O's and Mets, money don't buy champions

O's and Mets, money don't buy champions

Post by David Che » Thu, 21 May 1998 04:00:00


The 1992 NY Mets tried to buy themselves into a World Series contender.
Having the highest payroll and end up *** with a 71-91 record.

The 1998 Baltimore O's, tried to buy themselves into World Series.  Having
the highest payroll and right now have sole possesion of last place in AL
East.

Shows again payroll doesn't equal success.

 
 
 

O's and Mets, money don't buy champions

Post by London Dav » Thu, 21 May 1998 04:00:00


Quote:

>The 1992 NY Mets tried to buy themselves into a World Series contender.
>Having the highest payroll and end up *** with a 71-91 record.

>The 1998 Baltimore O's, tried to buy themselves into World Series.  Having
>the highest payroll and right now have sole possesion of last place in AL
>East.

>Shows again payroll doesn't equal success.

True.

However, no payroll equals no success.

David London

 
 
 

O's and Mets, money don't buy champions

Post by Michael J. Sack » Thu, 21 May 1998 04:00:00

Quote:

> The 1992 NY Mets tried to buy themselves into a World Series contender.
> Having the highest payroll and end up *** with a 71-91 record.

> The 1998 Baltimore O's, tried to buy themselves into World Series.  Having
> the highest payroll and right now have sole possesion of last place in AL
> East.

> Shows again payroll doesn't equal success.

What's really interesting is who was on that '92 Mets team.  David Cone,
who was traded during a great season and has been good in what limited
play he's had since.  John Franco, who had a wonderful '92 season, and has
pitched great since '94.  Bret Saberhagen, who has made this year a
remarkable comeback year, and pitched well during and after the '92
season.  Bobby Bonilla, who has threatened a 1.000 OPS a couple times
since.  Jeff Kent, who despite all the mediocy, is still a very good
player (not a $6M player, though).

It makes me think who off the '98 Orioles, after they bomb this season,
will post good seasons after this, even if they're old.  My bets are on
Robby, Raphael, and a wild guess in Jeffery Hammonds.

Mike Sacks

 
 
 

O's and Mets, money don't buy champions

Post by Chris Dia » Thu, 21 May 1998 04:00:00

Quote:

>The 1992 NY Mets tried to buy themselves into a World Series contender.
>Having the highest payroll and end up *** with a 71-91 record.

>The 1998 Baltimore O's, tried to buy themselves into World Series.  Having
>the highest payroll and right now have sole possesion of last place in AL
>East.

>Shows again payroll doesn't equal success.

Check out the last 5 WS champs, and their respective rank in payroll.  Also
check out the playoff teams and their rank in payroll.  The Braves in 1992
may not have been very high, but almost every playoff team has a huge
salary.

Payroll may not equal success, but it approaches it.

Chris Dial

 
 
 

O's and Mets, money don't buy champions

Post by David B » Thu, 21 May 1998 04:00:00

Quote:


>Well, of course.  The best players generally cost the most money, and
>therefore having a lot of money to spend will generally allow you to
>acquire the best players.  Certainly, there will be surprises -- both
>positive and negative, but the Yankees, Indians and Braves have been
>better than Montreal, Kansas City and Pittsburgh for the last four
>years for a reason.

They've been making better baseball decisions.  Yes, they can pick up
free-agents, but that didn't mean instant success as much a few years ago as
it does now.   Montreal and Pittsburgh have been examples of how  you CAN
compete with a low payroll.  Atlanta has a huge payroll now partly because
it has developed the talent, and NOW it has to pay up to keep those players.
But by the time the talent reached the age and experience level where it was
eligible for free agency, the organization had begun winning and had some
money to spend.  Kansas City, on the other hand, is an example of an
organization that's so screwed up from top to bottom that they
haven't.........

Aw, heck, we've been over this before.  (By the way, the Royals set a team
record tonight by giving up 14 runs...that sets the team record for
back-to-back pitching performances--30 runs in two games.  Ouch!   Anyone
know the ML record for this offhand?)

David B.

 
 
 

O's and Mets, money don't buy champions

Post by Terry M » Thu, 21 May 1998 04:00:00



 d> The 1998 Baltimore O's, tried to buy themselves into World
 d> Series.  Having the highest payroll and right now have sole
 d> possesion of last place in AL East.

And somewhere Davey Johnson is smiling...again.

... Atlanta Braves - 1991, 1992, 1995 & 1996 National League Champions!
--

        Terry May - Las Vegas, NV

 
 
 

O's and Mets, money don't buy champions

Post by F.B » Fri, 22 May 1998 04:00:00


Quote:


>>The 1992 NY Mets tried to buy themselves into a World Series
contender.
>>Having the highest payroll and end up *** with a 71-91 record.

>>The 1998 Baltimore O's, tried to buy themselves into World Series.
Having
>>the highest payroll and right now have sole possesion of last place
in AL
>>East.

>>Shows again payroll doesn't equal success.

>Check out the last 5 WS champs, and their respective rank in payroll.
Also
>check out the playoff teams and their rank in payroll.  The Braves in
1992
>may not have been very high, but almost every playoff team has a huge
>salary.

>Payroll may not equal success, but it approaches it.

>Chris Dial

Well, of course.  The best players generally cost the most money, and
therefore having a lot of money to spend will generally allow you to
acquire the best players.  Certainly, there will be surprises -- both
positive and negative, but the Yankees, Indians and Braves have been
better than Montreal, Kansas City and Pittsburgh for the last four
years for a reason.

Matt P

 
 
 

O's and Mets, money don't buy champions

Post by Larry Gene Gariepy, Jr » Fri, 22 May 1998 04:00:00

Quote:

> Aw, heck, we've been over this before.  (By the way, the Royals set a team
> record tonight by giving up 14 runs...that sets the team record for
> back-to-back pitching performances--30 runs in two games.  Ouch!   Anyone
> know the ML record for this offhand?)

> David B.

Well, Boston scored 49 runs in consecutive games vs. St. Louis on June
7th and 8th, in 1950.  I'm not sure if this is the record, but if it
isn't, it must be close.

Larry

 
 
 

O's and Mets, money don't buy champions

Post by Sean Lahma » Fri, 22 May 1998 04:00:00

Chris Dial

Quote:


> >Shows again payroll doesn't equal success.

> Payroll may not equal success, but it approaches it.

The fundamental points that we keep restating every few weeks (for as
long as I can remember) are:

a) it takes good players to win
b) good players cost more money
therefore
c) teams who win have high payrolls

but also (memo to Gillick)
d) paying a player a lot of money doesn't necessarily mean he's good
therefore
e) you can have a high payroll and still have bad players

and we conclude
f) teams with high payrolls won't necessarily win
but
g) teams who win will have high payrolls

--

           The Baseball Archive - http://www.baseball1.com

 
 
 

O's and Mets, money don't buy champions

Post by Douglas T. Mass » Fri, 22 May 1998 04:00:00



Quote:

> The 1992 NY Mets tried to buy themselves into a World Series contender.
> Having the highest payroll and end up *** with a 71-91 record.

> The 1998 Baltimore O's, tried to buy themselves into World Series.  Having
> the highest payroll and right now have sole possesion of last place in AL
> East.

> Shows again payroll doesn't equal success.

True!  Team wins correlate much better with team talent level than
it does with team salary.  

Some teams spend a lot more money than others for their players.
This is an advantage.  However, the wisdom with which a team spends
its money is more important than how much they have to spend.  Give
a league-average budget to the smartest GM available and he'll sign
players that can win 110 games a year, year after year.

Of course, the smartest GM available isn't necessarily employed by
anyone in major league baseball.  The 30 GM's in charge of the MLB
teams don't really seem to know what they're doing, most of the time.
But the competition is accordingly weak and *some* of them end up
looking good.

Peter Angelos:  for $200,000 a year, I will be your GM for 1999.
Please call (802)879-2820 to discuss contract details.

Doug

PS:  Still think the Mets are going to finish ahead of the Braves,
David?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
 ___,  IBM Microelectronics Division, Burlington, Vermont
 \o    ASICs Product Development Engineering                        |>
  |    Phone: (802)769-7095 t/l: 446-7095 fax: x6800                |

   .   Doug's Homepage:  http://SportToday.org/~masseyd        (|)

 
 
 

O's and Mets, money don't buy champions

Post by David Che » Fri, 22 May 1998 04:00:00


Quote:
> Peter Angelos:  for $200,000 a year, I will be your GM for 1999.
> Please call (802)879-2820 to discuss contract details.

> Doug

> PS:  Still think the Mets are going to finish ahead of the Braves,
> David?

yes.
Quote:
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>  ___,  IBM Microelectronics Division, Burlington, Vermont
>  \o    ASICs Product Development Engineering                        |>
>   |    Phone: (802)769-7095 t/l: 446-7095 fax: x6800                |

>    .   Doug's Homepage:  http://members.tripod.com/~masseyd        (|)