| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
levski
Veteran Presence
Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Posts: 1763
|
 Posted: Wed Dec 06, 2006 10:07 am Post subject: Team payroll in 07-09 |
 |
|
http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/index.php?sty=80137
| Quote: |
Until that debt is significantly reduced, however, the Diamondbacks’ payroll will remain among the lowest in major league baseball.
Kendrick said the 2007 payroll will be between $60 million and $65 million. Last year, 12 clubs, including the Diamondbacks, had a payroll of less than $65 million.
Arizona has budgeted a payroll of between $65 million and $70 million for the 2008 season and between $70 million and $75 million for the 2009 season, Kendrick said.
At that point, Kendrick added, the Diamondbacks’ deferred payments will be below $30 million, and the payroll, while not budgeted, should increase significantly. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
dirtygary
Everyday Player
Joined: 11 Aug 2006
Posts: 903
Location: Phoenix
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 06, 2006 10:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
Just in time to retain our own products and watch them fully develop. And then when they hit FA, maybe the payroll will be enough to afford Boras' demand for $10M/yr for Drew, and the others will want to get up there as well.
And seriously, how much is it going to cost to retain Brandon Webb once his current deal expires? I think it'd be fair to start out at $15M/yr, and go from there. He's a frickin CY winner.
_________________
The pen is mightier than the sword, if that pen is shot out of a gun |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
matt
Veteran Presence
Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Posts: 1748
Location: Researching my theory that a lime hat is more effective than tinfoil
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 06, 2006 10:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
Great article. I really liked the insight about the deferred payments and total debt.
| Quote: |
Kendrick said the Diamondbacks lost $353 million from their inaugural season of 1998 through the 2004 campaign, according to audited financial reports. In addition, he said the club was responsible for $254 million in deferred payments to 18 players, 15 of whom were no longer with the organization (my note, who would the three players be that are still with the org?).
The list includes super- stars such as Randy Johnson, Curt Schilling and Luis Gonzalez but also contains surprising names such as Russ Springer, Omar Daal, Bernard Gilkey and Roberto Alomar.
Arizona still owes $98 million in deferred payments and $200 million in debt payments, Kendrick said.
“That’s what we’ve had to deal with and why we haven’t been able to invest in current players at the level of money we’d like to invest,” Kendrick said.
The Diamondbacks are paying $25 million to $30 million a year toward the deferred contracts, which includes 6 percent interest, Kendrick said. |
So $30M a year for the deferred payments and probably another $10-20 for the debt payments. That's about 75% of what they spend on payroll, kids.
I guess Kendrick is getting sick of being called a cheapass by everyone and wants to get the story out. Too bad it was published in the EVT, otherwise the public would actually find out.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
matt
Veteran Presence
Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Posts: 1748
Location: Researching my theory that a lime hat is more effective than tinfoil
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 06, 2006 10:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I didn't know we gave deferred money to rejects like Russel F. Springer. The fucker played two and a half seasons for us and made less than $4M. It's like going to Jack in the Box and asking to put some tacos on layaway. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tmar
Veteran Presence
Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Posts: 1184
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 06, 2006 10:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
I've always been on Kendrick's side when it comes to accepting the errors of the past <financial> and still trying to put a good team on the field.
I think in the long run we'll be a better organization for it.
I wonder how much is "significant". |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
shoewizard
Hall of Famer
Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Posts: 3241
Location: In front of my computer
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 06, 2006 10:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
I am really glad that Ken decided to finally spell this out in detail. I have been banging my head against the wall trying to get the story out. Of course some of my numbers were off here and there, but the general situation I have had right all along.
I already posted it at MLB  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
matt
Veteran Presence
Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Posts: 1748
Location: Researching my theory that a lime hat is more effective than tinfoil
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 06, 2006 10:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
| shoewizard wrote: |
| I already posted it at MLB |
I figured you would do that. Thanks
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
B. O. N. D.
Everyday Player
Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Posts: 859
Location: Tucson, AZ until 3/6... then back to San Francisco
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 06, 2006 10:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| matt wrote: |
| I didn't know we gave deferred money to rejects like Russel F. Springer. The fucker played two and a half seasons for us and made less than $4M. It's like going to Jack in the Box and asking to put some tacos on layaway. |
Holy shite that's funny!!! 
_________________
Oops in the 2 hole!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
coop981
AA Prospect
Joined: 07 Oct 2006
Posts: 42
Location: Peoria
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 06, 2006 10:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
| matt wrote: |
Great article. I really liked the insight about the deferred payments and total debt.
| Quote: |
Kendrick said the Diamondbacks lost $353 million from their inaugural season of 1998 through the 2004 campaign, according to audited financial reports. In addition, he said the club was responsible for $254 million in deferred payments to 18 players, 15 of whom were no longer with the organization (my note, who would the three players be that are still with the org?).
The list includes super- stars such as Randy Johnson, Curt Schilling and Luis Gonzalez but also contains surprising names such as Russ Springer, Omar Daal, Bernard Gilkey and Roberto Alomar.
Arizona still owes $98 million in deferred payments and $200 million in debt payments, Kendrick said.
“That’s what we’ve had to deal with and why we haven’t been able to invest in current players at the level of money we’d like to invest,” Kendrick said.
The Diamondbacks are paying $25 million to $30 million a year toward the deferred contracts, which includes 6 percent interest, Kendrick said. |
So $30M a year for the deferred payments and probably another $10-20 for the debt payments. That's about 75% of what they spend on payroll, kids.
I guess Kendrick is getting sick of being called a cheapass by everyone and wants to get the story out. Too bad it was published in the EVT, otherwise the public would actually find out.
|
My crack at the 3 still with the organization would be: Williams, Grace and Bell.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
matt
Veteran Presence
Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Posts: 1748
Location: Researching my theory that a lime hat is more effective than tinfoil
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 06, 2006 11:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
| doh! I should have know that. Thanks. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tmar
Veteran Presence
Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Posts: 1184
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 06, 2006 11:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
Barring any multi-year signings or extensions this year, we should have about 25MM free next season.
I assume we'll commit 10-15MM of that this year on multi-year deals <Davis extension maybe and who know's what else we bring in>. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dirtygary
Everyday Player
Joined: 11 Aug 2006
Posts: 903
Location: Phoenix
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 06, 2006 1:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Seems like a lot to still be paying for contracts and stadium debt. And it doesn't really matter what our payroll is, the Dodgers are committed to being the uber-team like the Yankees. Time to pray for injuries and they get Russ Ortiz'd
_________________
The pen is mightier than the sword, if that pen is shot out of a gun |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
qudjy1
Veteran Presence
Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Posts: 1121
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 06, 2006 4:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I wonder how big the revenue sharing pot is going to be this year? With boston, LA, NY, CHC shelling out serious $, some of that will end up in AZ at the end of 07, correct? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
matt
Veteran Presence
Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Posts: 1748
Location: Researching my theory that a lime hat is more effective than tinfoil
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 06, 2006 4:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The threshold is pretty high, I think it's around $130M or so. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stu
Everyday Player
Joined: 12 Aug 2006
Posts: 560
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 06, 2006 5:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I am assumimg this 353M is on an accrual basis. Thus the deferred salaries are being counted in this loss. Also I assume some depreciation for the park is included. Even so there is no question that JC was perfectly spending other people's money and acting like a big shot.
Many of the signings were just stupid although since the new much signed Green and Ortiz, they should be estoppped from complaining.
I am still happy with the WS and am willing to suffer some years for it. What annoyed me was that stupidityafter the WS.
As to revenue sharing, it is revenue that is shared. Apart from the fact that attendence might increase in the towns that are spending, the salaries have nothing to do with revenue sharing.
If you are thinking of the tax on salaries beyond a certain amount, that is put in a Selig slush fund and is not shared based on revenue or payroll. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tmar
Veteran Presence
Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Posts: 1184
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 06, 2006 7:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| If you are thinking of the tax on salaries beyond a certain amount, that is put in a Selig slush fund and is not shared based on revenue or payroll. |
I had that misperception as well.
As far as the accrual accounting in regards to the 353MM isn't there some special accounting regulations that allow the MLB clubs to write of a bunch of a player's salary in the first year and ergo fudge the year to year books pretty substantially.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tucson DBacks Fan
MLB Rookie
Joined: 13 Oct 2006
Posts: 208
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 06, 2006 7:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Colangelo must really be a smooth talker to get bankers and other wealthy businessmen to give away so much of their money. In retrospect, after seeing how Colangelo spent these folks' money, some wisely, some unwisely, I think it would be very hard for him to get investors excited to let him run another MLB team such as the Cubs. Of course, his investors in Phoenix were all of legal age and nobody held a gun their heads and held them up for the money. If they had any legal recourse with Colangelo, I'm sure they would have used it by now.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
foulpole
Veteran Presence
Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Posts: 1358
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 06, 2006 9:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| matt wrote: |
| It's like going to Jack in the Box and asking to put some tacos on layaway. |
I love those greasy bad boys...yum yum!!!
http://jjij.analogcafe.net/J&the%20Box%20tacos.jpg
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
foulpole
Veteran Presence
Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Posts: 1358
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 06, 2006 9:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| stu wrote: |
| I am assumimg this 353M is on an accrual basis. Thus the deferred salaries are being counted in this loss. Also I assume some depreciation for the park is included. |
And IIRC the D-Backs ( and the D-Rays ) did not share in the national TV revenue for the 1st 5 years. This was a very new restriction for expansion clubs.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
