We are cheap, proven

[brianod]

If this was a debate you would have lost two days ago. I was trying to play nice. And I, for the record, was stating that someone else used the same numbers you did (as one source) and produced a significantly different end product.

Good try, please explain how my numbers are garbage, yet they were included in your graph which somehow proves my point is wrong?

[brianod]

If this was a debate you would have lost two days ago. I was trying to play nice. And I, for the record, was stating that someone else used the same numbers you did (as one source) and produced a significantly different end product.

Besides accounting, I also took logic in college. If my numbers are garbage and they are included in your graph, ergo, you graph is????????

[Can_of_corn]

Good try, please explain how my numbers are garbage, yet they were included in your graph which somehow proves my point is wrong?

I never stated they "proved" you wrong. I used it to show a contrary opinion. I never said your work was incorrect. I stated that the Forbes data was not reliable. I never hid that the Fangraphs piece also used that data you had total freedom to look at the article in question.

[Can_of_corn]

Besides accounting, I also took logic in college. If my numbers are garbage and they are included in your graph, ergo, you graph is????????

Good thing I never stated absolute trust in the Fangraph's piece eh? Almost as if I wouldn't fully trust any piece on team finances.

[brianod]

I never stated they "proved" you wrong. I used it to show a contrary opinion. I never said your work was incorrect. I stated that the Forbes data was not reliable. I never hid that the Fangraphs piece also used that data you had total freedom to look at the article in question.

Besides accounting and logic, I also took Business Law in college, they advised you to rest you case when you have won. I will now follow that advice. Have a good night, I'm out. PS, I will order the book you mentioned, it does interest me.

[Can_of_corn]

Besides accounting and logic, I also took Business Law in college, they advised you to rest you case when you have won. I will now follow that advice. Have a good night, I'm out. PS, I will order the book you mentioned, it does interest me.

I can by that you studied law since declaring victory then leaving seems like something they would teach.

You also took some poli sci right? I can tell by how you tried to spin something that I wasn't trying to hide as a revelation.

Pray tell where else would Fangraphs go for their information? Just because the Forbes stuff is deeply flawed doesn't mean there are better options out there.

I also noticed how you completely ignored the real life scenario which compromised your 11 million profit argument.

But yea, congrats on the win.

[El Gordo]

I think he is saying that a) the data you are using(Forbes) can't be verified, and b) the same data can be used to reach a different conclusion. So your argument is on shaky ground.

[CA-ORIOLE]

Ok Angelos COULD probably spend more of his money. His C-WAR could be better. So what?

[DrungoHazewood]

How about in the ballpark with our competitors. I'm not impressed by the Yankees spending money, they have more money to spend. But when Milwaukee accepts 11 million in profit and we take 31, that is not good.

If all you want is smaller profit then get Angelos' accountant to change how he calculates depreciation and a few other paperwork drills and there you go. I think it was Paul Beeston who said any decent accountant could change a MLB team's $10M profit into a $10M loss with 100% legal tax sleight of hands.

[DrungoHazewood]

Ok Angelos COULD probably spend more of his money. His C-WAR could be better. So what?

Are you really that dense? We would have signed Cruz and Markakis and Miller and Scherzer, and traded for Kemp and Upton and probably Kershaw and Donaldson and we'd have won the World Series instead of losing to the Marlins!

[Frobby]

My assumption is that the costs of a major league franchise, outside of salaries, are basically equivalent. I think that's a valid assumption.

I doubt this assumption would be valid at all. Stadium lease costs vary widely from one team to another. Some teams spend a lot more on scouting and development than others do. High revenue teams spend money on things that low revenue teams forego.

[weams]

I doubt this assumption would be valid at all. Stadium lease costs vary widely from one team to another. Some teams spend a lot more on scouting and development than others do. High revenue teams spend money on things that low revenue teams forego.

For instance. When we were cheap and mismanaged, our spring training attendees had to lift weights in tents in a parking lot in the blazing Florida heat.

[Can_of_corn]

If all you want is smaller profit then get Angelos' accountant to change how he calculates depreciation and a few other paperwork drills and there you go. I think it was Paul Beeston who said any decent accountant could change a MLB team's $10M profit into a $10M loss with 100% legal tax sleight of hands.

That is part of what that book I mentioned goes into.

Unless you get them to open the books and have a team of experts look at them you (or Forbes) have little idea what is actually going on.

[brianod]

I assume Forbes would be able to defend their numbers if asked to. Do you really think they would publish these figures without a reasonable amount of research and without being able to defend them? So, the 31 million is not exact. It doesn't change the main point. It could be 35 or it could be 27 but I highly doubt Forbes is totally inaccurate.

[brianod]

I don't plan to spend a beautiful holiday arguing. I wish all you guys a wonderful Memorial Day, even those that think I'm full of it:)