statistical correlation

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)

NY..............5.........................................1
Bos.............4.........................................2
LAA.............3.........................................3

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



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.

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.

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.

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.