Dan to Roch: “I’ve been told by ownership that the club’s going to take the payroll down significantly. "

[waroriole]

8 hours ago, Moose Milligan said:

Someone was yammering to me here a couple weeks ago about how a big payroll was a great thing and it was a travashamockery that the Orioles were looking to cut payroll.  

Trea back?

[Moose Milligan]

1 minute ago, waroriole said:

Trea back?

Don't think that's possible.

 

[weams]

2 minutes ago, waroriole said:

Trea back?

There are other members of the Funky Bunch. 

[weams]

2 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

Don't think that's possible.

 

I'm not sure that Maine IP addresses work. 

[weams]

Well they tell me that I'm wanted
Yeah, I'm a wanted man
I'm a colt in your stable
I'm what Cain was to Abel
Mister catch me if you can
I'm going out in a blaze of glory

[spiritof66]

8 hours ago, Frobby said:

It only makes sense to take the payroll down during a period when your team won’t be competitive anyway.   The Astros took their payroll down to $14.6 mm in 2013.   The Cubs got down to $59.8 mm in 2014.    This is what rebuilding looks like.   

Those numbers reflect payroll for the active 25-man rosters only. The Cubs had another $38.7 million owed to guys no longer on the roster, and the Astros had $21.9 million of those obligations. Their total payrolls were $89.5 million for the '14 Cubs (22nd in MLB) and $35.6 million for the '13 Astros (last in MLB). The Astros' number is really impressive.

[Frobby]

1 hour ago, bpilktree67 said:

The Astros player total was right at 15 million they had all guys at 490K to 550k and Bedard at 1.5 million.   They did however have nearly 23 million they were eating with trades they made during that offseason and other moves.  So it was more about 38 million total in player salary as they paid more for guys not to play for the then they did to play for them. 

 

1 hour ago, spiritof66 said:

Those numbers reflect payroll for the active 25-man rosters only. The Cubs had another $38.7 million owed to guys no longer on the roster, and the Astros had $21.9 million of those obligations. Their total payrolls were $89.5 million for the '14 Cubs (22nd in MLB) and $35.6 million for the '13 Astros (last in MLB). The Astros' number is really impressive.

Thanks for clarifying.   Still, the point is that many successful rebuilds begin with severe cuts in payroll, so it’s not surprising the O’s are planning to do that. 

[Dark Helmet]

I expected this and I'm fine with it. However, I'm not fine with the comment about spending beyond their market. I'm not sure I buy that. And if it's true And they can't afford to carry a payroll in the range they've been at, then they need to petition to change divisions or leagues. 

This team won't be able to compete if they have to clean house every 5 years because of payroll issues. They'll juat be a developmental team for the big market clubs. If the Orioles market is so weak, why did MLB allow another team to move into one already saturated it appears...atleast according to the Orioles. 

[weams]

4 minutes ago, Dark Helmet said:

I expected this and I'm fine with it. However, I'm not fine with the comment about spending beyond their market. I'm not sure I buy that. And if it's true And they can't afford to carry a payroll in the range they've been at, then they need to petition to change divisions or leagues. 

This team won't be able to compete if they have to clean house every 5 years because of payroll issues. They'll juat be a developmental team for the big market clubs. If the Orioles market is so weak, why did MLB allow another team to move into one already saturated it appears...atleast according to the Orioles. 

What if you are wrong? What if the market does not support 160?

[weams]

5 minutes ago, Dark Helmet said:

If the Orioles market is so weak, why did MLB allow another team to move into one already saturated it appears...atleast according to the Orioles. 

You'd have to ask those crooks who colluded with the arbitration the first time. They must have had some agenda. 

[Dark Helmet]

26 minutes ago, weams said:

What if you are wrong? What if the market does not support 160?

Then consistant winning baseball in Baltimore doesn't seem possible in the AL East. And I loathe the Gnats even more now.

[Dark Helmet]

32 minutes ago, weams said:

You'd have to ask those crooks who colluded with the arbitration the first time. They must have had some agenda. 

It just stinks that the Orioles are having to fight to keep the Gnats from getting a bigger piece of MASN. The Orioles getting a majority chunk of MASN was supposed to be to compensate for allowing anpther team to cut into their market. What did the Orioles really gain when it's all said and done?

[Can_of_corn]

Just now, Dark Helmet said:

It just stinks that the Orioles are having to fight to keep the Gnats from getting a bigger piece of MASN. The Orioles getting a majority chunk of MASN was supposed to be to compensate for allowing anpther team to cut into their market. What did the Orioles really gain when it's all said and done?

Who is to say they had exclusive rights to the area to begin with?

I never thought Angelos had a compelling case. 

I think he made out like a bandit with the MASN deal.

[Dark Helmet]

39 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Who is to say they had exclusive rights to the area to begin with?

I never thought Angelos had a compelling case. 

I think he made out like a bandit with the MASN deal.

He did personally. But I'm talking about the Orioles. 

I never thought DC or MLB had a compelling case that the Balt/DC market could support 2 teams.

[hoosiers]

A couple thoughts:

 - DD never said the franchise lost $ in recent years.  He said the team funded a major league payroll that was larger than the presumed regular payroll for a market our size.  Our payroll has been over $160+M - so I believe DD's quote is spot on.  We have funded this payroll through delayed investments especially internationally - which reflects the urgency to win now and invest every last $ in the major league roster at the expense of better investments in international prospect (that would ultimately have ultimately lowered payroll).

 - I do not believe the quotes should be a surprise to anyone.  Attendance is way down, MASN viewership is way down.  Revenues will be down accordingly next year.  We need to bring payroll down to a point to reflect the lower revenues and still allow the investments we need to make.

 - I would not be surprised to see Buck retained, but at a lower salary, if Buck wants to stay.

 - I believe Chris Davis will be back next season, but could be a candidate to be released prior to or during the 2020 season.