Which baseball teams are getting the most for their money? That's the question I was hoping to answer, and I figured there would be an easy mathematical way to do it. But after looking at team payrolls and win totals, I ran into a big problem. It's not that simple.Baseball's payrolls last year ranged from as little as $14.345 million dollars (Florida Marlins) to $198.662 million dollars (New York Yankees). And even though the Marlins paid a paltry $180K for each of their 78 wins last season (by far, the lowest dollar amount of all 30 teams) I have a hard time concluding that more teams should try to be like the Marlins. After all, this is a team that finished below .500, and in 4th place in the NL East, 19 games out of first.
On the flip-side, I have an equally hard time saying the New York Yankees were a complete failure last year too, even though they paid $2.05 million dollars per win. The Yanks did win the division (uh-gain) and led Major League Baseball with 97 wins.
For the record, here's a list (from lowest to highest) of what teams paid per win last season.
1. Florida - $180K2. Colorado - $540K
3. Tampa Bay - $580K
4. Minnestoa - $660K
5. Oakland - $670K
6. Milwaukee - $670K
7. Pittsburgh - $700K
8. Cleveland - $730K
9. Cincinnati - $740K
10. Kansas City - $760K
11. Arizona - $770K
12. San Diego - $780K
13. Texas - $810K
14. Toronto - $830K
15. Detroit - $870K
16. Washington - $890K
17. Philadelphia - $1.03M
18. Baltimore - $1.04M
19. NY Mets - $1.04M
20. St. Louis - $1.05M
21. Houston - $1.12M
22. LA Dodgers - $1.13M
23. Seattle - $1.13M
24. Chicago White Sox - $1.14M
25. LA Angels - $1.16M
26. Atlanta - $1.17M
27. San Francisco - $1.20M
28. Boston - $1.40M
29. Chicago Cubs - $1.44M
30. NY Yankees - $2.05M
Now, here's a list of win totals from 2006 (from highest to lowest)
1. NY Yankees - 971. NY Mets - 97
3. Detroit - 95
4. Minnesota - 96
5. Oakland - 93
6. Chicago White Sox - 90
7. LA Angels - 89
8. LA Dodgers- 88
8. San Diego - 88
10. Toronto - 87
11. Boston - 86
12. Philadelphia - 85
13. St. Louis - 83
14. Houston - 82
15. Texas - 80
15. Cincinnati - 80
17. Atlanta - 79
18. Seattle - 78
18. Cleveland - 78
18. Florida - 78
21. Arizona - 76
21. Colorado - 76
21. San Francisco - 76
24. Milwaukee - 75
25. Washington - 71
26. Baltimore - 70
27. Pittsburgh - 67
28. Chicago Cubs - 66
29. Kansas City - 62
30. Tampa Bay - 61
A few things jump out at me (and probably you too). First, the Chicago Cubs were really bad. They had the second highest cost per win ($1.44M) and third lowest win total (66). Also, Minnesota and Oakland were really good. They were both in the top 5 in wins, and in the bottom 5 in cost per win.
That gave me an idea. Teams want to be at the top of both lists those lists to be considered (a) cost-effective, and (b) successful. So what if I took their average ranking on the two lists? Here's how that panned out...
1. Minnesota - 42. Oakland - 5
3. Detroit - 9
4. Florida - 9.5
5. NY Mets - 10
5. San Diego -10
7. Colorado - 11.5
8. Toronto - 12
8. Cincinnati -12
10. Cleveland - 13
11. Texas - 14
12. Philadelphia - 14.5
13. Milwaukee - 15
13. LA Dodgers - 15
13. Chicago White Sox - 15
16. NY Yankees - 15.5
17. Arizona - 16
18. LA Angels - 16
19. Tampa Bay - 16.5
19. St. Louis - 16.5
21. Pittsburgh - 17
22. Houston - 17.5
23. Kansas City - 19.5
23. Boston - 19.5
25. Seattle - 20.5
25. Washington - 20.5
27. Atlanta - 21.5
28. Baltimore - 22
29. San Francisco - 24
30. Chicago Cubs - 28.5
While I don't agree with exactly how this panned out, a lot does make sense. Minnesota and Oakland, two franchises known for making the most out of the least, are ranked #1, and 2. In fact, five of the top six teams made the playoff last year, and the team that didn't (Florida) was one of the biggest surprises. The Cubs, Giants, Orioles and Braves all had big payrolls and poor results last year. And the Yankees (most wins, most money spent) rank in the middle.
I found the Cardinals (19th, tied with the D-Rays) and the Red Sox (23rd, tied with the Royals) a bit puzzling. The Cards have a big payroll, and did only finish 2 games over .500, they just happened to win the whole thing. As for the Red Sox/Royals debate I guess I'd say this, which is worse, having a big payroll and just missing the playoffs, or having a tiny payroll and missing the playoffs by a lot? I guess it's about equal.
2 comments:
kbiv, do you work anymore?
i also found it interesting that maybe the rockies arent as bad as you think.
Re: your last point. I'd much rather be the Red Sox than the Royals right now.
Interesting results, overall though. I think you can probably throw out points like the Yankees and Marlins because they are extreme. The Yanks spend way more than everyone else and the Marlins went a little nuts with their bargain basement/rebuilding method to spite Miami for not building them a stadium. Neither is a normal baseball situation.
Post a Comment