Turn Off Ads?
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 31 to 43 of 43

Thread: Reds eligible for 2013 Competitive Balance Lottery picks.

  1. #31
    Member Sea Ray's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio
    Posts
    15,539

    Re: Competitive Balance Lottery to shake up Draft

    Quote Originally Posted by MattyHo4Life View Post
    Simply that even though the Brewers are the smallest market team, they have a larger payroll than a lot of teams do. The Brewers have been able to put a winner on the field and the fans are responding by going to the games.
    Small markets can pull it together for a limited window especially with a new stadium. We saw Cleveland do this in the 90s. I expect Milwaukee's situation is similar.

    Even though Milwaukee is in their hey day, they don't compare to St louis. Case in point, both teams have FA slugging 1B. One is likely to re-sign him the other not so much.

    My point is MLB should not lump St Louis in with the likes of Milwaukee

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #32
    Member Sea Ray's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio
    Posts
    15,539

    Re: Reds eligible for 2013 Competitive Balance Lottery picks.

    Quote Originally Posted by fearofpopvol1 View Post
    I really don't like the idea of giving teams extra draft picks, even though it will benefit the Reds. I don't know, to me it cheapens the league, even if the Yankees have a bajillion dollars. I'd rather see a salary cap of $100M, maybe slightly more.
    Absolutely. I'd rather see a salary cap too but since that ain't happenin', I'll take this

  4. #33
    Member MattyHo4Life's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    St. Louis
    Posts
    3,515

    Re: Competitive Balance Lottery to shake up Draft

    Quote Originally Posted by Sea Ray View Post
    Small markets can pull it together for a limited window especially with a new stadium. We saw Cleveland do this in the 90s. I expect Milwaukee's situation is similar.

    Even though Milwaukee is in their hey day, they don't compare to St louis. Case in point, both teams have FA slugging 1B. One is likely to re-sign him the other not so much.

    My point is MLB should not lump St Louis in with the likes of Milwaukee
    really? last I heard, the Cardinals offered Pujols 22Mil per year and the Brewers offered Fielder 20Mil per year. Neither player seems any closer to resigning with their team. I guess I'm not sure which team you think is likely to resign their 1B and the other not so much.

  5. #34
    Member Sea Ray's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio
    Posts
    15,539

    Re: Competitive Balance Lottery to shake up Draft

    Quote Originally Posted by MattyHo4Life View Post
    really? last I heard, the Cardinals offered Pujols 22Mil per year and the Brewers offered Fielder 20Mil per year. Neither player seems any closer to resigning with their team. I guess I'm not sure which team you think is likely to resign their 1B and the other not so much.
    I think Pujols is much more likely to stay of course I could be wrong. There's more to it than dollars such as yrs and other considerations

  6. #35
    Where's my chair? REDREAD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Posts
    20,929

    Re: Competitive Balance Lottery to shake up Draft

    Quote Originally Posted by 757690 View Post
    Like I said, Saint Louis is around the fifth largest baseball market in baseball and always has been. It has little to do with how smart they are run, but mostly to do with logistics.

    Regardless, how can any team justify getting MLB welfare when it has offered a 9 year $200M contract, when it already has another player signed to 7 year $120M contract?

    Beyond absurd.
    It seems like StL has been a blueprint for small market success for the last 10-15 years. (Heck, probably longer than that). They have pretty much had a decent (if not contending team) during that entire period, and that's why they have such a great fan following and that's why they can give out big contracts.

    Why should they be penalized for their success? This is not about welfare, it's helping the smaller markets be more competitive. It's also not about giving inept teams like the Cubs and the recent version of the Astros extra picks in order to increase parity.

    If you were going to pull StL off the 13 small market list, who would you add?

    In any event, the impact of this competitive balance lottery is going to be almost zero, IMO..
    Thank you Walt and Bob for going for it in 2010-2014!

    Nov. 13, 2007: One of the greatest days in Reds history: John Allen gets the boot!

  7. #36
    Where's my chair? REDREAD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Posts
    20,929

    Re: Competitive Balance Lottery to shake up Draft

    Quote Originally Posted by Sea Ray View Post
    Yeah, in her heyday the Oakland A's had the highest payroll in MLB...so what? Times have changed and it ain't ever goin' back

    St Louis is the 21st market in the US while Cincinnati is 33rd. I consider that a significant difference:

    http://mediainfosaltlakecity.blogspo...-rankings.html
    Cincy has Columbus about 1.5 hours away. The Columbus area alone is roughly 2 million people. And people will complain that most of the Columbus people are Indians fans.. Well, that's the Reds fault for pretty much sucking since 1999 (with the exception of last year). The Reds marketing in Columbus is pretty much non-existent as well. I hear a few radio ads per year (usually for college night). That's it.

    John Allen and Carl Lindner decided to pursue the strategy of keeping payroll cut to the bone, getting bad TV deals, bad attendence and then just sitting back and letting the revenue sharing money guarantee them a profit. I'm sure that made Carl a lot of money, but it also cost the team a lot of fans.

    The team got a roughly 10% attendence increase this year. I think that's encouraging. Cast and Walt need to put a winning team on the field and try to get people to care about the Reds again.
    Thank you Walt and Bob for going for it in 2010-2014!

    Nov. 13, 2007: One of the greatest days in Reds history: John Allen gets the boot!

  8. #37
    Member Sea Ray's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio
    Posts
    15,539

    Re: Competitive Balance Lottery to shake up Draft

    Quote Originally Posted by REDREAD View Post
    It seems like StL has been a blueprint for small market success for the last 10-15 years. (Heck, probably longer than that). They have pretty much had a decent (if not contending team) during that entire period, and that's why they have such a great fan following and that's why they can give out big contracts.

    Why should they be penalized for their success? This is not about welfare, it's helping the smaller markets be more competitive. It's also not about giving inept teams like the Cubs and the recent version of the Astros extra picks in order to increase parity.

    If you were going to pull StL off the 13 small market list, who would you add?

    In any event, the impact of this competitive balance lottery is going to be almost zero, IMO..
    Call it what you want but this whole lottery pick idea is all about welfare. If they're going to do this it should be largely based on revenue and that will penalize teams that do a good job of marketing their product.

    The way the NFL does things like their draft and waiver system is all about welfare too

  9. #38
    Be the ball Roy Tucker's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Mason, OH
    Posts
    12,059

    Re: Reds eligible for 2013 Competitive Balance Lottery picks.

    The part I don't like about how they do this is if you are a large market team but you have lousy revenues, you get a pick. Small market team, good or bad, get one no matter what which is OK by me.

    If I were commisioner, I'd base it solely on market size. If you have a big market but can't make a go of it, then you're a bad business person so sell the darn team.

    Does anyone know how they determine "market"? I found this from Arbitron that ranks radio market size. It's probably a decent approximation. http://www.arbitron.com/home/mm001050.asp

    Pay attention to the open sky

  10. #39
    Member 757690's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Dayton
    Posts
    9,999

    Re: Competitive Balance Lottery to shake up Draft

    The Brewers really don't, nor never had a bigger payroll than most teams. They have actually had very similar payrolls to the Reds. The Cardinals on the other hand, have consistently had payrolls similar to big market teams.

    Here is how the Reds, Brewers, Cards and Giants payrolls have looked since 2000:

    Code:
    Reds 	Brewers	Cards	Giants
    $44 	$35 	$63 	$53 
    $48 	$43 	$78 	$63 
    $45 	$50 	$74 	$78 
    $59 	$40 	$83 	$82 
    $46 	$27 	$83 	$82 
    $61 	$39 	$92 	$90 
    $60 	$57 	$88 	$90 
    $68 	$70 	$90 	$90 
    $74 	$80 	$99 	$76 
    $73 	$80 	$88 	$82 
    $76 	$90 	$94 	$96 
    $80 	$83 	$109 	$118
    "Man, the pitch looks fast, even in slow motion." Thom Brennaman on Chapman's fastball.

  11. #40
    Member MattyHo4Life's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    St. Louis
    Posts
    3,515

    Re: Competitive Balance Lottery to shake up Draft

    Quote Originally Posted by 757690 View Post
    The Brewers really don't, nor never had a bigger payroll than most teams. They have actually had very similar payrolls to the Reds. The Cardinals on the other hand, have consistently had payrolls similar to big market teams.
    So the Cardinals, a small/mid market team has a payroll comparable to a big market team. How does the payroll change the size of the market?

    You compared the payrolls of the teams since 2000. However, the current Cardinals owners took over in 1996. If you look at the Cardinals payroll prior to 1996, you will probably see a payroll similar to that of Milwaukee and Cincinnati. St. Louis hasn't suddenly become a larger market, the owners are just running the club differently than some other clubs and has had success within the last 15 years.

  12. #41
    Member 757690's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Dayton
    Posts
    9,999

    Re: Competitive Balance Lottery to shake up Draft

    Quote Originally Posted by MattyHo4Life View Post
    So the Cardinals, a small/mid market team has a payroll comparable to a big market team. How does the payroll change the size of the market?

    You compared the payrolls of the teams since 2000. However, the current Cardinals owners took over in 1996. If you look at the Cardinals payroll prior to 1996, you will probably see a payroll similar to that of Milwaukee and Cincinnati. St. Louis hasn't suddenly become a larger market, the owners are just running the club differently than some other clubs and has had success within the last 15 years.
    The Cardinals were a top ten payroll team in the 80's, when the elder Busch was running things. For a brief time, when his son started running the team in the 90's, the payroll dropped significantly, you are correct, and they new owners in '96 brought the team back to their original payroll levels.

    The Cardinals have always been one of the wealthiest organizations in baseball from the beginning. They were the NL version of the Yankees for decades. Technically, St. Louis is a mid market city, but because of it's history and logistics, it always will be a big market team, and be able to spend like one.
    "Man, the pitch looks fast, even in slow motion." Thom Brennaman on Chapman's fastball.

  13. #42
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Amarillo,Texas
    Posts
    4,349

    Re: Competitive Balance Lottery to shake up Draft

    The Cardinals payroll in 2004 was comparable to the Reds payroll this year-$83 million, where it increased to 92 million the next year. What happened in 2004? The Cardinals signed Albert to that long contract that is only ending now. It's the success that the Cardinals had with Albert that led to them increasing payroll from 83 million to now 110 million. I don't think Albert was the only reason for the success, but they wouldn't have had it without him. It's something the Reds should consider as they face the decision to extend Votto. I simply think the Cardinals shouldn't be treated as a team that needs any help from the lottery.

  14. #43
    Member 757690's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Dayton
    Posts
    9,999

    Re: Competitive Balance Lottery to shake up Draft

    Quote Originally Posted by AmarilloRed View Post
    The Cardinals payroll in 2004 was comparable to the Reds payroll this year-$83 million, where it increased to 92 million the next year. What happened in 2004? The Cardinals signed Albert to that long contract that is only ending now. It's the success that the Cardinals had with Albert that led to them increasing payroll from 83 million to now 110 million. I don't think Albert was the only reason for the success, but they wouldn't have had it without him. It's something the Reds should consider as they face the decision to extend Votto. I simply think the Cardinals shouldn't be treated as a team that needs any help from the lottery.
    That's a very good point. One thing I will give the Cardinal ownership credit for, is that they understand that winning leads to more revenue which leads to more winning. They aren't afraid to take financial risks if they think it will lead to championships.

    Now that was Jocketty who was the mastermind behind that philosophy, so lets hope he can convince the Reds ownership to try it.
    "Man, the pitch looks fast, even in slow motion." Thom Brennaman on Chapman's fastball.


Turn Off Ads?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most importantly, enjoy yourselves!


RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball


Contact us: Boss | GIK | BCubb2003 | dabvu2498 | Gallen5862 | LexRedsFan | Plus Plus | RedlegJake | redsfan1995 | The Operator | Tommyjohn25