Os are tenth in 2007 MLB payroll

[Baltimoron]

MLB releases the team payroll figures for Opening Day and at the end of the year (the year-end figure is what gets used to calculate whether clubs break through the Luxury Tax threshold).

Maury Brown has introduced a two piece article at baseball prospectus that discusses the 2007 salary information here. Although the full article is only available to subscribers, the MLB aggregate salary info from 2005-2007 for each team is accessible to all.

2007 O's opening day salary is reported as $95,107,807.

[Frobby]

Peter opened hs checkbook pretty wide this year. Considering the O's were something like 20th in attendance last season, you really can't complain about payroll restrictions. I'm surprised how small Toronto's payroll is.

Yankees $195 mm

Red Sos $143 mm

Orioles $95 mm

Blue Jays $72 mm

Devil Rays $24 mm

[Pedro Cerrano]

My gripe with Angelos has never ever been about his reluctance to spend money -- I think he is quite generous when it comes to paying players. If we were truly "small-market" like some journalists say, we wouldn't have been able to sign Tejada.

My issue is, and will continue to be, his meddling in baseball affairs that he really has no clue on. If you aren't happy with Flanagan, fine. Hire a competent GM, tell him exactly how much money he can spend, and watch the games. That's it.

[SurhoffRules]

I'm surprised how small Toronto's payroll is.

Blue Jays $72 mm

Isn't Toronto payroll going to balloon over the next few years with the contracts they handed out last offseason?

[Sports Guy]

Its not how much do they spend but what do they spend it on.

They still have 1/3 of the payroll allocated to players that you could have at much much less money.

[Mark Carver]

Peter opened hs checkbook pretty wide this year. Considering the O's were something like 20th in attendance last season, you really can't complain about payroll restrictions. I'm surprised how small Toronto's payroll is.

Yankees $195 mm

Red Sos $143 mm

Orioles $95 mm

Blue Jays $72 mm

Devil Rays $24 mm

Somethings not right... at Cot's Baseball Contracts, which includes salaries plus pro-rated signing bonuses, payroll obligations for former players and payments from other clubs.

Yankees - $189.6m

Red Sox - $143.0m

Orioles - $93.5m

Blue Jays - $81.9m

Devil Rays - $24.1m

[TGO]

Isn't Toronto payroll going to balloon over the next few years with the contracts they handed out last offseason?

Short answer: Yes. I don't know if "balloon" is necessarily the right word. Their payroll will increase, though I don't know how much.

Their salary commitments are listed here: http://www.mlb4u.com/teamcontract.php?team=Toronto%20Blue%20Jays

[Fan4Life]

Its not how much do they spend but what do they spend it on.

They still have 1/3 of the payroll allocated to players that you could have at much much less money.

Can you express a list of players for each of the ones we signed, that you would have signed instead for less? So we can tack their progress as compared to who we actually have and know how much stock to put into this comment.

[Frobby]

Somethings not right... at Cot's Baseball Contracts, which includes salaries plus pro-rated signing bonuses, payroll obligations for former players and payments from other clubs.

Yankees - $189.6m

Red Sox - $143.0m

Orioles - $93.5m

Blue Jays - $81.9m

Devil Rays - $24.1m

Not that far off, the basic picture is the same. All these sites have their own way of treating the bonuses, etc.

[Sports Guy]

Can you express a list of players for each of the ones we signed, that you would have signed instead for less? So we can tack their progress as compared to who we actually have and know how much stock to put into this comment.

Cruz Jr instead of Payton(Cruz got 1/600K...Payton got 2/10)

Many relievers instead of Baez...THat list could go on and on.

No Mora extension..Wes Helms, trade for a young guy, whatever..Hell Huff at third

Fultz instead of Walker....Walker's contract wasn't terrible and if they pitch him versus righties alot, i will be much more in favor of him.

Many players instead of Trax.

Traded Benson when we had the chance.

Many back up catchers for league minimum instead of Bako.

[Frobby]

Many players instead of Trax.

The main name that was getting kicked around (not sure if you were one of them) was Mark Redman. He has been nothing short of horrible in his two starts for Atlanta (12.96 ERA in 8.1 IP).

So far, in terms of actual performance (as opposed to anticipated performance) I have no big complaints about how the O's spend their money this winter. The bullpen is panning out so far, Trax has looked better than expected. Jaret Wright kind of sticks in my craw but that's about all.

[DrungoHazewood]

Cruz Jr instead of Payton(Cruz got 1/600K...Payton got 2/10)

Many relievers instead of Baez...THat list could go on and on.

No Mora extension..Wes Helms, trade for a young guy, whatever..Hell Huff at third

Fultz instead of Walker....Walker's contract wasn't terrible and if they pitch him versus righties alot, i will be much more in favor of him.

Many players instead of Trax.

Traded Benson when we had the chance.

Many back up catchers for league minimum instead of Bako.

More exact figures:

Add in Knott/Dubois/House ($350k) instead of Gibbons (between $4.2M and $6.2M over '06-'09).

A Trachsel equivalent would have saved about $2.5M.

Could have saved about $500k on Bako.

Baez-like relievers could be had for no more than half of what he got, so let's assume a $3M a year.

Walker-like players are signed all the time for a million or two, instead of $3M, so let's say $1M a year there.

Without getting two far down in the noise we can assume that (if $$ was the overwhelming concern) they could have had similar players for about $12M a year less. I'm not necessarily saying all of those choices were good/bad, but a really thrifty GM could have built essentially the same team for under $80M.

[NewMarketSean]

Yeah I'm looking at the BJ's and they have a lot more talent for $23 million less than what our payroll is.

A lot of that comes from their farm system and a lot of that comes from smart signings.

I don't know if they are much better than the O's but they are better IMO, and even if we were on the same level with them (I don't think the O's are better, at least at this point) then it's still $23 million.

[Sports Guy]

More exact figures:

Add in Knott/Dubois/House ($350k) instead of Gibbons (between $4.2M and $6.2M over '06-'09).

A Trachsel equivalent would have saved about $2.5M.

Could have saved about $500k on Bako.

Baez-like relievers could be had for no more than half of what he got, so let's assume a $3M a year.

Walker-like players are signed all the time for a million or two, instead of $3M, so let's say $1M a year there.

Without getting two far down in the noise we can assume that (if $$ was the overwhelming concern) they could have had similar players for about $12M a year less. I'm not necessarily saying all of those choices were good/bad, but a really thrifty GM could have built essentially the same team for under $80M.

You can save another 3-3.5 by signing a "cheaper Payton".

[Fan4Life]

Originally Posted by Sports Guy

Cruz Jr instead of Payton(Cruz got 1/600K...Payton got 2/10)

Many relievers instead of Baez...THat list could go on and on.

No Mora extension..Wes Helms, trade for a young guy, whatever..Hell Huff at third

Fultz instead of Walker....Walker's contract wasn't terrible and if they pitch him versus righties alot, i will be much more in favor of him.

Many players instead of Trax.

Traded Benson when we had the chance.

Many back up catchers for league minimum instead of Bako.[/Quote]

More exact figures:

Add in Knott/Dubois/House ($350k) instead of Gibbons (between $4.2M and $6.2M over '06-'09).

A Trachsel equivalent would have saved about $2.5M.

Could have saved about $500k on Bako.

Baez-like relievers could be had for no more than half of what he got, so let's assume a $3M a year.

Walker-like players are signed all the time for a million or two, instead of $3M, so let's say $1M a year there.

Without getting two far down in the noise we can assume that (if $$ was the overwhelming concern) they could have had similar players for about $12M a year less. I'm not necessarily saying all of those choices were good/bad, but a really thrifty GM could have built essentially the same team for under $80M.

While I appreciate the input and the partial answer, that didn't really answer my question. It's easy to say coulda woulda shoulda... I would like to see specific names you would have in place of who we do have so at least I can see that your options would have indeed been better, Now obviously if you're going to choose AAA type guys, that would be tough to make a fair comparison, but since it sounds like you're saying the guys we signed are a dime a dozen, heck, maybe even a bakers dozen, you should be able to list major leaguers that signed elsewhere for less, that you would have taken in place of someone we have....