Bang for your Buck

[Reg]

10/8/2007: Charleston, SC - The playoffs are under way, but in about a month every team will experience another unforgiving measuring stick... the bottom line. After a year in this new venture known as PEBA, everybody is looking for the right formula that balances budget and wins. Is a large payroll automatically converted into success? Winning is a key factor in drawing the crowds and selling tickets, but which team got the most value out of their player payroll?

And the answer is... London. London paid out $541,760 per win. Second, Omaha paid $595,049 per win. Third, Tempe paid $614,736 for each of the precious 45 wins they collected. Of the top three only Omaha had a winning record, finishing the season 85-77 and 17 games back of Crystal Lake.

On the other end of the spectrum would be those teams whose wins cost them the most, or who got the least amount out of their investment. The winner in this category was Connecticut, who paid $1,433,702 for each win. Second, Canton paid $1,377,128, which was slightly more than Fargo's $1,344,338. All three teams lost near 100 or 100 plus games.

But perhaps the more intriguing teams are those who ended up in the playoffs. How well did they stretch their payroll dollar? The winner in this lot is definitely New Jersey, who tied for the PEBA lead with 108 wins and paid $772,414 for each victory. Crystal Lake, New Orleans, Charleston and Kalamazoo followed closely behind with little more that $100,000 separating them. Palm Springs ($1,111,050), San Antonio ($1,148,164), and Bakersfield ($1,248,356) got the least value per win from their payroll. Though I doubt that the teams are really that worried about it.

Over the next few months it will be interesting the see the effect of free agency and arbitration have on team payroll, especially as teams who had high hopes dashed look to rebuild and teams that excelled look to continue along that path.

Teams and Amounts
London $541,760
Omaha $595,049
Tempe $614,736
Kentucky $734,297
New Jersey $772,414
Crystal Lake $828,507
New Orleans $861,023
Charleston $937,248
Kalamazoo $940,560
Florida $982,083
West Virginia $1,006,082
Arlington $1,063,372
Aurora $1,063,662
Gloucester $1,106,042
Palm Springs $1,111,050
San Antonio $1,148,164
Reno $1,173,819
Duluth $1,201,114
Bakersfield $1,248,356
Yuma $1,265,337
Manchester $1,343,983
Fargo $1,344,338
Canton $1,377,128
Connecticut $1,433,702

[John]

I find this business of baseball to be fascinating, so I really eat this kind of thing up. Looking over the teams who got the best bang for their buck, you really appreciate this good teams that stretched their dollar the furthest.

You also begin to see why some real-life MLB teams don't have much incentive to splurge on their on-the-field product. Notice the two teams who are projected to have the highest balance at year's end: London and Florida. That's 182 losses combined, and yet a whole lot of money earned thanks to low payrolls. Now the big questions becomes how do those teams allocate that windfall? The answer will determine the course of their franchises for the next several seasons.

Looks like I'm middle-of-the-pack. I'll have to work on my efficiency!

[Coqui]

I hate my team.

[Ghosts]

As some of you know, the Bears are co-owned. And -- geez, it's almost like a marriage -- the only "differences" we have relate to the financial picture. In my opinion, this is where you really prove yourself and there are so many ways to go about it.

The only thing I'll add to your article, though is this: given that none of us knew the salaries of these players or our own financial picture, it's a bit unfair to place too much stock in these numbers.

For example, Ted Lilly is great. We love him. But would we love him during the draft if we knew he was going to make $20m through 2012? probably not. Right there, this one player takes up almost 20% of our payroll. We're not complaining, but given a contract like his -- which we didn't learn about until afterwards -- we'll never be anywhere close to the most "effeicient", regardless of whatever else we do.

[Reg]

I hate my team.

But does your team hate you?

[Reg]

The only thing I'll add to your article, though is this: given that none of us knew the salaries of these players or our own financial picture, it's a bit unfair to place too much stock in these numbers.

I don't know if I place any stock in these numbers, but it is interesting to look at. I mean I doubt that London is celebrating the fact that he had a losing season but at least it didn't cost him that much. I mean wins are wins are wins.

I think all of us except, for the original New Jersey owner(who had quite a bit of experience with online leagues in ootp), were pretty new to the online game and drafted a bit out of ignorance at what contracts would look like.

I guess what intrigues me is finding that right balance point for payroll and wins...having to decide whether to re-sign that star player to a major contract, and find young players or low value veterans to fill in the spots around him or using that chunk of money to sign three (or more) players which might add up to or exceed the one player's productivity...or might not...and so much depends upon luck (who gets injured, who gets hot and plays above thier ability, etc.)....and we are fast approaching the time when these type of decisions get made....

One area the number may be most useful, is for teams that found themselves at the bottom of the standings, cause if you are shelling out money hand over fist and not getting very many wins in exchange, something needs to change and quickly.

[Jason]

Suprising my team achieved such financial efficiency considering I paid $38,621, or roughly the price of a brand new 2008 BMW Z4 according to Kelley's Blue Book, per HIT from Miguel Angel Hernandez. He totally made up for his lack of hits with his .333 slugging percentage and his 4.6 VORP. I am hoping I can get a hit on him in the offseason.

[Duane]

Canton,
why do you hate your team???

My team absolutely stunk but I think Bill and I have developed some personal relations with our players. No-one in our system really hates us - well maybe Daron Little might since we cheated him out of his Bonus for Plate Appearances, or the 4 guyas we gave away for nothing might have some bad blood in their veins, and the coaches we canned across the track. Over-all I think it was a positive first season.

[Ghosts]

Suprising my team achieved such financial efficiency considering I paid $38,621, or roughly the price of a brand new 2008 BMW Z4 according to Kelley's Blue Book, per HIT from Miguel Angel Hernandez. He totally made up for his lack of hits with his .333 slugging percentage and his 4.6 VORP. I am hoping I can get a hit on him in the offseason.

FYI:

that $38,621 per hit is also...

the median expected salary for a typical accounts payable clerk in Pleasanton, CA;

the average system-wide sales number for Panera Bread outlets in July of 2006; and

the average salary for all sorts of places, including Goldsboro, NC, Portland, OR, Larimer County, CO, and Alaska.

[Duane]

You really like this Hernandez guy

[John]

You really like this Hernandez guy

I'm not sure "like" is the appropriate term. "Fixated on" may be close. "Greatly desiring to strangulate" would probably be almost exactly on the mark.

[Duane]

Suprising my team achieved such financial efficiency considering I paid $38,621, or roughly the price of a brand new 2008 BMW Z4 according to Kelley's Blue Book, per HIT from Miguel Angel Hernandez. He totally made up for his lack of hits with his .333 slugging percentage and his 4.6 VORP. I am hoping I can get a hit on him in the offseason.

So is this lovable whipping boy on the blick? (trading block that is)

He'd make a great roommate with my B.Murdock - two overpaid under-achieving infielders who could go off drinking by themselves when the rest are hangin out with Bill