means - Same as above. Plus Means is a bit older, probably at peak value especially if he had a good start to 2022. If you had a solid return on both Means and Mullins, it could infuse the upcoming wave of talent that could make us competitive for years Trey Mancini - Best case scenario, he looks like 2019 Trey and we swing him at the deadline for a solid prospect or 2.  If he plays like he did last year, you might get a Andrew Cashner type return Austin Hays - He's currently not on the block, nor should he be, but by chance he has a blow up season like Mullins did last year, then he would share the same circumstances in regards to service time as Mullins. We'll see if we cross that bridge Cole Sulser - He was good last year. He's controllable but a tad older than the Youth movement coming, so probably reaching peak value this year Anthony Santander- Already on 4th service year. Has shown flashes of what he could be. If he stays healthy and breaks out, he could fetch a really good return. This would be the year of peak value IF he performs. Tanner Scott - Seems to always be on the cusp of a break out. If he can harness the fb and slider a little more, some will want the LHP at the deadline Paul Fry- Depends on which Paul Fry shows up to camp. He could have been traded last year but Elias didn't like the return. He'll probably take it this year Dillon Tate - No rush to trade, but saw his name come up last year. Needs to get better, and if he does, he might be worth trading as he has similar arbitration status as Mullins and Hays Roughned Odor - If by chance he figures it out and hits a bunch of fingers, he'd be a trade deadline guy, but that was our hope for Maikel Franco Jordan Lyles- Apparently there's a pretty strong market for 5.00 era innings eaters. Another potential trade deadline guy, ala Cashner  Jorge Lopez - They paid a decent penny to bring back the inconsistent starter. If he thrives in a relief role, now would be a good time to trade the soon to be 29 year old in his fourth year of service  DJ Stewart - It's a now or never year for Stewart. He probably has a better chance of getting cut than traded as it stands.  Seems to have the OBP tool, has to hit now. If he can be an .800 OPS OF/DH, he essentially becomes a poor man's Kyle Schwarber. At 28, he'd be a peak value should he perform.          
    • Well, agree to disagree.  
    • The ACC that everyone loved is dead.  The old 9 team conference with true round-robin died long before Maryland left.  The ACC thought so much of Maryland that they decided Pitt was going to be its natural rival and wasn't going to ensure any annual home and homes with UNC, Duke, State, UVA, etc..  It was the last straw from a conference that never cared about Maryland. The move to the Big Ten has been great from an academic sense (look at the expansion of the engineering program), and the basketball has been fine (I'd argue that the BIG 10 has been deeper consistently than the ACC since Maryland left).    
    • I can't be the only one that thinks 6-9 is a black hole
    • Those 3 things do matter…but MD is the destination of those local kids.  Recruiting is so different now, especially with the power of social media.     There are tons of attractive urban areas, so that really isn’t much of a factor overall.  It may help vs some Midwest school in podunk but up against a lot of the power 5 teams, not as much. Lots of schools have top notch facilities.   I mean, look at their recruiting rankings. They have had 1 top 10 Class in the last decade.  They had more classes ranked outside the top 35 than inside the top 20.     Had you asked me 5+ years ago, I would have agreed it was a top 25 job.  It’s just not the case anymore.  
    • First of all, the current state of the program absolutely matters and it matters a hell of a lot more than MDs title in 2002. Would those schools out hire?  Maybe..money is important and the Terps haven’t had any. BTw, I meant Texas Tech, not Texas A&M.  Now, we will see what TT does after losing Beard but that’s been a really good program recently. FSU has been a far better program than MD for a solid 5-10 years.  It’s not close.  They have had several first round picks, highly ranked recruiting classes and lots of tourney success, not to mention being one of the winningest programs in the ACC. Your last sentence is just wrong.  The idea that you think it’s clear is absurd. They have limited recent success(especially in March), not much national appeal, no money and no real high end picks to point to in the league recently.     Like I said, the right coach can elevate the program back to what you are saying…but as we talk now, as the job is looked at by recruits, etc…it’s not there anymore.  Things can change.  
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...