They are trying to win. He's the best and most consistent pitcher in baseball, finishing in the top3 in Cy Young voting 6 of the past 7 years. He has shown zero signs of slowing down. They have money and if they aren't concerned with payroll limits, why not? Fans have been trained to view being efficient as a virtue - but it's only a virtue if you have payroll constraints. Otherwise, might as well spend away to win. With him and DeGrom, they have the best 1-2 punch in baseball by far, I would think.
Fans don't realize that with the local TV/Radio deals the big market teams have in place, that's not actually tied into overall MLB revenues or what the team reports as true operating income, that they're all spending within their means. There are likely some smaller/mid-market teams that can afford a helluva lot more than they're willing to let on. Hence why I feel we're in for a lengthy lockout/work stoppage as there are a lot of discrepant views at finances and how teams are choosing to spend (or not spend).
Probably...but the Astros attendance this year was about 800,000 less than it was in 2019. With this pandemic still ongoing I don't think owners are going to just bend over because of the TV deals.
Mets throwing some $$ around the last few seasons. I think they'll finally find a way to buy their way into a .500 record.
Total revenue has still continued to go up with average salaries staying stagnant. There's still a middle class of players that are the biggest losers in the whole process. TV deals will continue to go up in value (provided you don't try and start a brand new network, without securing carriage, in the midst of trying to tank). The teams not looking to put a competitive product out there aren't going to be drawing fans pandemic or not... and them raising payroll to attempt to compete (and then draw more fans) apparently doesn't make as much sense financially. In addition, MLB is barely scratching the surface of their streaming/pay-per-game abilities. There is a windfall of revenue on those platforms that has yet to be realized, and given the vast number of games, MLB does seem to lend itself to mobile/streaming consumption much more than other pro sports that still try and steer all viewers to the television.
It's hard to throw teams even with lower payrolls into the same category. Some teams are carrying more debt than others after recent ownership changes. 48% of local revenue gets kicked up to MLB to be shared amongst all 30 teams. Do I think teams like the Rays can spend more? Yup... and they just showed it with the Wander Franco deal. If owning an MLB team wasn't profitable people wouldn't lineup to buy them everytime they go up for sale. Owners are freaked out after 2020 where they took losses. Some teams had to get lines of credit from MLB when they stopped revenue sharing because of losses in revenue from the pandemic. There is a disagreement over whether or not the big market teams will have to repay that money. It's not as simple as people want it to be.
He had an ERA of 2.16 in the post season. In the last 10 post season games, he's only given up more than 2 runs once. He was not the reason why the dodgers couldn't beat the braves.
It certainly didn't help when they had to use Buehler on short rest in the game that ended their season. Buehler gave up 4 runs in 4 innings.
There will always be exceptions and ways teams structure operating expenses and report losses. Do the A's make as much money as the Astros? No... thus they don't spend as much. But are all the owners operating at a huge revenue loss? You also have to look at things long term and not simply on a recency bias. Franchise values continue to go up. The owners who are getting line of credit or carrying debt could always cash out and profit more than what they paid for the team. The market correction of the pandemic also doesn't fully explain the reason why average salaries have been stagnant. This was a predicted issue back in 2018-2019, and its merely been more amplified now as we reach the deadline (while live sports advertising, and tv deals overall, have actually appreciated in value).
Oh I agree with your points. I just expect the owners to use the pandemic and lower attendace as some of their reasons for not giving in.
Yeah, I just don't see that working out too well. The playoffs were still all sellouts. All other leagues have gone back to max capacity. There were attendance issues throughout baseball prior to the pandemic. Hopefully the common goal by both parties is to limit the disparity... which can lead to higher overall average contracts. I do feel the Rays anticipating that a salary floor very well will result in teams needing to start giving out longer term deals (with pre-are raises) now to their homegrown studs.
I agree with everything else you said. But this comment was curious to me, because I think MLB has actually done really well with their streaming product. Living out-of-market, I've been able to use the MLB app to watch games in a way that's not possible for other sports. And the app itself is smooth and reliable. They get subscriber revenue and also sell ads. Maybe you mean they should market their streaming app better?
Was more referring to the games they had on exclusively via YouTube or yahoo, that were free for all people regardless of territorial restrictions or subscription. That is the future of all live consumption. TV's now have those apps built in but the reach across all mobile platforms is so vast now that all sports will soon adapt to deliver content regularly via these mediums. But yes, I agree that their streaming via MLB.TV was always ahead of its time (was pre smart phone), and now has become the standard for all live sports streaming.
The Rangers could sign Seager, Bryant, Kershaw, AND Ray and they still wouldn’t be favored to win the division.
