Orioles Payroll is a Slap in the Face to Fans

[TradeAngelos]

Which is...?

Nothing of course. Matter of fact it probably costs money to keep that ship afloat, I mean all those monthly dollars don't add up to much.

Start up costs, overhead, yadda yadda yadda operation 'aint making a dime.

At least that is what a lot of you believe.......I guess.

[BaltimoreTerp]

Nothing of course. Matter of fact it probably costs money to keep that ship afloat, I mean all those monthly dollars don't add up to much.

Start up costs, overhead, yadda yadda yadda operation 'aint making a dime.

At least that is what a lot of you believe.......I guess.

If you don't have the information, you could at least be honest instead of acting like you know something the rest of don't. But I guess it's easier to pretend when it fits your belief

[El Gordo]

Funny how this was ignored.

What say the apologists with that number? Acceptable?

Utterly ridiculous with the revenue pouring in for the last 5 years from MASN.

Well, maybe we could give everyone on the 25 man roster an extra 1M per. That would bring it to 92 M or so. Would that make you happy?:rolleyestf:

[Capn Vivi]

This is the same team that offered $12m/year to Victor Martinez, right?

[nevadaO]

Good talent is not always expensive. CC and Lee and Beckett were all at one time just as talented and cheap as hell. Now they are expensive as hell.

We have guys who, in a few years, we'll be breaking the bank for. Jones, Wieters, Matusz, Arrieta, etc.

Why do people insist that money equals talent? Talent is talent. Either you are acquiring it cheaply through trades and the draft or you are paying out the ass for it on the open market. How big your payroll is does not dictate how well your team is doing.

Great post, and something those select few refuse to realize.

[Roll Tide]

I saw a November 25th blog post from the Baltimore Sun posted in another thread on another topic, and didn't want to derail that thread with the tangent I'm about to go off on.

Here's the relevant excerpt:

$45 million dollars is an insult. Even after the Reynolds trade, we're maybe talking $50 million. That's an insult. That would have been an insult 15 years ago, today is absolutely ridiculous.

Didn't I read an article in the last year or so that said that the Orioles revenue from MASN alone is like $40 million a year? Never mind ticket sales, radio rights, merchandise sales, concessions, parking, etc..

If you (Angelos) refuse to spend enough to field a competitive team with the Yankees or the Red Sox, you need to sell to someone who will. Sports franchises are public trusts, and aren't supposed to be run on the cheap as revenue generators without regard to wins and loses.

This is all the more frustrating because it does have to do with professional sports. If Coca-Cola were to double their prices or start producing an inferior product, people could switch to the Pepsi or RC Cola or whatever. But with sports, your team is your team. It's a loyalty issue by tradition and culture, so fans are kind of stuck with whatever some jerk owner wants to do.

What baseball really needs is a hard salary cap and a hard salary floor -- not only to adjust for revenue disparities, but also to ensure that all owners spend roughly the same amount to avoid situations like what's going on in Baltimore right now. After losing a World Series in '94, the owners should have just dug in their heels until the end of time if necessary to get that salary cap (And, yes, I did say so at the time, if I recall correctly).

Barring that, though, Angelos should spend or sell. Stop inflicting this stuff on the loyal fans of Baltimore.

Step back from the ledge my friend:thumbsup1:

Angelos/MacPhail's makor fault is that they wont trade/sign for the Stud player who will cost them $100 million. Preferring to add a collection of mid tier guys or reclamation projects.

Consider this .... What are we hoping from Hardy this season?

1) Solid if not spectacular defense

2) Hoping his bat will rebound to that of a couple of seasons ago.

Reynold's

1) That he will hit somewhere near a .270 clip.

2) That he won't strikeout more than 200 times.

I think the Orioles have improved this offseason.But I think they could have done better if they weren't so cheap.

[BrunoCherrytown]

Have you posted anything positive in the last month? I don't even think I've seen a smiley.

I said the two trades made us better which is factually true. So that's positive.

:hearts::thumbsup1::beerchug1:

Am I overwhelmed with joy over them...no.

Does it change my opinion of MacPhail? Absolutely not.

If he's scared of landing serious free agents or trading for impact players, than I want serious improvements in the farm system/drafting, international, scouting and player development departments before he gets any credit.

He has not done these things.

This average in all areas plan he's following will never get us to the finish line.

[Rake]

To compare MacPhail to Friedman is an insult to Friedman. I'm not saying you are though. We aren't the Rays and our GM isn't close to as good as their's.

MacPhail doesn't have an international presence, serious scouting and player department, and his method for building a farm system ain't even in the same universe as Friedman.

Admiring how the Rays built their system is one thing. We don't spend big money and they don't spend big money. Thats where the comparison ends.

They can't spend seriously...we can and don't.

And how we've spent the little we do has resulted in annual last place finishes and next year 'hopes' for improved performance.

Good point. I find it disappointing that the team doesnt spend more in scouting and development. They do seem to spend on signing draft choices but I wonder how many potential signees are missed?

[maybe2050]

I hope you realize that that article was from November 2009. And your quote clearly states that that was looking at 2010, before we added Millwood, Gonzalez, Atkins, and Tejada.

EDIT: Added more

Gee, and I bet those signings broke the bank. Is it our fault that MacPhail likes to use the sentence "We have money to spend, but we have to do it wisely", and then signs Millwood for $9 million? Truthfully, yes, I would rather overpay for one that has been consistent like a Crawford or Werth (not for that much though), than just pee money away for a guy like Millwood, or Atkins, both who had came off a season that was subpar. Either way, the CharmCityCrab is absolutely just for being angry about a ridiculous budget like Angelos lets MacPhail work with. And Weams is incorrect. We are not running at $70 million, we are more in the $45 million range now after the recent trades. I read we were at $38 million before the Reynolds desperation move (I mean addition)

[frankpembleton]

OP is misinformed. It doesn't change the fact that our payroll is not where it should be and we still have one of the absolute worst owners in professional sports.

Every single year we hear that we need to "save our money" for when we are ready to compete. We have been "saving money" for the last decade+. When we are ready to compete, are we going to be pushing a yearly payroll of 150 mil? Seems to me with all of the savings we are accruing we might be able to do that...

[El Gordo]

People keep saying the O's are too cheap to spend on top tier FA. I suppose that means they are advocating spending much more than 140 M for a Crawford, because if it took that much to get him in Boston how much would he have cost the O's? At some point none of them are worth the rididculous money it would take to get them to play here. That's not cheap, it's merely sane.

[larrytt]

Truthfully, yes, I would rather overpay for one that has been consistent like a Crawford or Werth (not for that much though), than just pee money away for a guy like Millwood, or Atkins, both who had came off a season that was subpar.

You think Millwood's 2009 season - 13-10, 3.67 ERA (8th in the AL), 31 starts, 198.2 innings, 6.4 innings per start - was "subpar"?

Regardless, isn't it a bit silly to condemn the Orioles for their payroll 3.5 months before the season begins, when you don't really know yet what the payroll will be? (Plus, as others have pointed out, you are off in your numbers.) It's like you're trying to get the complaints in now, while you can. There's a difference between emotionally condemning them in advance for apparent villainous things they haven't actually done yet (not have a high payroll), as opposed discussing it analytically, as in pointing out we have money to spend, and hoping it gets used. (Not as exciting as throwing a tantrum, but a lot more mature.) Plus, you don't just spend money to spend money; you can only sign those who are available and willing to come to Baltimore, and that the Yankees/Red Sox/occasionally others don't throw a ton of money at. (Unless you want to break the bankroll now on a non-superstar, thereby ensuring we don't have the money when one becomes available.)

[Crazysilver03]

Gee, and I bet those signings broke the bank. Is it our fault that MacPhail likes to use the sentence "We have money to spend, but we have to do it wisely", and then signs Millwood for $9 million? Truthfully, yes, I would rather overpay for one that has been consistent like a Crawford or Werth (not for that much though), than just pee money away for a guy like Millwood, or Atkins, both who had came off a season that was subpar. Either way, the CharmCityCrab is absolutely just for being angry about a ridiculous budget like Angelos lets MacPhail work with. And Weams is incorrect. We are not running at $70 million, we are more in the $45 million range now after the recent trades. I read we were at $38 million before the Reynolds desperation move (I mean addition)

Yet again, you are wrong. We are not around $45M.

Look at the date on the article you cite. It is from November 25, 2009. We are three weeks away from 2011 (and about 106 weeks away from Doomsday).

We didn't sign Millwood either. He was a salary dump/veteran starter acquisition.

[Dannyboy]

Gee, and I bet those signings broke the bank. Is it our fault that MacPhail likes to use the sentence "We have money to spend, but we have to do it wisely", and then signs Millwood for $9 million? Truthfully, yes, I would rather overpay for one that has been consistent like a Crawford or Werth (not for that much though), than just pee money away for a guy like Millwood, or Atkins, both who had came off a season that was subpar. Either way, the CharmCityCrab is absolutely just for being angry about a ridiculous budget like Angelos lets MacPhail work with. And Weams is incorrect. We are not running at $70 million, we are more in the $45 million range now after the recent trades. I read we were at $38 million before the Reynolds desperation move (I mean addition)

You do know we didn't sign Millwood. He was aquired via trade w/ the Rangers for Chris Ray. And as far as how much money they spend, who cares? I just want a competetive team on the feild for 27 outs. Whether it costs 38 mill. or 138 mill.

[maybe2050]

You do know we didn't sign Millwood. He was aquired via trade w/ the Rangers for Chris Ray.

Yeah, my bad on that one.