- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Is there a limit to what you would pay to one player in baseball?
Posted on 4/24/16 at 4:49 pm
Posted on 4/24/16 at 4:49 pm
We hear the talk about Bryce Harper getting between $400-500 million at an AAV of over $40 million per year, is one player in baseball worth that kind of money. Even though he is a everyday player and an unbelievable hitter he can't impact a game like an ace pitcher can, now his stardom and superpower will fill seats so he's worth it from a business standpoint but does it make sense to put that kind of money in one players hands when you have 24 other guys to feed especially if you are the nationals, the yanks and dodgers can do that but no one else really
8
Posted on 4/24/16 at 4:54 pm to RyanL
quote:
he can't impact a game like an ace pitcher can
is this a fair assessment considering an ace pitcher goes every 4th or 5th game whereas someone like harper is playign every game?
Posted on 4/24/16 at 4:56 pm to WG_Dawg
A pitcher controls the game, you can't "walk a pitcher". I can hit bryce or just walk him and take my shot with the other hitters, can't do that with an arrieta or kershaw. This is not to take anything away from bryce but giving one guy that kind of AAV and total money seems a lot
Posted on 4/24/16 at 4:57 pm to RyanL
If the Nationals can afford to give 31 year old Jayson Werth $126 million at 18 million a year, they can afford to pay Harper.
Posted on 4/24/16 at 4:57 pm to RyanL
@ 40mill I still don't see how the math works where he puts that many more butts in the seats. That's insane money for a single player.
I mean I guess if they can off set it by saying they get an extra 10-15mill in apparel sales or something as well.
I mean I guess if they can off set it by saying they get an extra 10-15mill in apparel sales or something as well.
Posted on 4/24/16 at 5:03 pm to RyanL
Stadium revenue can only fund so much, so I could understand all of this if the TV money is insane. But, I think national ratings keep going down, so I'd guess the major networks are not shelling out NFL money. I do realize that some local TV deals are huge. But, is that the case in anything other than a handful of cities?
Posted on 4/24/16 at 5:10 pm to Bunk Moreland
well yeah, the local tv money is insane because they play 162...
then you have MLB.TV which is Extra Innings without the middleman...
then you have MLB.TV which is Extra Innings without the middleman...
Posted on 4/24/16 at 5:12 pm to Bunk Moreland
The nationals are in a dispute with MASN over local tv money, I think they are getting $20 million less per year than they should
Posted on 4/24/16 at 7:32 pm to Bunk Moreland
quote:
Stadium revenue can only fund so much, so I could understand all of this if the TV money is insane. But, I think national ratings keep going down, so I'd guess the major networks are not shelling out NFL money. I do realize that some local TV deals are huge. But, is that the case in anything other than a handful of cities?
NFL Total Revenue 11.9 Billion Total Revenue per club 372 million
MLB Total Revenue 8.7 Billion Total Revenue per club $290 million
Premier League Total Revenue 4.6 Billion Total Revenue per club $235 million
NBA Total Revenue 4.5 Billion Total Revenue per club $152 million
NHL Total Revenue 3.4 Billion Total Revenue per club $110 million
Posted on 4/24/16 at 7:56 pm to TigerintheNO
I think your numbers are a little off:
MLB: Total Revenue = 9 billion
BPL: Total Revenue = 4.9 billion
NBA: Total Revenue = 5.2 billion
I think the NFL is past 12 billion but they don't release league revenue
MLB: Total Revenue = 9 billion
BPL: Total Revenue = 4.9 billion
NBA: Total Revenue = 5.2 billion
I think the NFL is past 12 billion but they don't release league revenue
Posted on 4/25/16 at 8:30 am to SuperSaint
quote:
@ 40mill I still don't see how the math works where he puts that many more butts in the seats. That's insane money for a single player.
I mean I guess if they can off set it by saying they get an extra 10-15mill in apparel sales or something as well.
Roger Clemens usually packed Minute Maid, and he certainly packed all the minor league stadiums when he made his trip back up to the majors.
But baseball payrolls is all sorts of crazy money:
LINK
Posted on 4/25/16 at 8:38 am to Bunk Moreland
Russillo was talking about it the other day on Mike and Mike. Nationally you would think Baseball is declining, but local and regional basis, baseball is off the charts. If baseball really wanted to grow, they might consider some new teams to hit markets they aren't in.
Posted on 4/25/16 at 8:43 am to RyanL
No, there is no theoretical limit. There is a luxury tax line around 170-180 currently iIrc, and that is based on average annual value. I know some teams are doing some interesting buy out/injury clauses, but I am ignorant to how that effects the average annual value if at all.
Whoops, I incorrectly read the question. Assuming I was an owner, I'd be like Mark Cuban and pay for talent, but also understand aging curves.
Whoops, I incorrectly read the question. Assuming I was an owner, I'd be like Mark Cuban and pay for talent, but also understand aging curves.
This post was edited on 4/25/16 at 8:46 am
Posted on 4/25/16 at 9:34 am to SuperSaint
quote:
@ 40mill I still don't see how the math works where he puts that many more butts in the seats. That's insane money for a single player.
I mean I guess if they can off set it by saying they get an extra 10-15mill in apparel sales or something as well.
I think 40 million is well worth it and actually a tad bit undervalued.
Harper is putting butts in the seats. The Nationals' attendance is up by about 10,000 per game since Harper's debut. A general rule of thumb is that every 100,000 fans per year is an additional $2 mil in revenue (average ticket price of $20.) For a conservative estimate, let's assume Harper's presence only brings in an extra 5000 per game (5000 x $20 x 81 games)= additional revenue of 8.1 MILLION dollars. No other player in the game has that type of drawing power.
That aside, Harper is worth about 8-10 wins a year (WAR). That's the difference between hosting the playoffs and sitting at home losing out on additional playoff revenue. For another conservative estimate, let's calculate playoff revenue. Let's say the nationals host 3 playoff games (Could be way more, but as an average let's say 3):
Capacity is 41,313. Let's say they bring in 38k (low for a playoff game, but whatever). 38,000 x $30 avg ticket price (increase for playoffs) x 3 games= Additional $3.4 million worth of revenue.
So, Harper brings in just over $11 extra million in revenue that otherwise wouldn't be there. Not mention the overall increase in your chances of winning will bring out larger crowds and higher tv ratings + all the additional Merch he will sell to casual fans and all over the country, I'd say he's well worth $45 million per year.
Posted on 4/25/16 at 9:37 am to Jcorye1
quote:
Assuming I was an owner, I'd be like Mark Cuban and pay for talent, but also understand aging curves.
I would be like the Pats. I feel like they only pay for what they think they're going to get. They don't pay a player based on past accomplishments. Take Welker for example. They knew he wasn't going to produce like he did in his past and they knew they could get similar production for cheaper.
I feel baseball owners and teams pay players based on past accomplishments. Take for instance the Tigers signing Miggy to that deal. That's fricking stupid unless they think they can get a WS ring in the few prime years he has left. The best example I can think of where a team should've let him walk is Ryan howard. No way was he worth that money and with aging curves, the PHillies should've never signed him.
Posted on 4/25/16 at 9:40 am to RyanL
if the nationals don't pay harper 40-50m, someone else will.
Posted on 4/25/16 at 10:06 am to UNO
quote:
if the nationals don't pay harper 40-50m, the Yankees or Red Sox will.
Posted on 4/25/16 at 10:10 am to RyanL
Does anyone think the Yankees got their monies' worth on those A-Rod contracts?
Serious question from a non-MLB fan.
Serious question from a non-MLB fan.
Posted on 4/25/16 at 10:40 am to tigerpimpbot
Or dodgers
Posted on 4/25/16 at 11:46 am to Moustache
the only player ever worth that much would be the roided up version of Barry Bonds.
This post was edited on 4/25/16 at 11:46 am
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News