1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Hey everybody! Another small market-large market baseball thread!

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Bubbler, Mar 31, 2010.

  1. Bubbler

    Bubbler Active Member

    Saw this link today. It describes how much teams spent on free agents during the off-season.


    Some highlights ...

    -- The Red Sox, Cardinals and Mets were 1-2-3 in free agent spending, but the Brewers were fourth at $55,650,000.

    -- The Mariners, Braves and Reds -- all considered medium-to-small market clubs -- were also in the top 10. Tack on the Astros and Nationals in the top 15.

    -- And the free-spending Yankees? They're ranked 19th, behind noted free-spenders ... the Oakland A's.

    -- The bottom 10 consists of owners or ownership groups (Diamondbacks, Royals, Padres, Pirates, Indians, Marlins (who spent $0) who are renowned for not putting any money into their baseball operation, many preferring to live off the luxury tax teet to pad their profits.

    The smart ones knew it all along, but its nice to have the numbers to back it up.
  2. old_tony

    old_tony Well-Known Member

    One question: Since the Yankees spent about a half-billion dollars a year ago, what holes did they have to fill this past year?
  3. Bubbler

    Bubbler Active Member

    Valid point, O_T, and you're right, they probably didn't need to spend as much this year.

    However, the classic argument has always been that small-market teams can't spend period and that big-market teams will out-spend them no matter what. That list says otherwise.
  4. PCLoadLetter

    PCLoadLetter Well-Known Member

    The other slight consideration here is that it doesn't account for salary lost this offseason. The Angels are fifth, but during the same time period they lost John Lackey, Chone Figgins, Vlad Guerrero and Darren Oliver.

    But having said that, it's an interesting list. Never would have guessed the Brewers would be that high.
  5. outofplace

    outofplace Well-Known Member

    Picking out only one year is a joke, especially a year with a relatively weak free agent class coming on the heels of the Yankees spending like crazy. Tony already pointed out one big reason why. Team payrolls for this year are a much better indicator.
  6. Football_Bat

    Football_Bat Well-Known Member

    A better measurement would be net change in payroll. The Broke Ass Rangers are in the middle at $22.5M in new contracts, but they also dumped Kevin Millwood, Hank Blalock and Marlon Byrd among others. So I think they are a net minus in payroll even though they spent a little on Harden and Vlad.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page