What are your expectations for Santander and Hays in 2021?

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, Sports Guy said:

And btw, to prove the point further...as you state here, attendance was never amazing.  The presence of the Nats probably means the attendance will never be amazing again (I’m defining that as 3M+).

And despite that, they had payrolls ranging from 107-165M for 5 years.

Where they screwed up, imo, was that they didn’t start rebuilding sooner.  They should already be back to contention had they started this process when they should have as opposed to when they did.

That being said, they proved that you don’t need to have crazy high attendance to spend money and I’m not even asking foe them to spend close to the what they were spending in most of those years.

You can explain that easily enough.

1. They ramped up payroll to help a contending team in the hopes that attendance would spike.
2. An elderly owner not in the best of health was willing to spend in the hopes of winning a title.  A situation that doesn't currently exist.
3. They used the MLBAM tech money.

[Moose Milligan]

20 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

You said, I don’t believe they are sitting on giant sums of money.  That’s not the same as a pile of money? Ummm, ok.  
 

And thank you for admitting they can spend more.  That is and was my point.  You are presuming I’m not talking about a ton more.  I stated 80-100M.  I don’t need to see the books to know they can spend that.  We have seen what TV and radio contracts bring them, MASN, etc...they can spend that but they aren’t.  Why?  Because of rebuilding.  That’s why.  It’s not because they can’t, it’s because they choose not to.

 

They brought in 35 million it gate receipts in 2019.  If I'm doing my math right, exactly 0 in gate receipts last year.  We can't ignore that the pandemic did damage.

In 2021, they've got 41.5 million in player salary on the books. If you want to assume they can double it, sure, be my guest. 

[Sports Guy]

3 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

You can explain that easily enough.

1. They ramped up payroll to help a contending team in the hopes that attendance would spike.
2. An elderly owner not in the best of health was willing to spend in the hopes of winning a title.  A situation that doesn't currently exist.
3. They used the MLBAM tech money.

And you can easily explain how they can spend more money now than they are.

 

[Sports Guy]

18 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

They brought in 35 million it gate receipts in 2019.  If I'm doing my math right, exactly 0 in gate receipts last year.  We can't ignore that the pandemic did damage.

In 2021, they've got 41.5 million in player salary on the books. If you want to assume they can double it, sure, be my guest. 

The payroll will be closer to 60M.  And yes, I’m perfectly fine assuming a team that is worth a few billion and brings in a big revenue stream from their RSN and national and TV radio deals can find another 20-40M to spend on this team to make it better.

You can choose to disagree with that but to me, that goes back to what I said before.  They have fed the fan base this rebuild stuff for so long that people are just buying into it.  Rebuilding was needed for this team.  They needed to do it.  That’s not up for debate imo.  But they have done it.  They have collected more talent, gotten cheap, not blocked players, etc...now it’s time to start to try and win.   No one is saying to stop doing what they have been doing because there is nothing about what they have been doing that you can’t do if you are winning 100 as opposed to losing 100.

[Can_of_corn]

5 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

And you can easily explain how they can spend more money now than they are.

 

I've never said otherwise.

You haven't seen my multitude of posts complaining about them not spending on things other than ML payroll?

[HowAboutThat]

1 hour ago, Sports Guy said:

Of course..but he asked for a team that did it so I supplied him with one.

I think the question here is different. At the moment Mike is not focusing on winning. He is not, however, focusing on losing. It seems as if you are suggesting he is trying to lose rather than not trying to win. I think it’s best to take him at his word which is that winning is not his focus. The organization so backwards and so not an organization that he has to re-set everything. It’s impossible to do that while you’re going out there and getting mid range free agents on two or three-year contracts. If he can get somebody cheap and they blossom, well, great. I give you Tommy Milone.  And if he can find cheap success on the rule five roster or the waiver wire or whatever that’s great too, but he’s not gonna go out and sign anybody for major money, and he shouldn’t. 
We can upgrade at catcher for practically free, because ours is so bad, and I hope he does that. And we can get a better third baseman with our eyes closed, and I hope he does that as well. So he can improve the team without spending money, but the main thing is improving the organization and setting up the conveyor belt. No extensions ever, no big FA signings ever, but a fine team regardless. That’s his goal, and he’s making progress.

[wildcard]

I am not sure which way Elias is taking the team as far as winning in 2021.   He left Nunez go because he needed the at bats for others and it made sense to him to save the 2m.    We don't know what he will do tomorrow.  That will give some more insight.

He has said he wants to add a pitcher or two.

He claimed Sanchez.  If he keeps him he could help the infield defense but probably not the offense.

3B is up in the air right now.  Let see what he does tomorrow. 

Its probably the quality of the people he adds that is the question related to winning in 2021.    And we do not know what  is going to happen there.....yet.  

[Sports Guy]

4 minutes ago, Philip said:

I think the question here is different. At the moment Mike is not focusing on winning. He is not, however, focusing on losing. It seems as if you are suggesting he is trying to lose rather than not trying to win. I think it’s best to take him at his word which is that winning is not his focus. The organization so backwards and so not an organization that he has to re-set everything. It’s impossible to do that while you’re going out there and getting mid range free agents on two or three-year contracts. If he can get somebody cheap and they blossom, well, great. I give you Tommy Milone.  And if he can find cheap success on the rule five roster or the waiver wire or whatever that’s great too, but he’s not gonna go out and sign anybody for major money, and he shouldn’t. 
We can upgrade at catcher for practically free, because ours is so bad, and I hope he does that. And we can get a better third baseman with our eyes closed, and I hope he does that as well. So he can improve the team without spending money, but the main thing is improving the organization and setting up the conveyor belt. No extensions ever, no big FA signings ever, but a fine team regardless. That’s his goal, and he’s making progress.

Yea but again, many of the things you say here you can do whether you win a lot or lose a lot.

I think Elias is more than happy to draft in the top 5..which basically means he’s fine with losing right now.

Where I do agree with what I think you are saying is that Elias would also be more than happy to win with the young guys coming up now.  These guys will represent the foundation for the next contending team..at least hopefully.  The sooner they start to be good, stay healthy and play up here, the sooner the team can win.  So, in that sense, we agree.  
 

What Elias isn’t doing, at least so far, is trying to help those players by putting better talent around them.  That’s where I have an issue.  I don’t want them bringing in multiple starters.  I don’t want them bringing in OFers.  I want them bringing in a few players in positions where we aren’t good and make those improvements.  I don’t feel he is going to do that unless he signs someone to some minor league deal, ala Milone.  I think that’s a bad strategy.

[Frobby]

1 hour ago, Sports Guy said:

No one has said they should spend X amount more. 
 

However, we do know that they have recently spent 100M more than they are now, so it’s fair to say that they have a lot of payroll that they could add.  
 

I don’t need the payroll to be that high regardless of whether they are winning or not though.  It’s not about how much you spend, it’s how you spend it.

I think it’s a fallacy to think that because they spent $160 mm on payroll one year that means they could do it regularly.   Almost every team has peaks and valleys of spending and I don’t think most teams can spend at their peak every year.   

Now, could they have spent more than they did the last two years?   Almost surely.    But that doesn’t necessarily make it a good idea.

I know you don’t believe that $1 mm not spent this year is $1 mm available to be spent some other year, and that you think the money just goes into the Angelos family’s pockets never to be seen again.   Lots of other people believe that too.    I don’t, and I find that arguing about that with people is like arguing about religion - nobody ever convinces anyone that they’re wrong.    So I’m just going to leave it there.  
 

[Sports Guy]

7 minutes ago, Frobby said:

I think it’s a fallacy to think that because they spent $160 mm on payroll one year that means they could do it regularly.   Almost every team has peaks and valleys of spending and I don’t think most teams can spend at their peak every year.   

Now, could they have spent more than they did the last two years?   Almost surely.    But that doesn’t necessarily make it a good idea.

I know you don’t believe that $1 mm not spent this year is $1 mm available to be spent some other year, and that you think the money just goes into the Angelos family’s pockets never to be seen again.   Lots of other people believe that too.    I don’t, and I find that arguing about that with people is like arguing about religion - nobody ever convinces anyone that they’re wrong.    So I’m just going to leave it there.  
 

Whether you believe or not is only a small part of the discussion.  The bottom line is that they can’t definitely spend more than they are.

And btw, as I already stated..I don’t care if they spend 150+M in any season.  I’m largely against long term deals, generally speaking hate free agency spending and don’t feel the need to try to compete payroll wise with the big boys.  

But that’s far different than just being cheap and pocketing money when you can put a better product on the field.

[Can_of_corn]

Just now, Sports Guy said:

Whether you believe or not is only a small part of the discussion.  The bottom line is that they can’t definitely spend more than they are.

And btw, as I already stated..I don’t care if they spend 150+M in any season.  I’m largely against long term deals, generally speaking hate free agency spending and don’t feel the need to try to compete payroll wise with the big boys.  

But that’s far different than just being cheap and pocketing money when you can put a better product on the field.

I don't see the advantage to spending say 30M more in payroll and have the team win 77 games instead of 72 games.

[owknows]

2 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

But that’s far different than just being cheap and pocketing money when you can put a better product on the field.

Man drives beat up 12 year old Nissan

Really wants a BMW.... Has put away about half what he needs to buy it

He could buy a new Chevrolet today.

What's wrong with this cheapskate? Why won't he put a better car on the road?

[Sports Guy]

2 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

I don't see the advantage to spending say 30M more in payroll and have the team win 77 games instead of 72 games.

Well it depends on how the money is spent .  Did you add longer term talent that helps you for more than just 2021?  Did you bring in guys that help the younger players?  
 

On paper, I agree that 5 more wins (in your scenario) is meaningless.  But there is more to it than that.

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, owknows said:

Man drives beat up 12 year old Nissan

Really wants a BMW.... Has put away about half what he needs to buy it

He could buy a new Chevrolet today.

What's wrong with this cheapskate? Why won't he put a better car on the road?

I'm firmly in the camp that money not spent today isn't being put away to spend tomorrow.

[Sports Guy]

3 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

I'm firmly in the camp that money not spent today isn't being put away to spend tomorrow.

Especially with this family.