Re: Cubs Step up pursuit of Byrd

[Rob]

Back to a previous conversation, davearm, where did you find payroll figures for all teams the last 7 years?

USA Today's salary database. http://content.usatoday.com/sports/baseball/salaries/default.aspx

 

I had to extract them one year at a time, but that was no biggie.

 

Thank you.

 

I hope you don't mind, but I took the exercise to its logical conclusion and calculated marginal payroll per marginal win for all 30 teams over that seven year span. (I only subtracted $65 mil from payrolls because the league minimum salary used to be a bit lower)

 

Team	          mPay/mWin
NY Yankees	 $3,187,708.68 
NY Mets	    $2,653,616.93 
Seattle	    $2,343,271.01 
Detroit	    $2,131,146.89 
Boston	     $2,115,821.57 
Chicago Cubs  $2,083,748.96 
Baltimore	  $2,032,025.55 
LA Dodgers	 $2,021,127.23 
Atlanta	    $1,812,265.33 
LA Angels	  $1,807,528.36 
San Francisco $1,807,362.66 
Houston	    $1,750,671.06 
Chicago Sox	$1,745,537.21 
Philadelphia  $1,721,229.02 
St. Louis	  $1,613,370.36 
Kansas City	$1,612,677.30 
Arizona	    $1,596,952.26 
Cincinnati	 $1,571,711.55 
Texas	      $1,506,534.09 
Toronto	    $1,458,434.86 
Washington	 $1,373,272.30 
Colorado	   $1,361,277.14 
San Diego	  $1,284,717.13 
Milwaukee	  $1,260,474.12 
Pittsburgh	 $1,226,321.84 
Cleveland	  $1,201,639.26 
Oakland	    $1,121,017.22 
Minnesota	  $1,066,697.13 
Tampa Bay	  $791,845.75 
Florida	    $641,255.47 

 

That's just the raw data, and it makes no effort to adjust for the fact that wins are worth much more to a team (and hence worth overpaying market value for) when they're in approximately the area the Cubs are (right on the verge of a playoff spot most years).

 

Edit:

 

I would like to draw everybody's attention to Minnesota, though. #6 in wins over that seven year span, and they manage it while being extremely cost effective.

[davell]

Minnesota is obviously interesting, but it brings up a whole other subject actually as well. How succesful would they be IF they had a larger payroll? Isn't it possible that larger market teams may have it harder in some aspects? I am almost postive that Beane didn't want to go to Boston because he didn't want a larger payroll, as it could affect how he thinks about player decisions......If I'm wrong on that info about Beane, please let me know, but I'm fairly certain he said something to that affect. I'm not making an excuse for Hendry either, because there is a very good payroll model going on up in Boston for large market teams, that to now anyway, we haven't paid any attention to at all.

 

At any rate, a larger payroll makes it easier to cave in to fan expectations. Like keeping players that may or may not be beneficial to keep for the longterm.(extensions for players coming out of their arb years or re-signing players that are out of their current contract with said club, ala Lee next year) And to a much worse extent, it seems like some teams(us included) spend money just to spend at times......And while I am confident that no GM's look at it that way, there are always deals out there making you go, "we could have had the same production for 400K, instead of the _ millions we are paying this guy". To me, that's spending just to spend anyway......

[Backtobanks]

I really admire the fact that Minnesota does it year after year with a low budget, but it does help playing in the AL Central. For all of the criticism the NL Central gets, I would still rank it ahead of the AL Central. Minnesota is the only consistent team in that division.

[jersey cubs fan]

I really admire the fact that Minnesota does it year after year with a low budget, but it does help playing in the AL Central. For all of the criticism the NL Central gets, I would still rank it ahead of the AL Central. Minnesota is the only consistent team in that division.

 

The White Sox are decent, better than the Cubs at least in terms of consistent winning, while Detroit has been a threat since they went through that disaster season, and Cleveland puts together a good team every other year. I think they compare favorably with the NL Central, which gets an extra crappy team to kick around every year.

[Little Slide Rooter]

I dont care if everyone on earth, or at least the board disagrees with me, but considering the options, I really think the best one is to re sign Reed Johnson for cheap and platoon him with Sam Fuld. That way, you have your leadoff man and you have a great defensive center fielder. I really dont think Scott Podsednik can do anything with the bat that Fuld can, and Fulds a much better fielder. That way, the lineup looks something like

 

1. Fuld/Johnson

2. Theriot

3. Lee

4. Ramirez

5. Soriano

6. Soto

7. Fukudome

8. Baker

9. P

 

If anything becomes available in the Summer, go for it, but at this point, the pickens are very, very slim, unless of course theres a hidden Bay/Holliday fund that nobody knows about.

[Wrigley Rat]

I dont care if everyone on earth, or at least the board disagrees with me, but considering the options, I really think the best one is to re sign Reed Johnson for cheap and platoon him with Sam Fuld. That way, you have your leadoff man and you have a great defensive center fielder. I really dont think Scott Podsednik can do anything with the bat that Fuld can, and Fulds a much better fielder. That way, the lineup looks something like

 

1. Fuld/Johnson

2. Theriot

3. Lee

4. Ramirez

5. Soriano

6. Soto

7. Fukudome

8. Baker

9. P

 

If anything becomes available in the Summer, go for it, but at this point, the pickens are very, very slim, unless of course theres a hidden Bay/Holliday fund that nobody knows about.

I don't strongly disagree with you, but Johnson would not get many AB's in that platoon. Usually, the lefty in a platoon gets paid more than the righty since they get more AB's. Fuld doesn't really deserve 450 AB's next year. Maybe he will after another nice showing as our 4th OF'er. Johnson also was not a great solution as a leadoff hitter IIRC.

 

I wouldn't mind letting Colvin, Fuld, Adduci, and Hoffpauir duke it out in spring training. The most valuable member of that group would start in right or center (Fukudome can still play CF if need be). Perhaps you could convince me that a Reed Johnson/Fuld/Hoffpauir platoon could work, but I think that money ($3 millionish) could be better spent elsewhere (2B, SP, RP). Of course, if he accepted $2 million, I'd have to do it assuming he's healthy. The lineup would then look something like this:

1 - Fukudome/Fuld

2 - Theriot

3 - Lee

4 - Ramirez

5 - Soriano

6 - Johnson/Fukudome/Hoffpauir

7 - Baker/Fontenot

8 - Soto

[davearm2]

There's no rule that says Fuld would have to get more ABs than Johnson.

 

Piniella can divide up the starts however he sees fit.

[Backtobanks]

There's no rule that says Fuld would have to get more ABs than Johnson.

 

Piniella can divide up the starts however he sees fit.

 

OMG! Are you proposing that a RH batter face RH pitching? Radical thinking like that will get you into trouble. :-))

[Little Slide Rooter]

There's no rule that says Fuld would have to get more ABs than Johnson.

 

Piniella can divide up the starts however he sees fit.

 

OMG! Are you proposing that a RH batter face RH pitching? Radical thinking like that will get you into trouble. :-))

 

When that RH batter has a long history of difficulty with RH pitching, I wouldnt propose it, unless Rudy J can work some kind of magic with Reed. Last year he seemed to be doing a bit better vs. righties, but not enough to be an every day guy. IM just saying give Fuld the chance at the job because its not like there are a lot of options out there. I see Byrd as a .260 guy with an OPS in the low-mid .700s and about 10-12 HRs, and hes the best option available.

[Magnetic Curses]

There's no rule that says Fuld would have to get more ABs than Johnson.

 

Piniella can divide up the starts however he sees fit.

 

OMG! Are you proposing that a RH batter face RH pitching? Radical thinking like that will get you into trouble. :-))

 

reed johnson should never get a start against right-handed pitching. evar.

[chopsx9]

I dont care if everyone on earth, or at least the board disagrees with me, but considering the options, I really think the best one is to re sign Reed Johnson for cheap and platoon him with Sam Fuld. That way, you have your leadoff man and you have a great defensive center fielder. I really dont think Scott Podsednik can do anything with the bat that Fuld can, and Fulds a much better fielder. That way, the lineup looks something like

 

1. Fuld/Johnson

2. Theriot

3. Lee

4. Ramirez

5. Soriano

6. Soto

7. Fukudome

8. Baker

9. P

 

If anything becomes available in the Summer, go for it, but at this point, the pickens are very, very slim, unless of course theres a hidden Bay/Holliday fund that nobody knows about.

I don't strongly disagree with you, but Johnson would not get many AB's in that platoon. Usually, the lefty in a platoon gets paid more than the righty since they get more AB's. Fuld doesn't really deserve 450 AB's next year. Maybe he will after another nice showing as our 4th OF'er. Johnson also was not a great solution as a leadoff hitter IIRC.

 

I wouldn't mind letting Colvin, Fuld, Adduci, and Hoffpauir duke it out in spring training.

 

Yay Adduci!!

[Backtobanks]

There's no rule that says Fuld would have to get more ABs than Johnson.

 

Piniella can divide up the starts however he sees fit.

 

OMG! Are you proposing that a RH batter face RH pitching? Radical thinking like that will get you into trouble. :-))

 

reed johnson should never get a start against right-handed pitching. evar.

 

And yet posters were willing to give up half the farm system for Granderson and insisted he isn't a platoon player. Actually Johnson had an on-again-off-again career against RHP. Bad in 2009 and 2007, but fair in 2008 ( .280/.323/.398/.721) and great in 2006 (.317/.370/.498/.869).

[17 Seconds]

There's no rule that says Fuld would have to get more ABs than Johnson.

 

Piniella can divide up the starts however he sees fit.

 

OMG! Are you proposing that a RH batter face RH pitching? Radical thinking like that will get you into trouble. :-))

 

reed johnson should never get a start against right-handed pitching. evar.

 

And yet posters were willing to give up half the farm system for Granderson and insisted he isn't a platoon player. Actually Johnson had an on-again-off-again career against RHP. Bad in 2009 and 2007, but fair in 2008 ( .280/.323/.398/.721) and great in 2006 (.317/.370/.498/.869).

 

not being able to hit lhp is way different than not being able to hit rhp

 

like sulley said, reed johnson should never be starting against rhp.

[Magnetic Curses]

There's no rule that says Fuld would have to get more ABs than Johnson.

 

Piniella can divide up the starts however he sees fit.

 

OMG! Are you proposing that a RH batter face RH pitching? Radical thinking like that will get you into trouble. :-))

 

reed johnson should never get a start against right-handed pitching. evar.

 

And yet posters were willing to give up half the farm system for Granderson and insisted he isn't a platoon player. Actually Johnson had an on-again-off-again career against RHP. Bad in 2009 and 2007, but fair in 2008 ( .280/.323/.398/.721) and great in 2006 (.317/.370/.498/.869).

 

1. i wasn't one of those people and i was relieved when granderson went to the yankees.

 

2. his 3 year split against righties is .233/.294/.322/.616. i repeat, he should never get a start against a RHP. expecting him to be anything but bad is, well, unwise.

[Eric Clipperton]

Also, Reed Johnson isn't really a great defensive CF. Fuld, maybe, but Reed is more of an average to slightly below-average CF, or a good corner OF. And letting Piniella divide up the starts is a recipe for disaster. If that happens, get ready for Reed vs RHP until he suffers some head injury diving into a wall, then bouncing between Fuld, Adduci, and any other AAAA guy we can find. (not saying Fuld is AAAA, I think he's a definite MLB 4th/5th OF...tilting more towards 5th though)

[fromthestretch]

There's no rule that says Fuld would have to get more ABs than Johnson.

 

Piniella can divide up the starts however he sees fit.

 

OMG! Are you proposing that a RH batter face RH pitching? Radical thinking like that will get you into trouble. :-))

 

reed johnson should never get a start against right-handed pitching. evar.

 

And yet posters were willing to give up half the farm system for Granderson and insisted he isn't a platoon player. Actually Johnson had an on-again-off-again career against RHP. Bad in 2009 and 2007, but fair in 2008 ( .280/.323/.398/.721) and great in 2006 (.317/.370/.498/.869).

 

Actually, many people here were against unloading the farm for Granderson. But I guess sine a few people wanted to, that should apply to the entire board, right?

[Backtobanks]

There's no rule that says Fuld would have to get more ABs than Johnson.

 

Piniella can divide up the starts however he sees fit.

 

OMG! Are you proposing that a RH batter face RH pitching? Radical thinking like that will get you into trouble. :-))

 

reed johnson should never get a start against right-handed pitching. evar.

 

And yet posters were willing to give up half the farm system for Granderson and insisted he isn't a platoon player. Actually Johnson had an on-again-off-again career against RHP. Bad in 2009 and 2007, but fair in 2008 ( .280/.323/.398/.721) and great in 2006 (.317/.370/.498/.869).

 

Actually, many people here were against unloading the farm for Granderson. But I guess sine a few people wanted to, that should apply to the entire board, right?

 

Did I say everybody wanted to trade a bunch of prospects for Granderson? Also, if I'm not mistaken, the sentiment for trading 3 good prospects for Granderson was pretty much favorable among a majority of the posters.

[fromthestretch]

And yet posters were willing to give up half the farm system for Granderson and insisted he isn't a platoon player. Actually Johnson had an on-again-off-again career against RHP. Bad in 2009 and 2007, but fair in 2008 ( .280/.323/.398/.721) and great in 2006 (.317/.370/.498/.869).

 

Actually, many people here were against unloading the farm for Granderson. But I guess sine a few people wanted to, that should apply to the entire board, right?

 

Did I say everybody wanted to trade a bunch of prospects for Granderson? Also, if I'm not mistaken, the sentiment for trading 3 good prospects for Granderson was pretty much favorable among a majority of the posters.

 

No, but you made it seem like there were a lot, when there really wasn't. My bad, if I misinterpreted your point.

 

That said, trading three good prospects does not equal unloading the farm.

[Backtobanks]

And yet posters were willing to give up half the farm system for Granderson and insisted he isn't a platoon player. Actually Johnson had an on-again-off-again career against RHP. Bad in 2009 and 2007, but fair in 2008 ( .280/.323/.398/.721) and great in 2006 (.317/.370/.498/.869).

 

Actually, many people here were against unloading the farm for Granderson. But I guess sine a few people wanted to, that should apply to the entire board, right?

 

Did I say everybody wanted to trade a bunch of prospects for Granderson? Also, if I'm not mistaken, the sentiment for trading 3 good prospects for Granderson was pretty much favorable among a majority of the posters.

 

No, but you made it seem like there were a lot, when there really wasn't. My bad, if I misinterpreted your point.

 

That said, trading three good prospects does not equal unloading the farm.

 

3 good prospects (depending on who they are) does equal unloading the farm if you have a lousy farm system.

[dew1679666265]

And yet posters were willing to give up half the farm system for Granderson and insisted he isn't a platoon player. Actually Johnson had an on-again-off-again career against RHP. Bad in 2009 and 2007, but fair in 2008 ( .280/.323/.398/.721) and great in 2006 (.317/.370/.498/.869).

 

Actually, many people here were against unloading the farm for Granderson. But I guess sine a few people wanted to, that should apply to the entire board, right?

 

Did I say everybody wanted to trade a bunch of prospects for Granderson? Also, if I'm not mistaken, the sentiment for trading 3 good prospects for Granderson was pretty much favorable among a majority of the posters.

 

No, but you made it seem like there were a lot, when there really wasn't. My bad, if I misinterpreted your point.

 

That said, trading three good prospects does not equal unloading the farm.

 

3 good prospects (depending on who they are) does equal unloading the farm if you have a lousy farm system.

 

Our farm system isn't lousy.

[fromthestretch]

3 good prospects (depending on who they are) does equal unloading the farm if you have a lousy farm system.

 

Our farm system isn't lousy.

 

Exactly.

[Guest]

Did I say everybody wanted to trade a bunch of prospects for Granderson? Also, if I'm not mistaken, the sentiment for trading 3 good prospects for Granderson was pretty much favorable among a majority of the posters.

 

Care to take a vote?

[NCCubFan]

This thread is now moot.