Around Baseball 2025

[Jimcanuck]

3 big fish that time!

Prospect porn.... 🤪

[Spanky__99]

8 hours ago, Jimcanuck said:

3 big fish that time!

Prospect porn.... 🤪

JimmyC, I've noticed whenever you post something dumn, you fall back on that you were trolling, it's weak man. His post was and is about payroll, a lot of these owners should s*** or get off the pot and sell their franchise to someone who will.

[Jimcanuck]

58 minutes ago, Spanky__99 said:

JimmyC, I've noticed whenever you post something dumn, you fall back on that you were trolling, it's weak man. His post was and is about payroll, a lot of these owners should s*** or get off the pot and sell their franchise to someone who will.

Meh.  It's a business, and the market dictates payroll.  Not many will run a baseball team at a loss.  Is there someone out there that is such a fan of the Brewers that they will (1) buy the team by making an offer the current owner cannot refuse, and (2) increase payroll at the expense of personal wealth.  If there is, the Brewers would have been sold yesterday.

Most of my posts are flippant, tongue in cheek, trolling, or just spitballing.

[Spanky__99]

5 minutes ago, Jimcanuck said:

Meh.  It's a business, and the market dictates payroll.  Not many will run a baseball team at a loss.  Is there someone out there that is such a fan of the Brewers that they will (1) buy the team by making an offer the current owner cannot refuse, and (2) increase payroll at the expense of personal wealth.  If there is, the Brewers would have been sold yesterday.

K.....

[John_Havok]

36 minutes ago, Jimcanuck said:

Meh.  It's a business, and the market dictates payroll.  Not many will run a baseball team at a loss.  Is there someone out there that is such a fan of the Brewers that they will (1) buy the team by making an offer the current owner cannot refuse, and (2) increase payroll at the expense of personal wealth.  If there is, the Brewers would have been sold yesterday.

Most of my posts are flippant, tongue in cheek, trolling, or just spitballing.

Not sure why you'd think the Brewer's aren't making money. Without revenue sharing... yeah I could see that. For the most part, billionaires don't own businesses that are not profitable unless their last name is Cohen. 

[Jimcanuck]

Just now, John_Havok said:

Not sure why you'd think the Brewer's aren't making money. Without revenue sharing... yeah I could see that. For the most part, billionaires don't own businesses that are not profitable unless their last name is Cohen. 

Where did i say they aren't?

[John_Havok]

2 minutes ago, Jimcanuck said:

Where did i say they aren't?

Just seemed from your post you were insinuating the Brewers were being run at a loss, which is why nobody wanted to buy them.

[Jimcanuck]

Just now, John_Havok said:

Just seemed from your post you were insinuating the Brewers were being run at a loss, which is why nobody wanted to buy them.

So you interpreted something that isn't there

[John_Havok]

2 minutes ago, Jimcanuck said:

So you interpreted something that isn't there

Well.....based on the below, it may not have been your intent to imply it... but it's not a reach for someone to infer it.

"Is there someone out there that is such a fan of the Brewers that they will (1) buy the team by making an offer the current owner cannot refuse, and 2) increase payroll at the expense of personal wealth.  If there is, the Brewers would have been sold yesterday."

But, if that was not what you were getting at, cool. 

[Jimcanuck]

1 minute ago, John_Havok said:

Well.....based on the below, it may not have been your intent to imply it... but it's not a reach for someone to infer it.

"Is there someone out there that is such a fan of the Brewers that they will (1) buy the team by making an offer the current owner cannot refuse, and 2) increase payroll at the expense of personal wealth.  If there is, the Brewers would have been sold yesterday."

 

But, if that was not what you were getting at, cool. 

A huge leap.

[Jimcanuck]

This started with respect to the rumours of the Brewers trading Peralta a year before he hits free agency.  Y'all know that signing pitchers long term is a very risky proposition.  For a small market team, a bad contract will be a huge anchor.  Not so concerning for the Dodgers.

Of course they are kicking tires on trading Peralta.  It's just smart business for a small market team.  The Rays, the Marlins, the Pirates, etc all do the same.

ROI for a small market team is maxed by drafting, scouting, development.  The Brewers and Rays just do it best.

 

[Spanky__99]

20 minutes ago, John_Havok said:

Just seemed from your post you were insinuating the Brewers were being run at a loss, which is why nobody wanted to buy them.

That's how I read it, too, big guy.

[Spanky__99]

16 minutes ago, John_Havok said:

Well.....based on the below, it may not have been your intent to imply it... but it's not a reach for someone to infer it.

"Is there someone out there that is such a fan of the Brewers that they will (1) buy the team by making an offer the current owner cannot refuse, and 2) increase payroll at the expense of personal wealth.  If there is, the Brewers would have been sold yesterday."

But, if that was not what you were getting at, cool. 

We're correct, jimmyC is wrong, again.

[Spanky__99]

11 minutes ago, Jimcanuck said:

This started with respect to the rumours of the Brewers trading Peralta a year before he hits free agency.  Y'all know that signing pitchers long term is a very risky proposition.  For a small market team, a bad contract will be a huge anchor.  Not so concerning for the Dodgers.

Of course they are kicking tires on trading Peralta.  It's just smart business for a small market team.  The Rays, the Marlins, the Pirates, etc all do the same.

ROI for a small market team is maxed by drafting, scouting, development.  The Brewers and Rays just do it best.

 

yadon'tsay.gif  😅

[Jimcanuck]

3 minutes ago, Spanky__99 said:

We're correct, jimmyC is wrong, again.

No where did I write the Brewers are losing money.  If that was my intent, it would have been written in black and white, with no need for your mental gymnastics.

[Spanky__99]

2 minutes ago, Jimcanuck said:

No where did I write the Brewers are losing money.  If that was my intent, it would have been written in black and white, with no need for your mental gymnastics.

Fish in a barrel.

[Jimcanuck]

9 minutes ago, Spanky__99 said:

Fish in a barrel.

Reported

[mphenhef]

9 hours ago, Jimcanuck said:

Meh.  It's a business, and the market dictates payroll.  Not many will run a baseball team at a loss.  Is there someone out there that is such a fan of the Brewers that they will (1) buy the team by making an offer the current owner cannot refuse, and (2) increase payroll at the expense of personal wealth.  If there is, the Brewers would have been sold yesterday.

Most of my posts are flippant, tongue in cheek, trolling, or just spitballing.

They could spend way more and still be making money.  They spent only 40 percent of revenue on player salaries in 2024 

 

 

[mphenhef]

For what it is worth, the teams at the bottom of that last image I posted are a far bigger problem than the ones at the top.

[Omar]

On 11/27/2025 at 6:03 PM, Laika said:

Combined - no World Series wins since 1948 

Two in a combined 209 seasons? Wow 

Baseball armageddon is bound to happen one day.  Need a floor and a cap or else 25 teams play for nothing.  

[Laika]

1 minute ago, Omar said:

Baseball armageddon is bound to happen one day.  Need a floor and a cap or else 25 teams play for nothing.  

I kind of prefer the inequity 

Leagues like the NHL seem so boring and random now 

[Jimcanuck]

1 hour ago, mphenhef said:

They could spend way more and still be making money.  They spent only 40 percent of revenue on player salaries in 2024 

 

 

Incomplete.  They have like 180M in operating expenses.  Plus other expenditures.  Get back to me when you have the full balance sheet.

If you look at the differences between revenue and payroll for the various teams, it seems to average around $200M.  Operating expenses are semi fixed although teams could cut or add to for example player development expenses at any time.  Or marketing / promotions, or scouting, or DSL operations, etc.

So Miami has 317M in revenue and 86M in payroll.  A difference of 231M.  A large chunk of that is operating expenses, maybe some loan interest, and yes probably some profit too.

Miami spending 27% of revenue on player payroll DOES NOT mean the owners are making a huge profit and they have room to add tens of millions in player salary.

[Omar]

13 hours ago, Jimcanuck said:

Incomplete.  They have like 180M in operating expenses.  Plus other expenditures.  Get back to me when you have the full balance sheet.

If you look at the differences between revenue and payroll for the various teams, it seems to average around $200M.  Operating expenses are semi fixed although teams could cut or add to for example player development expenses at any time.  Or marketing / promotions, or scouting, or DSL operations, etc.

So Miami has 317M in revenue and 86M in payroll.  A difference of 231M.  A large chunk of that is operating expenses, maybe some loan interest, and yes probably some profit too.

Miami spending 27% of revenue on player payroll DOES NOT mean the owners are making a huge profit and they have room to add tens of millions in player salary.

I think this is generally correct. Their EBITDA number is something like $24 million. So yeah, a spike in payroll could easily put them in a loss position.

[John_Havok]

14 hours ago, Jimcanuck said:

Incomplete.  They have like 180M in operating expenses.  Plus other expenditures.  Get back to me when you have the full balance sheet.

If you look at the differences between revenue and payroll for the various teams, it seems to average around $200M.  Operating expenses are semi fixed although teams could cut or add to for example player development expenses at any time.  Or marketing / promotions, or scouting, or DSL operations, etc.

So Miami has 317M in revenue and 86M in payroll.  A difference of 231M.  A large chunk of that is operating expenses, maybe some loan interest, and yes probably some profit too.

Miami spending 27% of revenue on player payroll DOES NOT mean the owners are making a huge profit and they have room to add tens of millions in player salary.

Yes...but, are operating expenses for an MLB team wildly different from franchise to franchise? 

All the perennial non-spenders st the bottom of that list are either so bad at business theyre expenses are off thar charts.... or, they could absolutely afford to spend more on payroll and field better teams, but they choose not to. 

[Jimcanuck]

3 hours ago, John_Havok said:

Yes...but, are operating expenses for an MLB team wildly different from franchise to franchise? 

All the perennial non-spenders st the bottom of that list are either so bad at business theyre expenses are off thar charts.... or, they could absolutely afford to spend more on payroll and field better teams, but they choose not to. 

Of course there could be significant differences in operating expenses from one team to another depending on their stadium agreements, potentially principal and interest paydowns on loans, etc.

The small market teams may well invest more in scouting and player development in general, as that is the only way they can realistically compete.

[BTS]

 

[glory]

Helsley's deal with the O's is apparently 2/28 (with an opt out after the season). Curious to see what Williams and Suarez get in this market. The Jays are likely looking at those two. 

[Olerud363.354]

5 hours ago, John_Havok said:

Yes...but, are operating expenses for an MLB team wildly different from franchise to franchise? 

There must be something else weird about that chart.  I know it was 2024 but how are Toronto's revenues about the same as Baltimore?    Is it because they don't get "TV Renenue" since Rogers owns the team?  So that (and maybe other) of their profits are in Rogers books but not the Jays? 

[John_Havok]

3 minutes ago, Olerud363.354 said:

There must be something else weird about that chart.  I know it was 2024 but how are Toronto's revenues about the same as Baltimore?    Is it because they don't get "TV Renenue" since Rogers owns the team?  So that (and maybe other) of their profits are in Rogers books but not the Jays? 

That is one factor yes. The Jays get paid very little (comparitively to other big markets) from Rogers for their TV rights. 

[BTS]

20 minutes ago, glory said:

Helsley's deal with the O's is apparently 2/28 (with an opt out after the season). Curious to see what Williams and Suarez get in this market. The Jays are likely looking at those two. 

I'm guessing he has 18 or so guaranteed in year 1. Something like 14M in 2026 plus a 14M player option and 4M buyout. 

Still less than I thought he'd get. Nice signing by Baltimore if he's healthy.