Which Team gets has the best team for the money!

Jack · Post by **Jack** » Sat Apr 16, 2005 5:18 am

MLB TEAM PAYROLL (US$)
1. NY Yankees 205,938,439
2. Boston 121,311,945
3. NY Mets 104,770,139
4. Philadelphia 95,337,908
5. LA Angels 95,017,822
6. St. Louis 92,919,842
7. San Francisco 89,487,426
8. Chicago Cubs 87,210,933
9. Seattle 85,883,334
10. Atlanta 85,148,582
11. LA Dodgers 81,029,500
12. Houston 76,779,022
13. Chicago Sox 75,228,000
14. Baltimore 74,570,539
15. Detroit 68,998,183
16. Arizona 63,015,833
17. San Diego 62,888,192
18. Florida 60,375,961
19. Cincinnati 59,658,275
20. Minnesota 56,615,000
21. Oakland 55,869,262
22. Texas 53,891,258
23. Washington 48,581,500
24. Colorado 48,107,500
25. Toronto 45,038,500
26. Cleveland 41,830,400
27. Milwaukee 40,234,833
28. Pittsburgh 38,133,000
29. Tampa Bay 37,975,067
30. Kansas City 36,881,000

*********************
Salaries from ESPN.
Salaries do no include luxury tax and revenue sharing $$

************************

I would go with Minnesota, followed by Oakland, Texas and Toronto.

AnNeg · Post by **AnNeg** » Sat Apr 16, 2005 5:32 am

I agree with the call on Minny, given that they keep pulling out the division titles every year and are in the bottom half of the league in payroll. Florida is not doing too bad for the money they're paying either. Based on the first few weeks of games, the Jays are getting a great team for the money but trust me, the wall has to be hiding somewhere (i.e. the offence cannot continue to cover the bullpen's ass). After last year I'm not expecting too much, even though JP fulled a few decent signings and Doc looks to be back to his old self.

rozy · Post by **rozy** » Sat Apr 16, 2005 12:32 pm

Have you jizz-monkeys seen Florida's lineup and staff lately?

Minn. is better than Florida?

Thanks for the Saturday morning lolololololer

Shoalzie · Post by **Shoalzie** » Sat Apr 16, 2005 4:30 pm

The Tigers are 15th and they're "new and improved" bullpen has blown a few games already and Ordonez is on the shelf with a hernia...nice investments. :x

I'd go with Minnesota and Florida as the best teams in the lower half of payroll...the Tribe have a strong team for having a payroll under $50 million.

BSmack · Post by **BSmack** » Sat Apr 16, 2005 4:39 pm

I'm pretty impressed with Texas since they finaly realized that they would never contend with A-Rod's contract on their books.

Funkywhiteboy · Post by **Funkywhiteboy** » Sat Apr 16, 2005 4:43 pm

BSmack wrote:I'm pretty impressed with Texas since they finaly realized that they would never contend with A-Rod's contract on their books.

They're still paying a bunch of that contract, even though he's not on their team anymore.
Texas will not seriously contend until they can take some of that $$
and spend it on pitching.

I'll be interested to see what happens to the Nats once an ownership group
is in place, and raises the payroll above the $50 mil level.
They've raised their "bang for the buck" value simply by moving out of Montreal.

Phils are currently in last place in the NL East.
Not a good return on investment for the fourth-highest payroll! :P

BSmack · Post by **BSmack** » Sat Apr 16, 2005 4:49 pm

Funkywhiteboy wrote:
BSmack wrote:I'm pretty impressed with Texas since they finaly realized that they would never contend with A-Rod's contract on their books.
They're still paying a bunch of that contract, even though he's not on their team anymore.
Texas will not seriously contend until they can take some of that $$
and invest it in pitching.

I'll be interested to see what happens to the Nats once an ownership group
is in place, and raises the payroll above the $50 mil level.
They've raised their "bang for the buck" value simply by moving out of Montreal.

They'll have a run for a while. They'll be like the Marlins or DBacks. Able to contend rather quickly, but then discovering that, even though they are in a better spot financialy than Montreal, they still don't have the cash to go toe to toe with the big boys long term.

Funkywhiteboy · Post by **Funkywhiteboy** » Sat Apr 16, 2005 4:57 pm

BSmack wrote:
Funkywhiteboy wrote:I'll be interested to see what happens to the Nats once an ownership group
is in place, and raises the payroll above the $50 mil level.
They've raised their "bang for the buck" value simply by moving out of Montreal.
They'll have a run for a while. They'll be like the Marlins or DBacks. Able to contend rather quickly, but then discovering that, even though they are in a better spot financialy than Montreal, they still don't have the cash to go toe to toe with the big boys long term.

That may or may not turn out to be true, depending on who ends up
holding the purse-strings.
For now, I'm happy that DC has a team again.

Best team on the lower half of that list has to be the Marlins,
only two years removed from a World Series win.

Jack · Post by **Jack** » Sun Apr 17, 2005 1:06 pm

In addition to the team salaries, there is luxury tax and revenue sharing.

Last year the Yankees, Red Sox and Anaheim paid luxury tax

Yankees paid $25 million in luxury tax.

Boston paid $3 million in luxury tax

Anaheim - $927,059.
**************************************
As far as revenue sharing, I can't find a list of what teams paid and what teams received.

The Yankees paid an addtional $60 million in revenue sharing but I can't find a listing of what other teams paid and what other teams received.

Any Help??

Link

Link 2

The Assassin · Post by **The Assassin** » Sun Apr 17, 2005 10:49 pm

Right now it looks like the dodgers. 9-2 best record in baseball. Yeah I know its early,but who here thought the Dodgers would of come out of the gate like this?

Cross Traffic · Post by **Cross Traffic** » Mon Apr 18, 2005 2:38 am

I certainly didn't, the Angels lackluster start has been frustrating.