Sports
22 Oct 07
22 Oct 07
2 edits
I noticed this in the World Series thread, so I decided to do a little research.
The question is: Do teams that spend the most money win championships?
Here are the last 20 years of world series winners, and their rank in highest payrolls.
You decide:
2007 - Red Sox 2 or Rockies 24
2006 - St Loius - 11
2005 - Chicago - 13
2004 - Boston - 2
2003 - Florida - 26
2002 - Anaheim - 15
2001 - Arizona - 8
2000 - Yankees - 1
1999 - Yankees - 1
1998 - Yankees - 2
1997 -Florida - 5
1996 - Yankees - 1
1995 - Braves - 4
1994 ------------
1993 - Toronto - 1
1992 - Toronto - 1
1991 - Twins - 15
1990 - Reds - 16
1989 - Oakland - 5
1988 - Dodgers - 2
1987 - Twins - 12
22 Oct 07
Originally posted by PocketKingsEvery time I see another number besides 1 or 2 that proves that money wasn't the reason. Does it help? Sure.
I noticed this in the World Series thread, so I decided to do a little research.
The question is: Do teams that spend the most money win championships?
Here are the last 20 years of world series winners, and their rank in highest payrolls.
You decide:
2007 - Red Sox 2 or Rockies 24
2006 - St Loius - 11
2005 - Chicago - 13 ...[text shortened]...
1990 - Reds - 16
1989 - Oakland - 5
1988 - Dodgers - 2
1987 - Twins - 12
A strong farm system is required also, team chemistry... and depth.
P-
22 Oct 07
Originally posted by PocketKingsWhere did you find that info?
I noticed this in the World Series thread, so I decided to do a little research.
The question is: Do teams that spend the most money win championships?
Here are the last 20 years of world series winners, and their rank in highest payrolls.
You decide:
2007 - Red Sox 2 or Rockies 24
2006 - St Loius - 11
2005 - Chicago - 13 ...[text shortened]...
1990 - Reds - 16
1989 - Oakland - 5
1988 - Dodgers - 2
1987 - Twins - 12
22 Oct 07
Originally posted by PhlabibitI agree with most of that.
Every time I see another number besides 1 or 2 that proves that money wasn't the reason. Does it help? Sure.
A strong farm system is required also, team chemistry... and depth.
P-
Only 12 of the past 20 have been in the top ten on payroll.
I don't think a stong farm system is valued enough.
You hardly see a team winning the world series doesn't get along really well and fun together.
If you don't have a solid bench or bullpen, then you have no chance.
Good points, but its obvious from the chart that money certainly does help.
22 Oct 07
1 edit
Originally posted by PocketKingsThey don't list all the years at ESPN.com, but I've found some discrepancies. Wonder where the info came from?
A mixture of :
http://www.super70s.com/Baseball/Years/2006/Payroll.asp
and
http://mistupid.com/sports/worldseries.htm
http://espn.go.com/mlb/news/2003/0721/1583823.html
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=1778397
P-
22 Oct 07
Originally posted by PhlabibitIts public information, so it should be around the same.
They don't list all the years at ESPN.com, but I've found some discrepancies. Wonder where the info came from?
http://espn.go.com/mlb/news/2003/0721/1583823.html
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=1778397
P-
26 Oct 07
Originally posted by PocketKingsjust looking at which team out of 30 won the championship doesn't tell you much.
I noticed this in the World Series thread, so I decided to do a little research.
The question is: Do teams that spend the most money win championships?
Here are the last 20 years of world series winners, and their rank in highest payrolls.
You decide:
2007 - Red Sox 2 or Rockies 24
2006 - St Loius - 11
2005 - Chicago - 13 ...[text shortened]...
1990 - Reds - 16
1989 - Oakland - 5
1988 - Dodgers - 2
1987 - Twins - 12
Look at who made the playoffs because anything can happen in a 7 game series. Playoff teams in baseball tell you much more. If you don't make it to the playoffs you have no chance of a championship.
I've already posted those stats. But this is a dead horse.
26 Oct 07
1 edit
Just for balance. And i've never said you can buy championships but you can buy a chance at a championship by at least getting to the playoffs.
Since 2003.....
Team.....playoff appearances.....League Payroll position (8 is avg)
NY..............5.........................................1
Bos.............4.........................................2
LAA.............3.........................................3
26 Oct 07
5 edits
Originally posted by uzlessIt says alot, especially the first two posts. Is your argument that the best team doesn't always win the championship, or that money can buy you championships? Because i agree with the first, and the second is obviously not true.
just looking at which team out of 30 won the championship doesn't tell you much.
Edit- I forget how to unbold
Edit 20,000,000 - I figured it out
26 Oct 07
Originally posted by PocketKingsHe won't touch how many DO pay a LOT but get NOTHING cuz they SUCK.
It says alot, especially the first two posts. Is your argument that the best team doesn't always win the championship, or that money can buy you championships? Because i agree with the first, and the second is obviously not true.
Edit- I forget how to unbold
P-
26 Oct 07
Originally posted by PocketKingsNeither.
. Is your argument that the best team doesn't always win the championship, or that money can buy you championships? Because i agree with the first, and the second is obviously not true.
Edit- I forget how to unbold
I'm saying that by having a gigantic payroll you increase your chances of getting to the playoffs to fight for a championship. Most teams that are not in the top 3 in salary don't make the playoffs to have that shot as evidenced by the stats I just posted.
I don't know why this is so hard to accept.
26 Oct 07
Originally posted by PhlabibitCome again?
He won't touch how many DO pay a LOT but get NOTHING cuz they SUCK.
P-
Since 2003.....
Team.....playoff appearances.....League Payroll position (8 is avg)
NY..............5.........................................1
Bos.............4.........................................2
LAA.............3.........................................3