We're back to where we ought to be. We can win a championship with a payroll in the [$70-80 million range], and that's where we are.
Tom Hicks, speaking in January, 2004. This 2010 season looks like it will be the 7th straight year where the Rangers will have a payroll below where Hicks said it "ought to be" half a decade ago.
6 days ago
Adam J. Morris
58 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
But, but...
Jamey told us all in a very terse diatribe before 2009 that he was very happy with how the team was spending their money!!!
Ye Olde Latin American Program and somesuch.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
"Ranger players, especially veterans, weren’t surprised that Daniels couldn’t find a deal"
by Josey Wales on Nov 15, 2009 11:08 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Not particularly in defense of that
But an “engineered” approach can work in any kind of competition. You can get winning performance without being the most expensive. Some examples that might be relevant:
- Dodge Vipers dominate GT racing. They cost about a third of a Ferrari, but routinely beat ’em.
- TCU and Boise State miss out on the Texas, OU, USC recruits but do a good job of selection and win.
- I no longer have a Mercedes E class, buoght a Mitsubishi after steep depreciation, and have a good ride point A to point B at about a third of the expense.
But yeah, you have to mine for gold and expect a few failures when you can’t spend for the obvious choices.
"He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lamp-posts... for support rather than illumination." - Andrew Lang (1844-1912) also -
"Telephone, n. An invention of the devil which abrogates some of the advantages of making a disagreeable person keep his distance."
~Ambrose Bierce
by Ed Coffin on Nov 15, 2009 11:18 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Can anyone see Ed in a Eclipse?
LoL What did you get Ed?
The bloggerformelyknownasBigBaddBubbaJ
by NYTXFAN on Nov 15, 2009 7:47 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Galant
Sedan. Surprisingly good so far.
"He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lamp-posts... for support rather than illumination." - Andrew Lang (1844-1912) also -
"Telephone, n. An invention of the devil which abrogates some of the advantages of making a disagreeable person keep his distance."
~Ambrose Bierce
by Ed Coffin on Nov 15, 2009 9:59 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Galant
Sedan. Surprisingly good so far.
"He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lamp-posts... for support rather than illumination." - Andrew Lang (1844-1912) also -
"Telephone, n. An invention of the devil which abrogates some of the advantages of making a disagreeable person keep his distance."
~Ambrose Bierce
by Ed Coffin on Nov 15, 2009 9:59 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
LSB is acting funky tonight
"It's kind of a new stat that's in vogue" - Joe Buck on OPS
"...he wasn’t a good hitter, just a good middle of the order bat that hit a lot of homers." - NYTXFAN on Mark McGwire
by lonestarJon on Nov 15, 2009 10:28 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Well...
Not to be a Hicks apologist (far from it), but, if Hicks were to say, “We’re back to where we ought to be. We can win a championship with a payroll in the [$70-80 million range] each and every year, and that’s where we are,” it would be one thing. But, he was referring to that year, and that year alone.
The Rangers did very well with a reasonable payroll, which is to say, the amount of money used on player payroll does not always define success (look at the Mets and Cubs as two examples).
Given the sale of the club, and Hicks bleeding red ink, if player payroll is at or near last year’s figure, I’d be happy. Just saying, given the chaotic nature of the ownership situation, it could a whole lot worse.
by Maury Brown on Nov 15, 2009 11:13 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
I get that
It is frustrating, though, that the Rangers followed up a successful 2004 season with a 2005 season where they spent money on Richard Hidalgo, and basically nothing else (other than big raises and extensions for Buck Showalter and John Hart), and have just bobbed around the mid-$60 million mark ever since.
One of the things that I felt like made that, if not okay, at least somewhat palatable was the belief that, when the Rangers got to the point where they were ready to contend, the payroll would jump to the $80-90 million mark to help fund that.
Instead, it looks like we’re following up the team’s best season in years, and going into the “target” year for contention, shopping in the bargain bin again.
It is frustrating.
by Adam J. Morris on Nov 15, 2009 11:16 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Frustrating, sure, but were you ever really surprised at any point?
"Nothing we do here has a point" - Czar Morris
by Chase Irwin on Nov 15, 2009 11:36 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
No one is surprised
but that doesn’t make it okay.
by Brett Perryman on Nov 15, 2009 12:20 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
No point wasting energy dwelling on it, imo.
I don’t think it was Adam’s intention to dwell on it, but rather point out what the trend has been for people who were unaware or misunderstood. Nothing particularly newsworthy about the 7th year as opposed to the 6th.
"Nothing we do here has a point" - Czar Morris
by Chase Irwin on Nov 15, 2009 1:42 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
and based on a report by Olney
Hicks still wants to hold onto ownership of this team. If anything, all that will do is drag the process of the sale out. I want no part of Hicks as the owner.
Our payroll needs to increase if we are going to compete. We are not going to win with the current crop of players. It is always build with the farm, supplement via FA. Now is the time to supplement.
A baseball game is simply a nervous breakdown divided into nine innings.
by NothinG on Nov 15, 2009 11:37 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Tom Hicks is basically a leech
at this point in his life.
by Brett Perryman on Nov 15, 2009 12:12 PM CST up reply actions 6 recs
I don't get the bitching about the payroll right now
When your team is being sold by the owner, what did you expect to happen? Its frustrating, but the team just has to suffer through Hicks for a little longer. Then we can see where the new owner takes this team as far as payroll is concerned.
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
"I am one of the biggest Texas Ranger fans out there but I'm also one of the smartest. Deal with it."
-The Outlaw
by Gdawg on Nov 15, 2009 12:54 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
What you said was fine, except for
one word: reasonable. Their payroll last season was not reasonable, and their payroll this season will not be reasonable. HIcks’ pathetic stewardship of the club is only offset to a certain extent by how well Daniels and Ryan have run the club under bottom of the barrel circumstances. They won’t sustain that indefinitely, and Hicks’ disastrous ownership may well cost them playoff success over the next few years. That is not reasonable.
by Brett Perryman on Nov 15, 2009 12:08 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Our payroll for next season will be appropriate for our roster composition
And it should go up simply due to natural progression of service times. If it doesn’t then theres a argument. But with the current FA crop and our roster it simply out of the question to have a payroll above league average next year unless you are being stupid with your money
Bryan Smith (12:17:17 PM PT): Justin Smoak and Josh Hamilton. The AL West might just have found their Bash Brothers, v. 2.0.
by bigsteve on Nov 15, 2009 11:15 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Really?
A payroll of $80 million for the Rangers in 2010 would mean they were being stupid with their money?
If they could add Ben Sheets on an incentive laden deal, and sign Mike Cameron and Nick Johnson to one year deals, that would get payroll to about $80 million, would put the Rangers in a really good position to contend in 2010, and would be fiscally responsible.
by Adam J. Morris on Nov 15, 2009 11:18 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
We should have
at least a 95 million payroll in this market.
Small market payroll teams usually have crap attendance no matter how well the team plays.
Invest in the team, give us some sizzle (along with results) and the fans in this area will support the team.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
"Ranger players, especially veterans, weren’t surprised that Daniels couldn’t find a deal"
by Josey Wales on Nov 15, 2009 11:21 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
95 million is unrealistic right now
It would be throwing 10-15 million away stupidly
Bryan Smith (12:17:17 PM PT): Justin Smoak and Josh Hamilton. The AL West might just have found their Bash Brothers, v. 2.0.
by bigsteve on Nov 15, 2009 11:24 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Again
You are confusing cause and effect.
You assume that a team that wins with a $100 million payroll will result in more people coming to the game than a team that wins with a $60 million payroll.
By that same logic, I would argue that you should go out and buy a Maserati, because people who drive Hondas don’t make much money, but people who buy Maseratis make lots of money.
by Adam J. Morris on Nov 15, 2009 11:24 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
adam
Which small-market payroll teams have consistently high attendance?
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
"Ranger players, especially veterans, weren’t surprised that Daniels couldn’t find a deal"
by Josey Wales on Nov 15, 2009 11:26 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Irrelevant
You are confusing cause and effect.
By your logic, if the Yankees or Red Sox were spending $70 million per year, and were winning 90+ games per year, the drop in payroll would cause the stands to start being half-empty.
by Adam J. Morris on Nov 15, 2009 11:37 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
If it was irrelevant
you’d be able to find a small market payroll team with high attendance.
You can’t depend only on sizzle alone (Ranger 2001 attendance was 34,000+) or you have a situation that happened to the Rangers in 2003 (attendance at 25,000).
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
"Ranger players, especially veterans, weren’t surprised that Daniels couldn’t find a deal"
by Josey Wales on Nov 15, 2009 11:42 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
No you wouldn't
Because a team with high attendance is going to have higher revenues and is going to end up putting more money in payroll.
This is Econ 101.
by Adam J. Morris on Nov 15, 2009 11:46 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm freaking out
reading this exchange right now. I’m trying to think of ways to explain it in a more efficient manner and can’t.
by CS3 on Nov 15, 2009 1:19 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
It wouldn't matter anyway.
LoneStarBall....You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy.
by DaheelzCM on Nov 15, 2009 3:50 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
For you this is a much more embarrassing run of comments
than the whole Will Carroll thing. You really just don’t understand anything below the surface level.
G G G E-flat_______ F F F D__________....
by t ball on Nov 15, 2009 11:49 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
10-12 years ago
the Red Sox were only getting 27,000-29,000 at their games.
They now have the second highest payroll in the game plus they’re one of the best teams.
They have sizzle and results.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
"Ranger players, especially veterans, weren’t surprised that Daniels couldn’t find a deal"
by Josey Wales on Nov 15, 2009 12:04 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Check out the Mets when it comes
to payroll and attendance.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
"Ranger players, especially veterans, weren’t surprised that Daniels couldn’t find a deal"
by Josey Wales on Nov 15, 2009 12:08 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Their attendance increased
as soon as they started winning again. The years you mention were a run of mediocre finishes around the player’s strike.
G G G E-flat_______ F F F D__________....
by t ball on Nov 15, 2009 12:08 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Not too shabby
for a team that finished 2nd, 2nd, and 4th in the division those seasons with a 33,500 max capacity
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
"I am one of the biggest Texas Ranger fans out there but I'm also one of the smartest. Deal with it."
-The Outlaw
by Gdawg on Nov 15, 2009 12:59 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
And 80 million is about league average correct?
I said above league average is being stupid with your money. Im talking about 85-90+ million.
We could get it up to around 80 and be smart with it although by signing guys to one year deals you are pushing off development and then the payrolls are gonna go back down once they leave
Bryan Smith (12:17:17 PM PT): Justin Smoak and Josh Hamilton. The AL West might just have found their Bash Brothers, v. 2.0.
by bigsteve on Nov 15, 2009 11:23 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Let's say then that it takes an $85 million payroll to get those three guys
Rather than $80 million.
Or rather than Sheets, you sign Harden to a 1 year, $10 million deal.
by Adam J. Morris on Nov 15, 2009 11:25 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Depends
If its Harden then you are probably still good but getting into a grey area. If its Sheets then you are probably overpaying for those guys. On one year deals it doesn’t hurt as much but like I said the payroll will just drop once those guys leave so are you going to continue doing one year deals with guys just to inflate the payroll?
Bryan Smith (12:17:17 PM PT): Justin Smoak and Josh Hamilton. The AL West might just have found their Bash Brothers, v. 2.0.
by bigsteve on Nov 15, 2009 11:34 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
You do one year deals...
…with guys that you believe can fill immediate holes to improve a team you believe is a playoff contender, while retaining your flexibility and not getting locked in on a bad long-term deal, so if you want to extend your core people or go out and try to moneywhip a special talent on the f.a. market, you can.
by Adam J. Morris on Nov 15, 2009 11:38 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah I get that
But the guys you want on one year deals this year look to be positions that will be filled by prospects who will be here for awhile starting in 2011. Sheets should be replaced by one of the plethora of pitching prospects. Johnson should be filled by Smoak. Cameron should be filled by Borbon. Looking at other areas past 2010 there aren’t many, if any, spots that would need one year upgrades. LF possibly. A reliever maybe.
Thats why im saying with our current roster composition. We have good young players at most the spots who aren’t going to be gone after next year. And the spots we do have open this year should be filled after this year by more good young players.
Bryan Smith (12:17:17 PM PT): Justin Smoak and Josh Hamilton. The AL West might just have found their Bash Brothers, v. 2.0.
by bigsteve on Nov 15, 2009 11:43 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
plethora of pitching prospects
how long have you been a rangers fan?
counting on smoak next year isn’t smart
by ab03 on Nov 15, 2009 12:27 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
How many times have we had so many top pitching prospects?
Im didn’t say counting on Smoak next year. I said 2011. If he isn’t ready by then then I think the bust label should start being mumbled
I mean hell some on here are already trying to find room in the rotation for Feliz next year without Sheets. Add him and it pushes that back. By 2011 Feliz will be rotation ready no doubt along with Scheppers possibly along with Martin Perez being on the horizon. Thats not mentioning all the mid-level guys like Poveda, Kiker, Moscoso, Hurley, Harrison, etc who may be ready also
Bryan Smith (12:17:17 PM PT): Justin Smoak and Josh Hamilton. The AL West might just have found their Bash Brothers, v. 2.0.
by bigsteve on Nov 15, 2009 12:31 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
i think this year should be 1 year deals
next year if we want to sign a pitcher, there are alot more on the market if you want to go semi-longterm
A baseball game is simply a nervous breakdown divided into nine innings.
by NothinG on Nov 15, 2009 11:39 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I will not allow you to ruin my Sunday...
but with these first two posts you’re doing a pretty good job of trying
"Sometimes you just want to sit back and watch somebody throw 100." - Jeff Passan on Neftali Feliz
by Ryin A on Nov 15, 2009 11:38 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Our only hope
is to get off to a hot start in April/May and have new ownership in place before the trade deadline.
by cstorm15 on Nov 15, 2009 12:22 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Yep
and that isn’t sounding likely
by Brett Perryman on Nov 15, 2009 12:58 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I had a dream last night that we acquired Milton Bradley
Ron told him he has his old spot (locker) and he was happy to be back and got in his locker all curled up…heh.
by Mike E on Nov 15, 2009 12:34 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
you dream about the Rangers? Really?
Hey have you ever dreamed that the Rangers won the World Series? If so how did it feel?
Kinda sad that I have to fantasize vicariously through someones dreams but I’ll take what I can get at this point.
Good help doesn't come cheap.
- Gil LeBreton
by BigGuns on Nov 15, 2009 12:43 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
No I haven't ever dreamed that. lol.
And honestly I don’t recall ever dreaming anything about the Rangers other than maybe me randomly being at a game as the setting, aside from this.
by Mike E on Nov 15, 2009 12:59 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
oh ok damn, I was gonna ask you where the ticker tape parade was?
Dallas? Ft. Worth? both? sighhhhh
Good help doesn't come cheap.
- Gil LeBreton
by BigGuns on Nov 15, 2009 1:01 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
OT.
The Hiroshima Carp cut Ben Kozlowski. http://bit.ly/4hThTY
"I was going to say, 'You’re gay for Elvis.' But then I realized that I, too, am gay for Elvis." ~Adam J. Morris.
by Kinslerhomer on Nov 15, 2009 2:04 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Payroll
Does is make sense to give John Lackey a contract like the Yankees gave AJ Burnett?
Does is make sense to take on the majority of the two-year obligation to Milton Bradley, given the concerns about him?
Does is make sense to trade some combination of Derek Holland, Justin Smoak, Tommy Hunter, Julio Borbon, et al for one year of Roy Halladay?
For all the complaining about our payroll, I haven’t really seen us not sign a player or complete a trade that made sense. And if we go re-sign Marlon Byrd to a three-year contract and don’t sign Mike Cameron, it isn’t because Tom Hicks wouldn’t pay Cameron, but rather because Nolan Ryan, Jon Daniels and Ron Washington made a bad decision.
by Darrell McKown on Nov 15, 2009 5:10 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Did anybody find that small market payroll team
that has consistently high attendance?
I know the Cardinals reside in a small market with a limited revenue stream but somehow find a way to have a top 10-12 payroll.
They win, they have sizzle, the fans know ownership is busting it’s balls to compete and whaddya know, 3.5 million give or take in attendance.
Irrelevant, my ass.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
"Ranger players, especially veterans, weren’t surprised that Daniels couldn’t find a deal"
by Josey Wales on Nov 15, 2009 11:31 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Not a good comp JDub
The Redbirds have a storied history. St. Louis is a baseball town. The passion for all things Cardinals is every bit as strong as that for the Cowboys.
I don’t have an answer to your challenge, I don’t particularly care either way on the payroll argument, just pointing out that the Rangers are not in the same strata as the Cardinals.
by poster formerly known as ncrangerman on Nov 16, 2009 6:57 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I have always heard about St.Louis being this great baseball town
but I wonder if they’d support the team if they had an ownership that insisted on a small market payroll and a team that competed once every 5 years. That’s what will test your passion.
Take a good look at Milwaukee…21,000 or so in a very new ballpark with a small payroll in 2003. In 2009 they bump their payroll to $ 80 million and still put 3 million people into their ballpark (for the second year in a row) despite finishing below .500.
Look at Houston, Philly, Detroit. Take a good look at what Arte Moreno did with the Angels.
Your chances of winning with a small payroll are diminished but it can happen. If you win with a small market payroll, your attendance is most likely going to suck (see Oakland & Minnesota this decade).
The fans want to keep their own players, have the sizzle of an occasional free agent and know the owner is trying to be competitive.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
"Ranger players, especially veterans, weren’t surprised that Daniels couldn’t find a deal"
by Josey Wales on Nov 16, 2009 8:39 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
St. Louis
breathes Cardinals baseball. Sure, like most anyplace else attendance spikes up and down with winning or particularly bad teams, but overall, people are going to go to the ballpark there on a fairly consistent basis. Embracing the Cardinals really is a rite of passage there. My dads family came from there, I’ve lived it.
Sorry, I’ve unintentionally derailed your momentum. I do get your point. I don’t disagree, I’m just not passionate one way or the other about payroll dollars.
by poster formerly known as ncrangerman on Nov 16, 2009 9:19 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Join the community and dive in!
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
