Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Posts: 859
Location: Tucson, AZ until 3/6... then back to San Francisco
Posted: Fri Sep 29, 2006 2:23 pm Post subject:
I just don't see them even attempting to move Byrnes this offseason. He's outspoken in a positive way, a team player, fan favorite, Pig Pen®... they've already had a Dirty Jersey Byrnes Day... and he's a having a great season. They're also probably not going to give the whole OF to rookies.
Maybe if Byrnes regresses in 2007, and Tracy continues to be subpar at 3b, THEN at the deadline you could see some action.
But I doubt before then. Pitching should come from trading Estrada and prospects... not of the elite variety... unless it's an offer Josh can't refuse and then it's bye-bye Callaspo.
_________________ Oops in the 2 hole!
Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Posts: 2404
Location: Gold Canyon
Posted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 6:37 am Post subject:
Nick Piecoro this morning wrote:
Not everything went according to plan for the Diamondbacks. Their 76-86 finish, tied for last in the National League West, attests to that.
But from a financial standpoint, it sounds like the Diamondbacks season played out just about as expected.
The club's revenue projections came in just about on target, Managing General Partner Ken Kendrick said, and the organization again turned a small profit that he said will be reinvested in the team.
"The last couple of years, we have had a real budget that we have had to live by," Kendrick said. "We have done that, and we'll continue to do that."
Sunday's crowd of 48,946 pushed the season attendance mark to 2.09 million, a small increase over last season, and right in line with what the club had budgeted to go along with a payroll in the $60 million range. Kendrick said next year's payroll will be similar.
The Diamondbacks are expected to have about $30 million committed to six players on the roster and two others, pitcher Russ Ortiz and outfielder Shawn Green, who are no longer with the team.
Factor in another $20 million or so that will go to players whose rights the Diamondbacks control, and assume that catcher Johnny Estrada and reliever Jorge Julio don't return, and the club likely will have upwards of $10 million to spend this winter.
(The club will receive payments from the Dodgers and Yankees for deals made two off-seasons ago while making a payment to the White Sox.)
Kendrick said that the payroll could trend upward in the future should attendance and revenue increase.
"We can be very successful at 3 million fans," Kendrick said. "Successful in terms of financially we can make some profit that we can reinvest into the team in increasing payroll. That would allow us to go out and get selected players out of free agency and have a blend of veterans and younger players that is kind of the best mix you can ever hope for in a middle-market team."
Kendrick said the club still owes about $100 million in deferred salaries.
"We have, really, three more years of significant deferred player obligations," he said.
Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Posts: 3243
Location: In front of my computer
Posted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 8:45 am Post subject:
Well, I guess the info I got about Ortiz money not coming out of the payroll budget byrnes gets to work with was bullshit.
The 100 million remaining on deferrels, and the 3 year time period jives with what I thought it was though. And while not mentioned, I am sure the stadium Debt did not go away, although they may have paid some of it.
So last year per forbes they had 241 million of the debt, and it looks like with 100 in salary, and 80-100 in stadium, they are probably just a bit under 200 million.
Last year Debt to Value ratio was 79% on 305 Million Franchise Value.
If Franchise value went up 5 % to 315 million, and Debt is down to say 190 million, DVR will be about 60%
Here is the rub though....
Next year attendance will be worse. I am guessing minimum 10% drop in Season Ticket Sales, possibly as much as 25% That translates into 4000-5000 less per game.
So I see attendance dropping all the way to about 1.6-1.7 million next year....UNLESS they are winning and come September the walkup numbers give them a huge boost...and they make the playoffs.
I'll say it right now, 2007 is a MUST WIN year to keep the team from going into the spiral of lower attendance begets ------lower payroll begets-losing team------yet even lower attendance-----etc etc etc......i
The Chinese have a saying, that I believe is very applicable here:
So, if 2007 is a must win, doesnt the question really become...
Does the addition 1 starting pitcher (Really the only addition that everyone agrees on) add the 6-10 wins to get us over 500. Consider that the probable way to aquire that talent (trade) would include some loss of talent as well.
Would the new pitcher (Lets say Westbrook for example) really be that much of an improvement in terms of wins over the guys we are looking to upgrade like Vargas, Enrique. (would that REALLY translate to 6-10 more wins?
Just a question... i dont know the answer... would it be more efficient money/talent wise to get 3 really good bullpen guys instead of one starter? (the hard part would be figuring out who they are) I think we lost more games via the BP than the starters this year. (i know, i know, they got burnt out via less innings by starters)
If estrada and byrnes and julio and even hairston can be traded for a starter, fine... but i have a feeling the cost will be greater than that... and could put AZ in a deeper hole by giving away the talented young players we have...
im rambling... but i still think patience is the best way to go..
Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Posts: 3243
Location: In front of my computer
Posted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 9:17 am Post subject:
Allow me to clarify.
I don't think the team is going to go balls to the wall in an all out effort to win in 2007 at any and all costs.....they of course correctly perceive the team as being more than 1 or ever 2 players/pitchers away from a playoff spot and chance to go deep in the playoffs.
When I say 2007 is a must win season....I simply am saying this
1.) Season ticket sales will drop 10-25 heading into 2007.
Does anyone dispute this? If not...then what happens next?
2.) Don't win in 2007 and you won't recoup those lost sales.Does anyone dispute that failure to win in 2007 will keep ticket sales down?
3.) Don't recoup those lost sales and you lose alot of revenue
OK...I guess it's possible they will get revenues from elsewhere to make up for a large drop in attendance...but don't forget, fewer people at the stadium isn't only lower ticket sale revenue...concessions, team shop, parking, etc, ALL take a hit.
4.) Lose alot of revenue, and then Drop payroll
OK....they have said they won't increase payroll till attendance goes up. It does not take a rocket scientist to figure that if revenues drop, they will reduce payroll. Read their statements.
5.) Drop payroll...make it even harder to win going forward.
Does anyone dispute this?
I think if you take event 1, and reasonably project the result of event one, you logically come up with event 2, and so on. It really follows pretty closely, and there is ALOT of precedent to base these "assumptions" on.
So I am simply projecting that if they don't make the playoffs in 2007, or at least come really close in an exciting September.....it's going to have SERIOUS ramifications for this organizations ability to compete in the years beyond that because it will result in lower payroll.
I do think that the FO is very aware of this as well, and i think the break in the chain in your series of events (you even mention it) is the alternative revenues. I think we will see lots of more advertising around the park, and other things (new unis) to try to account for this drop.
Your conservative numbers up in the beginning of this thread have gate and operating revenue at about half of the total revenue earned... I would be surprised if that media figure hasnt increased dramatically over the last 5. I wonder how much the yanks will be paying az this year?
I think the next couple years may be interesting, but once we get through the deferred money, and stadium is paid down.. we should be in the clear... Just like any business starting up... (this one just had a big credit card limit in the beginning)
Thats a good point.. place is pretty full with ads already... just making the point that i think the FO understands that attendance will drop, and alternative sources will be sought out...
Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Posts: 1555
Location: clawing my eyes out, praying for sleep. booyah.
Posted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 10:33 am Post subject:
byrnes is a smart guy, though. he KNOWS attendance will drop next year, he KNOWS the team will bring in less cash, and he KNOWS winning is all that brings people back... right?
so if i were to be a betting man, i'd say byrnes knows all this shit, and he knows pretty well what his budget levels will be not only for next year, but also a baseline salary level to assume for the couple years beyond that.
i just think byrnes has a longterm plan. i think the FO does too. i think his next three years probably have a minimum salary to work with. after three years or so, THEN i think it could drop if we're not competing.
i've got no proof of that, aside from wild ass speculation. but these guys know what they're doing. they've gotta have a set plan, and they've gotta see the attendance drop coming. right?
_________________
Hank, you're dead to me.
Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Posts: 1871
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 10:36 am Post subject:
McCray wrote:
byrnes is a smart guy, though. he KNOWS attendance will drop next year, he KNOWS the team will bring in less cash, and he KNOWS winning is all that brings people back... right?
so if i were to be a betting man, i'd say byrnes knows all this shit, and he knows pretty well what his budget levels will be not only for next year, but also a baseline salary level to assume for the couple years beyond that.
i just think byrnes has a longterm plan. i think the FO does too. i think his next three years probably have a minimum salary to work with. after three years or so, THEN i think it could drop if we're not competing.
Well said, McCray.
The statement also works very effectively if you read it with the word "hope" in every place where it says "think"...
_________________
Is It Next Season Yet?
Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Posts: 1555
Location: clawing my eyes out, praying for sleep. booyah.
Posted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 10:42 am Post subject:
EvilJuan wrote:
McCray wrote:
byrnes is a smart guy, though. he KNOWS attendance will drop next year, he KNOWS the team will bring in less cash, and he KNOWS winning is all that brings people back... right?
so if i were to be a betting man, i'd say byrnes knows all this shit, and he knows pretty well what his budget levels will be not only for next year, but also a baseline salary level to assume for the couple years beyond that.
i just think byrnes has a longterm plan. i think the FO does too. i think his next three years probably have a minimum salary to work with. after three years or so, THEN i think it could drop if we're not competing.
Well said, McCray.
The statement also works very effectively if you read it with the word "hope" in every place where it says "think"...
"pull out of my ass" works just as great for wherever i say "think," but it usually does.
_________________
Hank, you're dead to me.
MLB shares all merch revenue evenly. The change in uni's to bring in more $$ will help LAD, SFG, and NYY just as much as it would us. Same thing goes for the sale of other teams helping us out. There is no inherant advantage to changing the uniforms.
Also, even if there was, the turnover that a team has year in and year out facilitates new purchases even if the uni never changed except for the names on the back. Honestly, they always change. Now they say Webb and Quentin instead of Schilling and Gonzo.
Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Posts: 1555
Location: clawing my eyes out, praying for sleep. booyah.
Posted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 7:19 pm Post subject:
so the money that the team shop takes in goes to a fund and is divided into thirty sub funds and then sent back? that's just weird... i never knew that.
_________________
Hank, you're dead to me.
Team shops, online, in the mall stores, WalMart, etc..
So even if the merch sales are evenly distributed (at the wholesale costs I assume), what about whether the org is running a successful team shop? I mean that the initial sale of MLB products is evenly distributed, but the team shop could be like any other biz that is attempting to turn a profit, and the team gets that. If not, I need to reconsider where I buy my merch, cuz I go out of ym way to purchase any goods at the stadium shop specifically to help the team make a little more. Yeah, I know, inconsequential. But it's also why I try to eat or buy something downtown whenever I'm in Tucson.
_________________
The pen is mightier than the sword, if that pen is shot out of a gun
So you're saying that if the Diamondbacks opened a team shop in the mall, the revenues generated from that private enterprise go into a pool? Why would anybody attempt to have a team shop, then?
_________________
The pen is mightier than the sword, if that pen is shot out of a gun
Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Posts: 1749
Location: Researching my theory that a lime hat is more effective than tinfoil
Posted: Wed Oct 18, 2006 12:50 pm Post subject:
My guess is that that part that is pooled is the profits on the wholesale price (the price the retailer pays). Whoever owns the retail outlet gets the profit from the actual retail sale.
Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Posts: 2404
Location: Gold Canyon
Posted: Wed Oct 18, 2006 8:06 pm Post subject:
scout.com's take on the arbitartion eligible snakes:
scout.com wrote:
ARBITRATION-ELIGIBLE: 2B Orlando Hudson, C Johnny Estrada, OF Eric Byrnes, RHP Luis Vizcaino, RHP Claudio Vargas, RHP Juan Cruz, RHP Brandon Lyon, RHP Jorge Julio.
Hudson likely will receive a multiyear extension after basically having the best season of anyone on the club. He's in the hunt for his second consecutive Gold Glove Award. Estrada is gone. He will be traded despite a stellar offensive season that saw him hit .302 with a career-high 11 home runs and finish with 71 RBIs. He has too many enemies on the club. Byrnes will be replacing stalwart Gonzalez in left field and is also eyeing a multi-year extension. The only pitchers who could be out of the loop are Cruz and Julio. Cruz is certain to gather interest from several clubs, but Julio has fallen off the radar some because of his wildness.
IN LIMBO: Estrada, Vargas, Cruz and Julio can't be sure of their futures, and ditto with left field prospect Scott Hairston, who has seen a job open in left field with the departure of Gonzalez, only to learn it will given to Byrnes. Estrada's situation is sure to be solved in the form of a trade, and he's already stated he would like to moved to Philadelphia, if possible. If not, destinations could include San Diego, if Mike Piazza doesn't re-sign, and perhaps San Francisco, which is near where Estrada was raised.
Elsewhere in the article, BoMel's ProvenVeteran™ fixation was addressed:
scout.com wrote:
"We'll discuss that, but I don't know if there's anybody out there that can take the place of Luis Gonzalez, period. We have some people here that will be asked to help fill that void, guys like Brandon Webb, Chad Tracy, Eric Byrnes and Orlando Hudson, who really stepped it up in a leadership role and in a role we didn't really expect coming in here and not really knowing him."
-- Manager Bob Melvin on the Diamondbacks' pursuit of potential veteran leadership following the departures of Luis Gonzalez and, most likely, Craig Counsell.
All times are GMT - 7 Hours Goto page Previous1, 2, 3
Page 3 of 3
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
