Orioles Payroll is a Slap in the Face to Fans

[maybe2050]

C Wieters (400K)

1B LaRoche/Lee (8m) *PROJECTED*

2B Roberts (10m)

3B Reynolds (5m)

SS Hardy (6m)

LF Pie (700K)

CF Jones (3m)

RF Markakis (10.6m)

DH Scott (6.5m)

C/CI Fox (400K)

C Izturis (1.5m)

MI Harris (1.75m)

OF Reimold (400K)

Hitters: 46.25m (Including $8m for LaRoche/Lee: 54.25)

SP Guthrie (5.5m)

SP Matusz (1.4m)

SP Bergesen (400K)

SP Arrieta (400K)

SP Tillman/Britton (400K)

RP Simon (400K)

RP Berken (400K)

RP Patton (400K)

RP Johnson (600K)

RP Vanden Hurk (400K)

RP Uehara (5m)

RP Gonzalez (6m)

Pitchers: 21.3m

Roster Total: 66.45 (including $8m for LaRoche/Lee: 74.45)

Buyouts:

Hendrickson (200K)

Atkins (500K)

Received $500K from Twins

2011 Projected Payroll: $66,650,000 (including $8m for LaRoche/Lee: $74,650,000)

2010 Actual Payroll: $73,812,500

Add to this the fact that the Orioles have allegedly offered Kevin Gregg $8-10m for two years.

Check out Cot's if you seek any more information on salaries.

"Orioles fans are understandably restless, a product of 13 consecutive losing seasons, as well as winters filled with marquee players who frequently turn down playing in Baltimore. The addition of new manager Buck Showalter, coupled with an end-of-the-season surge, could help some. But ultimately, money talks, and the Orioles -- with less than $29 million committed to next season -- have enough to considerably upgrade a squad that finished 66-96. Just don't expect MacPhail to throw money around haphazardly in the Florida sunshine. "

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And this article wasn't from 2009. Now what you're saying, is that we went from $29 million to $73 million by adding Reyonlds , Hardy, Izturis and Koji? (even with the money added that we received from the trades), that seems about $43 million too high. For one, you can't just add $8 million or so for players that we havn't added yet either (Lee/Laroche)

[Crazysilver03]

"Orioles fans are understandably restless, a product of 13 consecutive losing seasons, as well as winters filled with marquee players who frequently turn down playing in Baltimore. The addition of new manager Buck Showalter, coupled with an end-of-the-season surge, could help some. But ultimately, money talks, and the Orioles -- with less than $29 million committed to next season -- have enough to considerably upgrade a squad that finished 66-96. Just don't expect MacPhail to throw money around haphazardly in the Florida sunshine. "

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And this article wasn't from 2009. Now what you're saying, is that we went from $29 million to $73 million by adding Reyonlds , Hardy, Izturis and Koji? (even with the money added that we received from the trades), that seems about $43 million too high. For one, you can't just add $8 million or so for players that we havn't added yet either (Lee/Laroche)

Please learn how to post articles. And how to actually cite articles. It makes my head hurt trying to figure out what part of your post is an article vs. your opinion. It is what makes this community really nice. When you go to make a post, you can click the

box, which is the 4th from the right on the line starting with the B[old] button. You can place the text in there and it shows up in a different box with in your post. Four more buttons to the left of the quote is the citation line.

And if you are really that dense to look solely at $29M, I don't know what to tell you if you refuse to look at the post that was written and you quoted. Technically, there was only three guaranteed contracts for 2011 - Roberts, Markakis, and Gonzalez, so that is where that $29M came from. But of course you have all of your arbitration eligible and 0-3 guys to account for, so that becomes your projected payroll.

[Hank Scorpio]

I'd much rather us have a good team than an expensive one.

[weams]

"Orioles fans are understandably restless, a product of 13 consecutive losing seasons, as well as winters filled with marquee players who frequently turn down playing in Baltimore. The addition of new manager Buck Showalter, coupled with an end-of-the-season surge, could help some. But ultimately, money talks, and the Orioles -- with less than $29 million committed to next season -- have enough to considerably upgrade a squad that finished 66-96. Just don't expect MacPhail to throw money around haphazardly in the Florida sunshine. "

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And this article wasn't from 2009. Now what you're saying, is that we went from $29 million to $73 million by adding Reyonlds , Hardy, Izturis and Koji? (even with the money added that we received from the trades), that seems about $43 million too high. For one, you can't just add $8 million or so for players that we havn't added yet either (Lee/Laroche)

Facts are facts. The 29 is the problem. We are at approximate 66 million without a first baseman or new DH or the rest of the veteran bullpen. This does NOT figure in the new economic effect on the arbitration eligible or an extension to one or two of them.

The whole premise was brought out from a 2009 article, and the attempt to now defend it with recent information does not become you.

[weams]

We also have amortization of signing bonuses for current ML Matusz and Wieters and Arrieta. To count them at the levels listed would be disingenuous. A case could be Made (amortized signing bonus) for Machado, Hobgood and this year's 1-4 as well.

[Crazysilver03]

Facts are facts. The 29 is the problem. We are at approximate 66 million without a first baseman or new DH or the rest of the veteran bullpen. This does NOT figure in the new economic effect on the arbitration eligible or an extension to one or two of them.

The whole premise was brought out from a 2009 article, and the attempt to now defend it with recent information does not become you.

Really, it is semantics. Technically, when this article was written, our guaranteed payroll was less than $29M, because only Markakis, Roberts, Matusz, and Gonzalez were the only two on the team with guaranteed contracts. Everyone else was just projected.

The true problem is this person's misunderstanding of the situation and thinking that we were truly at $29M.

[Hank Scorpio]

Facts are facts. The 29 is the problem. We are at approximate 66 million without a first baseman or new DH or the rest of the veteran bullpen. This does NOT figure in the new economic effect on the arbitration eligible or an extension to one or two of them.

The whole premise was brought out from a 2009 article, and the attempt to now defend it with recent information does not become you.

Fact AREN'T facts!!!!!!! Torches!!!!!! Pitchforks!!!!!!!

[MarkF]

SP Matusz (1.4m)

Check out Cot's if you seek any more information on salaries.

Question. Cot's has Matusz at 550K for 2011, but I have seen this 1.4M elsewhere. Do you have another source for this?

Cot's: "salaries in majors: 09:$0.425M, 10:$0.5M, 11:$0.55M, 12:$0.65M"

[Crazysilver03]

Question. Cot's has Matusz at 550K for 2011, but I have seen this 1.4M elsewhere. Do you have another source for this?

Cot's: "salaries in majors: 09:$0.425M, 10:$0.5M, 11:$0.55M, 12:$0.65M"

Well, Cot's payroll outlook has it down at $1.4M.

Once again, you bring up a good point MarkF.

Matusz should only have a $.55M salary in 2011. The bonus was already paid in 2008-2009.

EDIT: I am e-mailing him to ask about it.

While looking at their 2009 excel spreadsheet, they had Matusz down for $.868M in 2010 and 2011. So there are three different situations going on.

EDIT #2: Baseball Reference has their own spreadsheet, which has similar spreadsheet numbers. It states Matusz had a $2.7M contract for 2010-2011.

EDIT #3: USAToday reports Matusz had a $1.3M salary in 2010.

[weams]

Really, it is semantics. Technically, when this article was written, our guaranteed payroll was less than $29M, because only Markakis, Roberts, Matusz, and Gonzalez were the only two on the team with guaranteed contracts. Everyone else was just projected.

The true problem is this person's misunderstanding of the situation and thinking that we were truly at $29M.

I did understand that. The thing that gets me riled up is that people see the title, read a post or two and they become Flat-Earthers.

They never see where the premise was originally from a 2009 article posted in another thread. They never see where truly knowledgeable fans do research and correct the falsehoods.

We are not a large payroll team. but we are within spitting distance of 100 mil and not 29.

[mcpd]

I did understand that. The thing that gets me riled up is that people see the title, read a post or two and they become Flat-Earthers.

They never see where the premise was originally from a 2009 article posted in another thread.They never see where truly knowledgeable fans do research and correct the falsehoods.

We are not a large payroll team. but we are within spitting distance of 100 mil and not 29.

That's because some people have agendas, and whatever fits their agendas is the information they use.

[Mad Mark]

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.

Into the breach, yet again...

What baseball needs is NOT a salary cap. What baseball needs is equitable revenue distribution, a balanced schedule and the end of interleague play.

A salary cap without revenue sharing is nothing more than a scheme to make the Yankee$ and Red $ox even more profitable.

[BaltimoreTerp]

Into the breach, yet again...

What baseball needs is NOT a salary cap. What baseball needs is equitable revenue distribution, a balanced schedule and the end of interleague play.

A salary cap without revenue sharing is nothing more than a scheme to make the Yankee$ and Red $ox even more profitable.

And spend their money in ways not covered by the cap to find another path to domination.

[CharmCityCrab]

I'd rather have a payroll of 45 million then give a guy like Werth 120 million.

Why? It's not your money. Well, in a way I suppose it is, in the sense that you may have bought ticket, paid a cable bill (i.e. MASN money), or bought a hat. The alternative to the team spending money is it going into the owner's pockets, though, and that's what's happening. An effort to win isn't really being made.

I'm shocked people are finding ways to bash this team.

I'm shocked people are finding ways to defend this organization after all this time. I guess it's sort of like Stockholm Syndrome.

After what they did this past week and the money made through the trades, I'm giving them a lot of rope now.

What happened this week? We acquired a guy who hit .198 last year and two utility infielders. I don't think any of those moves exactly set the baseball world on fire. I mean, I like Reynolds' power and on-base percentage, he's probably a good reclamation project to give a shot to, but it's not like acquiring a big ticket free agent or an All-Star or something through a trade. And Izturis in a utility role is probably an upgrade over Lugo, but we're talking about a ultility infielder. Meanwhile, the Red Sox keep doing what it takes to get even better than they already were last year -- and the Yankees probably aren't very far away from signing Cliff Lee.

For example, with a salary cap in place, the Yankees and Red Sox could put up ridiculous posting fees for Japanese players, bonuses for drafted players and international amateur FAs. As one-time expenses, none of those would count towards a cap, but the large-market teams would still be able to outspend all the other teams by virtue of their greater resources.

Include these things in the salary cap, or have separate minor league/draft/intentional acquisitions caps.

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.

Exactly. If the article was in fact outdated, the essential point still remains.

That's because some people have agendas, and whatever fits their agendas is the information they use.

What agenda? I don't get it. We're all here because we're fans, right?

[frankpembleton]

I'm shocked people are finding ways to bash this team. After what they did this past week and the money made through the trades, I'm giving them a lot of rope now. AM impressed me this week.

Um. LOL.