39303829275D0 wrote:
There's no way in the world I'm going to wait and see what we spend the extra 15 million on because I'm still waiting on where we are spending the extra money we had this year from last year's paltry payroll.
Cervelli and Polanco were extended for $88 million. Does that count?
Salary flexability
Moderators: SammyKhalifa, Doc, Bobster
Salary flexability
58535B575253480D0B7C455D545353125F533C0 wrote:
There's no way in the world I'm going to wait and see what we spend the extra 15 million on because I'm still waiting on where we are spending the extra money we had this year from last year's paltry payroll.
Cervelli and Polanco were extended for $88 million. Does that count?
im sure you believe that, but of course not. thats not how the accounting works. future payroll obligations 5 years from now have nothing to do with todays budgeting for this season.
There's no way in the world I'm going to wait and see what we spend the extra 15 million on because I'm still waiting on where we are spending the extra money we had this year from last year's paltry payroll.
Cervelli and Polanco were extended for $88 million. Does that count?
im sure you believe that, but of course not. thats not how the accounting works. future payroll obligations 5 years from now have nothing to do with todays budgeting for this season.
-
dogknot17@yahoo.co
Salary flexability
So, this means they didn't put it back into the team?
There is only one position player not locked up (Mercer) and yet people still say the Owner isn't investing into the team.
I guess I don't understand.
There is only one position player not locked up (Mercer) and yet people still say the Owner isn't investing into the team.
I guess I don't understand.
Salary flexability
As I mentioned before Dog those contract extensions are fixed costs. All MLB baseball teams have a payroll. Teams have to spend something. When you say they've spent $88 million for Cervelli and Polanco (actually baseball reference.com places the total at about $71 million) that is for 9 player years (4 for Cervelli + 5 for Polanco). Which means that for 2 of their core players they are paying an average of $7.88 million per player per season.
The average MLB player salary this year is $4.38 million. This means that a team which paid each man on the 25 man roster an average MLB salary would have a total payroll of $110 million. To use a poker analogy, that $110 million should really be the ante that's required for a MLB owner to get in the competitive game. Or in other words it should be the salary floor for a team not in a complete rebuild.
The Pirates are paying a premium of $3.5 million above average per year for each of Polanco and Cervelli. That $7 million dollar premium for those two players represents only 6.4% of payroll, and that percentage will decrease when the average MLB salary increases each year with inflation.
What the Pirates are putting back into the team is a triflingly small percentage of total payroll. Of course every team will have young players who will be on contracts that will be lower than the MLB average so this spending the Pirates are doing can be easily viewed not so much as investing as just payroll averaging.
Like dmetz what I want to see the Pirates do is to make an investment with what Huntington has called the 'financial flexibility' that they achieved in the Liriano deal. I want to see a player (or players) added to this team from that pile of cash that makes the Pirates a better team.
The average MLB player salary this year is $4.38 million. This means that a team which paid each man on the 25 man roster an average MLB salary would have a total payroll of $110 million. To use a poker analogy, that $110 million should really be the ante that's required for a MLB owner to get in the competitive game. Or in other words it should be the salary floor for a team not in a complete rebuild.
The Pirates are paying a premium of $3.5 million above average per year for each of Polanco and Cervelli. That $7 million dollar premium for those two players represents only 6.4% of payroll, and that percentage will decrease when the average MLB salary increases each year with inflation.
What the Pirates are putting back into the team is a triflingly small percentage of total payroll. Of course every team will have young players who will be on contracts that will be lower than the MLB average so this spending the Pirates are doing can be easily viewed not so much as investing as just payroll averaging.
Like dmetz what I want to see the Pirates do is to make an investment with what Huntington has called the 'financial flexibility' that they achieved in the Liriano deal. I want to see a player (or players) added to this team from that pile of cash that makes the Pirates a better team.
Salary flexability
183C282025490 wrote: As I mentioned before Dog those contract extensions are fixed costs. All MLB baseball teams have a payroll. Teams have to spend something. When you say they've spent $88 million for Cervelli and Polanco (actually baseball reference.com places the total at about $71 million) that is for 9 player years (4 for Cervelli + 5 for Polanco). Which means that for 2 of their core players they are paying an average of $7.88 million per player per season.
The average MLB player salary this year is $4.38 million. This means that a team which paid each man on the 25 man roster an average MLB salary would have a total payroll of $110 million. To use a poker analogy, that $110 million should really be the ante that's required for a MLB owner to get in the competitive game. Or in other words it should be the salary floor for a team not in a complete rebuild.
The Pirates are paying a premium of $3.5 million above average per year for each of Polanco and Cervelli. That $7 million dollar premium for those two players represents only 6.4% of payroll, and that percentage will decrease when the average MLB salary increases each year with inflation.
What the Pirates are putting back into the team is a triflingly small percentage of total payroll. Of course every team will have young players who will be on contracts that will be lower than the MLB average so this spending the Pirates are doing can be easily viewed not so much as investing as just payroll averaging.
Like dmetz what I want to see the Pirates do is to make an investment with what Huntington has called the 'financial flexibility' that they achieved in the Liriano deal. I want to see a player (or players) added to this team from that pile of cash that makes the Pirates a better team.
just because the Bucs decided the Liriano deal was a bad one doesn't mean they shouldn't try to sign anyone else for that amount or higher.
The average MLB player salary this year is $4.38 million. This means that a team which paid each man on the 25 man roster an average MLB salary would have a total payroll of $110 million. To use a poker analogy, that $110 million should really be the ante that's required for a MLB owner to get in the competitive game. Or in other words it should be the salary floor for a team not in a complete rebuild.
The Pirates are paying a premium of $3.5 million above average per year for each of Polanco and Cervelli. That $7 million dollar premium for those two players represents only 6.4% of payroll, and that percentage will decrease when the average MLB salary increases each year with inflation.
What the Pirates are putting back into the team is a triflingly small percentage of total payroll. Of course every team will have young players who will be on contracts that will be lower than the MLB average so this spending the Pirates are doing can be easily viewed not so much as investing as just payroll averaging.
Like dmetz what I want to see the Pirates do is to make an investment with what Huntington has called the 'financial flexibility' that they achieved in the Liriano deal. I want to see a player (or players) added to this team from that pile of cash that makes the Pirates a better team.
just because the Bucs decided the Liriano deal was a bad one doesn't mean they shouldn't try to sign anyone else for that amount or higher.
Salary flexability
7A5C5D4A5C4C3F0 wrote: As I mentioned before Dog those contract extensions are fixed costs. All MLB baseball teams have a payroll. Teams have to spend something. When you say they've spent $88 million for Cervelli and Polanco (actually baseball reference.com places the total at about $71 million) that is for 9 player years (4 for Cervelli + 5 for Polanco). Which means that for 2 of their core players they are paying an average of $7.88 million per player per season.
The average MLB player salary this year is $4.38 million. This means that a team which paid each man on the 25 man roster an average MLB salary would have a total payroll of $110 million. To use a poker analogy, that $110 million should really be the ante that's required for a MLB owner to get in the competitive game. Or in other words it should be the salary floor for a team not in a complete rebuild.
The Pirates are paying a premium of $3.5 million above average per year for each of Polanco and Cervelli. That $7 million dollar premium for those two players represents only 6.4% of payroll, and that percentage will decrease when the average MLB salary increases each year with inflation.
What the Pirates are putting back into the team is a triflingly small percentage of total payroll. Of course every team will have young players who will be on contracts that will be lower than the MLB average so this spending the Pirates are doing can be easily viewed not so much as investing as just payroll averaging.
Like dmetz what I want to see the Pirates do is to make an investment with what Huntington has called the 'financial flexibility' that they achieved in the Liriano deal. I want to see a player (or players) added to this team from that pile of cash that makes the Pirates a better team.
just because the Bucs decided the Liriano deal was a bad one doesn't mean they shouldn't try to sign anyone else for that amount or higher.
Exactly! And I'm not advocating tossing money at a player just to spend more on payroll, but there should be no hesitation on the Pirates part to spend from their 'flexibility' to improve in an area that needs to be improved even if it means paying market price. The FO needs to show some flexibility of their own in that regard.
The average MLB player salary this year is $4.38 million. This means that a team which paid each man on the 25 man roster an average MLB salary would have a total payroll of $110 million. To use a poker analogy, that $110 million should really be the ante that's required for a MLB owner to get in the competitive game. Or in other words it should be the salary floor for a team not in a complete rebuild.
The Pirates are paying a premium of $3.5 million above average per year for each of Polanco and Cervelli. That $7 million dollar premium for those two players represents only 6.4% of payroll, and that percentage will decrease when the average MLB salary increases each year with inflation.
What the Pirates are putting back into the team is a triflingly small percentage of total payroll. Of course every team will have young players who will be on contracts that will be lower than the MLB average so this spending the Pirates are doing can be easily viewed not so much as investing as just payroll averaging.
Like dmetz what I want to see the Pirates do is to make an investment with what Huntington has called the 'financial flexibility' that they achieved in the Liriano deal. I want to see a player (or players) added to this team from that pile of cash that makes the Pirates a better team.
just because the Bucs decided the Liriano deal was a bad one doesn't mean they shouldn't try to sign anyone else for that amount or higher.
Exactly! And I'm not advocating tossing money at a player just to spend more on payroll, but there should be no hesitation on the Pirates part to spend from their 'flexibility' to improve in an area that needs to be improved even if it means paying market price. The FO needs to show some flexibility of their own in that regard.
Salary flexability
3C373F3336372C696F182139303737763B37580 wrote:
I guess I don't understand.
Correct. Your twisting your mind around and it's very, very simple.
If you are earmarking money today, to pay a contract 5 years from now, then you are using a revenue surplus today, to cover a shortage 5 years from now.
There is no projected shortage 5 years from now. Revenues are off the charts and money available to spend on the draft is now limited. The pirates payroll obligations moving forward are comparatively tiny and there are huge payroll surpluses projected for then as well.
Saying saving 8 million today is going towards cervellis money 2 years from now is just a bunch of BS. The pirates would need to actually go out and spend more than they have available for prior years profits to be "rolled forward"
Not to mention it's bad business to allocate it that way because unless they hide the supposed money this year, the surplus they would supposedly be using to help with payroll 3 years from now will be taxed. Inefficient use of resources.
They aren't doing it that way, so it's a moot point.
I guess I don't understand.
Correct. Your twisting your mind around and it's very, very simple.
If you are earmarking money today, to pay a contract 5 years from now, then you are using a revenue surplus today, to cover a shortage 5 years from now.
There is no projected shortage 5 years from now. Revenues are off the charts and money available to spend on the draft is now limited. The pirates payroll obligations moving forward are comparatively tiny and there are huge payroll surpluses projected for then as well.
Saying saving 8 million today is going towards cervellis money 2 years from now is just a bunch of BS. The pirates would need to actually go out and spend more than they have available for prior years profits to be "rolled forward"
Not to mention it's bad business to allocate it that way because unless they hide the supposed money this year, the surplus they would supposedly be using to help with payroll 3 years from now will be taxed. Inefficient use of resources.
They aren't doing it that way, so it's a moot point.
Salary flexability
Does anyone know when their contract with Root is up for renegotiation?