1. Standard memberuzless
    The So Fist
    Voice of Reason
    28 Mar '06
    31 Oct '09 11:363 edits
    These are the facts taken from the thread last year. They laid out 3 different ways.

    Since 2003.....

    Team.....playoff appearances.....League Payroll position (8 is avg)



    Here's a run down of the last 6 YEARS of who made the playoffs..Yankees every year and Boston 4 times outta 6..

    02 NY
    03 NY & BOS
    04 NY & BOS
    05 NY & BOS
    06 NY
    07 NY & BOS

    Since 2003.....

    The top 4 teams in salary have made it to the playoffs 13 times while the bottom 11 teams in salary have made it only 6 times

    These stats are irrefutable but go on, use your weak example of a lower team that made it in to the playoffs one year which in your mind somehow disproves all of this....If any of you look at these stats, AND STILL CAN"T SEE that payroll increases a teams likelyhood of getting intot the playoffs then I suggest you go play checkers or get a job re-inflating tires at a gas station because there is no hope for you.
  2. Standard memberuzless
    The So Fist
    Voice of Reason
    28 Mar '06
    31 Oct '09 11:504 edits
    Team 2009 payroll

    New York Yankees $201,449,189
    New York Mets $149,373,987
    Chicago Cubs $134,809,000
    Boston Red Sox $121,745,999
    Detroit Tigers $115,085,145
    Los Angeles Angels $113,709,00
    Philadelphia Phillies $113,004,046
    Houston Astros $102,996,414
    Los Angeles Dodgers $100,414,592
    Seattle Mariners $98,904,166
    Atlanta Braves $96,726,166
    Chicago White Sox $96,068,500
    San Francisco Giants $82,616,450
    Cleveland Indians $81,579,166
    Toronto Blue Jays $80,538,300
    Milwaukee Brewers $80,182,502
    St. Louis Cardinals $77,605,109
    Colorado Rockies $75,201,000

    Cincinnati Reds $73,558,500
    Arizona Diamondbacks $73,516,666
    Kansas City Royals $70,519,333
    Texas Rangers $68,178,798
    Baltimore Orioles $67,101,666
    Minnesota Twins $65,299,266
    Tampa Bay Rays $63,313,034
    Oakland Athletics $62,310,000
    Washington Nationals $60,328,000
    Pittsburgh Pirates $48,693,000
    San Diego Padres $43,734,200
    Florida Marlins $36,834,000

    Breaking the 30 teams down into who made the playoffs this year we get:

    Top 10 salary teams ..... 5 .....(50% failure rate)
    Mid 10 salary teams .....2 ......(80% failure rate)
    Bot 10 salary teams .....1 ..... (90% failure rate)


    No , no correlation there now is there!! Jebus folks, give your collective heads a shake.
  3. Standard memberuzless
    The So Fist
    Voice of Reason
    28 Mar '06
    31 Oct '09 11:57
    The yankess spent $52 Million dollars more than the next highest payroll. That gap is BIGGER than the TOTAL SALARY of the bottom 3 teams.

    ($200 million vs ~$40 million)

    Now, do you really think the bottom 3 teams have just as good of a chance as making the playoffs as the yanks do??????? Come on, not even close.
  4. Subscribershortcircuit
    The Energizer
    where you want to be
    28 Jan '07
    31 Oct '09 17:02
    The funny thing about numbers...you can present them many different ways to make any point. The problem with your argument is that dollars spent does not guarantee performance. There is no way that it can. I agree if you buy up the best horses, you should, in theory, win the race. But there are several factors that dollars do not control. They can't control injuries. They can't control slumps. They can't control headcases, lost nerves, vapor locking...etc... They also cannot control clubhouse attitude, nor do the guarantee competitive fire.

    If you want to do some research I am sure the results will be the same as when I did the stuff a few years ago. The performance levels in the first year after signing a long term contract are hugely down from the previous year's performance. The final year of the contract is typically one of the better years. This may surprise you. That is why I always discount what a free agent signee will provide the first year of his contract. So, even though the team spent a fortune on the player, he produces diminished results. This would also refute some of your assumptions. As an example, the Dodgers paid a ton for Manny Ramirez this year. Even if you take out the 50 day suspension and interpolate his production average across those 50 days, his numbers were way down compared to last year.

    Clubhouse chemistry is a huge factor too. Too many large egos can actually countermand each other. It is important to get the correct blend of players. This is a primary reason that lower income teams will do well at times. If they have a young talent base, who has not yet tasted stardom, but has the tools to play at that level, their mutual desire to get to the top, and the absence of egos will band the players into a cohesive unit that can actually win (see Florida Marlins & Tampa Rays for example).

    Now, I am not saying that your arguments do not have merit, because they do, but when coupled with the arguments I have made, you can see why I have taken the stance that I have. I believe that you can look at my position over time and it will prove what I am saying is quite accurate.
Back to Top