With a 35-17 record that leads AL clubs and trails only the Phillies in the NL, the Yankees have been among the very best teams in baseball to start the 2024 campaign. That being said, all that winning has come at a price: RosterResource pegs the club’s payroll at a whopping $302MM this season, trailing only the Mets and Dodgers for the third-highest in the league while surpassing the fourth-place Phillies by nearly $60MM. It appears that club chairman Hal Steinbrenner doesn’t plan to keep payroll at those top-of-the-line levels, however, as he told reporters (including Dan Martin of the New York Post) yesterday that payroll will be coming down in the future.
“I’m gonna be honest, payrolls at the levels we’re at right now are simply not sustainable for us financially,” Steinbrenner said, as relayed by Martin.
He went on to point to the luxury tax as a limiting factor on the club’s spending. New York’s payroll is just over $312MM for luxury tax purposes this season. As a club that has gone over the lowest threshold more than two seasons in a row, the Yankees are subject to a tax that escalates from 50% to 110% of the overage above the league’s base threshold of $237MM. That figures to put them on the hook for more than $58MM in luxury tax obligations this offseason, a figure that could increase further depending on midseason additions and contract incentives. That’s a hefty bill, particularly considering the fact that (as noted by Cot’s Baseball Contracts) the club’s 2024 payroll breaks the franchise record payroll of roughly $278MM that was set just last season. Prior to the last two seasons, the club’s payroll generally set in the $200MM and $250MM range.
Scaling back payroll could be feasible for the for the Yankees somewhat naturally, as the club has just under $182MM in guaranteed money on the books for next year per RosterResource. That figure does not factor in arbitration-level contracts for players such as Nestor Cortes, Jose Trevino, and Clarke Schmidt, nor does it include the possibility of the club picking up options on the services of veterans like Anthony Rizzo and Luke Weaver. Even considering that, however, it’s reasonable to expect the Yankees to have some room to cut down payroll and still add in free agency this winter.
Of course, the elephant in the room regarding the coming free agent class is superstar youngster Juan Soto, who is slated to hit free agency this fall ahead of his age-26 season. Acquired from the Padres in a blockbuster swap back in December, Soto has been everything the Yankees could have hoped for in his first 51 games with the club, slashing an incredible .313/.409/.569 with a 15.1% strikeout rate, a 14.2% walk rate, and 13 homers in 232 trips to the plate. Given how vital a one-two punch of Soto and Aaron Judge has been to the club’s success this winter, it’s hard to imagine the Yankees not aggressively pursuing a long-term deal with their newly-acquired star.
Steinbrenner himself indicated recently that he hopes to see Soto remain with the club “for the rest of his career,” suggesting that the Yankees at least plan to make an effort to retain him beyond this season. With Soto widely expected to land a contract that rivals the $460MM net present value of the Shohei Ohtani deal from this past offseason, it would seemingly be difficult to significantly lower the club’s payroll while retaining Soto via what could be a massive raise over his current $31MM salary.
That’s not to say it can’t be done, of course. Steinbrenner’s comments also made note of the club’s ability to retain Soto, as he noted that the club has a “considerable amount” of money coming off the books this winter in comparison to last year. Gleyber Torres and Alex Verdugo are both pending free agents who have combined to make more than $20MM this season, and it’s feasible to imagine the Yankees allowing the pair to walk in free agency before offering their roles to younger players such as Oswald Peraza and Jasson Dominguez.
Then don’t spend. All owners want a salary cap to increase their profits.
Uh.. No.. Small market, as in teams actually IN a small market owners might not care much for a way to survive without salary caps, but seriously doubt LAD, henry, steinbrenner want a cap. What mostly sticks with them is how many teams have their hands out every year, get freebie draft picks and other cash for nothing.
Welfare in the sport is all it is. Not to mention the thought of any steinbrenner being against spending any amount they want on the nyy is and antithesis to every way any steinrenner has approached nyy payrol since george 1st acquired the team 50y ago.. As in? it’ll never happen, sans a 2yr period where even george was arm twisted late 80’s and league was hammered for collusion.
Telling other people how to spend their money…
It’s our money. The owners are just middle men. Toll collectors.
Shoshon
“The owners are just middle men. Toll collectors.”
Why do you say that?
Once you give your money away, it’s not yours any more.
And the bucks pretty much stop when they make it to billionaires. They are at the top, not the middle
Keep telling yourself that. The owners don’t care about individual fans.
It’s a sport, a competitive league is what any sport wants. Your crying over welfare is pitiful, mate.
CG
But MLB is also a business and businesses want to make money.
No reason to think that having the A’s be good brings in as much money as having the Dodgers be good
Then all tv networks and broadcasting revenue should be shared equally… Yanks have to play another team. They hoard that money and poach other teams best players in fa…
Broke Yankees ^_^ Dodgers are now the premier team in baseball. They clearly make more money and have about 200 million a year from their TV deal to easily pay off their roster.
In other words Steinbrenner saying this teams gonna get rolled over in October no point in having max payroll.
On the media bias watch: Of the yankees’ first 52 games, 22 have been on national TV. However, the Dodgers have been on national TV 34 times.
As far as national TV goes, the avenger confused the Yankees with the LOL ballclub in NYC. Yankees don’t get an ESPN or Fox broadcast network game until mid-June.
Chucky: I’ve been keeping track. Games on MLB , Fox, FS1, ESPN and Apple TV are all broadcast nationwide. I’m not counting any local game whether they’re home or away
blessyouboys.com/2024/4/19/24134946/the-business-o…
Actually Dodgers had an estimated $230M less in revenue in 2023. They are also valied at $2B less than the Yankees.
The Dodgers, with their new partner Otahni better win it all. Shohei loaned the Dodgers $7million to buy other premier players. Something stinks about it all.
dh4all: The Dodgers have had superstar-type players for awhile now. Betts, Freeman, Kershaw, Buehler, etc. and haven’t won a full season WS with them. Of course they have a better chance now with Ohtani and Yamamoto. But Betts and Freeman stopped hitting in the PO last year. The same thing happened to the O’s, Astros and, in the WS, the Dbacks. Only Texas kept hitting. I do think the LAD will do more than their expected NLW title this year because I think Ohtani will be both a stable and motivating force for them.
@Dh4 The Dodgers are paying Ohtani $3M annually as well as funding the $44M in principle set to accrue to future deferred value.
Nothing stinks about it, deferrals have been going on for years. That’s why MLB has rules on when and how they re funded and on the luxury tax implications
Yeah had the Ashtrays not cheated they would have won. The Dodgers were clean while the Astros were basically all on hitting steroids and they still needed 7 games to Vanquish the Kings.
Lord what a ridiculous take.
I find the timing puzzling. You allowed Cashman to spend this much you knew what you were committing to and all of a sudden now that the team is playing so well you come out with there payroll comments? Not saying he’s wrong I don’t know the financials but you’ve already committed to spend the money this season enjoy what you hope is continued success and address it this offfseason. Unless he’s setting up the fans for Soto to be elsewhere next year. I just can’t think of a team playing this well crying about payroll. That’s what either a team with a high payroll underperforming does in season otherwise that’s addressed in the offseason
Soto gonna play for free ?
Mets, Padres, Dodgers and Phils show how hard it is to buy a WS, but Yanks without Cole look strong
Take Coles salary out and the Yankees still have a payroll that dwarfs most teams, some of those teams you just mentioned.
It wouldn’t be entirely wrong to say Tex “bought” a WS. Only one team can win. Of course the odds are low. But piecing together a club largely from free agency and taking on contracts from other teams is not the most likely way. But all teams, like Tex,have their homegrown talent too.
I don’t like the phrase, but as people tend to use it, Texas ABSOLUTELY bought a WS.
And this year the Dodgers are buying it.
Texas bought enough talent to win it all but that alone didn’t win it. You can have all the physical talent in the world but if you can’t get a group to “play nice” together it will be difficult to win it. Enter coach Bochy!
The only time I can recall a dysfunctional group winning a WS was in the late 70s when Big Apple ego men Steinbrenner, Martin and Jackson knocked heads through it all.
The Oakland teams in the early 70s was a pretty rowdy bunch, as well. Reggie being the common denominator to both of them.
15 of the last 16 WS winners have been top 7 payroll teams. WS can be and is bought.
Top 7 make the bought classification ? Very generous.
How did the top 3 go in those years ?
Well obviously there is an advantage. But teams are also more likely to spend when they are primed for success. Would you consider ATL as having bought a WS? Houston? There is a lot of homegrown talent on those teams. Top seven is pretty generous if you consider that a chunk of teams arent spending because they don’t want to and/or think the chance isn’t worth it. It can be bought to a degree but my point is the odds are slim. Most teams trying to do that won’t win just because only one team a year can. And most the teams that win also have a lot of home grown talent. So they don’t usually “buy” it. They just have an advantage on top of their quality youth. Many of the best run organizations also have money to spend. That’s partially why they attract good minds to their organization.
Rishi always has reasonable, level-headed takes +1.
@Rishi. Yeah I know and all good points. Maybe “bought” was a bad choice of words. I was merely pointing out a strong correlation between payroll and success. Top 7 may be generous, but the results are compelling; if you’re one of the other 23 teams, your WS odds are quite low. It’s a choice owners make.
Yes, a good way to try to do well is to hire good employees vs. middling ones.
That can’t be true. At the very least, the Cardinals were 11th in payroll in 2011, and the Royals were only 16th in payroll in 2015.
@Lanidrac. Good points. I’m using active 26-man roster payrolls in order to more accurately equate $ with success, and the Cards were # 7 payroll in MLB in 2011, and the Royals were # 7 in 2015.. If total payroll is used, then 13 of the past 16 WS winners were top 7.
Such a stupid comment.
Terrible argument. You are dismissed with extreme prejudice.
Huh? Georgie would surely disagree with his children luxury tax or otherwise, pulling out the check book and paying players no matter what… What are you going to do with the Sotos of the baseball?
There was no luxury tax when George was running the show.
Yes there was. I believe it started in 2001
Also, the owners got together and decided to curb spending (leading to collusion charges which benefitted players like Fisk very well when the owners were found guilty). But George ignored the other owners and paid an exorbitant amount of money for name players. It did lead to a couple of WS wins, too.
It’s really the surcharges added in ’17 that have caused these franchises to slow down. Those hurt enough, unlike the previous thresholds; however helpful at limiting spending, it does artificially holding big markets from spending what they could. This creates imbalances in the market that benefit owners and hurt free agents.
no it didn’t. collusion happened in 1985, 1986, and 1987… the Steinbrenner didn’t ignore the other owners, he offered Fisk a contract and pulled it back and George WANTED to sign players like Tim Raines but stuck with the other owners during collusion. The Yankees didn’t win a WS until rebuilding while Steinbrenner was banned for life during the next decade.
Having a extremely high payroll was a lot more sustainable when:
You could pay for first round talent in 3 and 4th round in the draft
You could sign top 10 talent because a players “asking price” was out of a lot of teams comfort level.
You could spend freely on international amateur players
You could make handshake agreements impending free agents to turn down arbitration, allowing them to be type B free agents and getting compensation picks.
When going into the luxury tax effects where you pick and how much you can spend on amateur talent, it becomes less and less sustainable.
Honestly I’m not surprised nor really upset about it. 312M is insane. I’m hoping they can find a way to retain Soto, there are quite a few contracts coming off the books. An outfield of Judge, Soto, Dominguez sounds pretty good.
Yeah i think some people hear lower payroll and instantly freak out but the Yankees have some good young players. They can make it work even if they sign Soto.
Cut payroll and go with the Rays method. Then spend on the core guys you need.
They tried that and failed miserably. The only option would be to tank, like the O’s, and rebuild through the draft system. But, they would probably lose more money that way than what it would cost them to sustain this payroll.
This statement is about increasing profit margin. The percentage of their profit is higher now than it was when George owned the team, so I don’t necessarily buy this line.
They certainly don’t need to rebuild the team has a lot of talent young and old. As for as profit it’s 2024 corporate America. Profits have never been higher…..
@
Yankee Clipper
When did they attempt the Rays method? Never. Your point is moot.
When they went under the LTT and tried to fill their roster with analytics-based players.
Perhaps you should clarify what you mean by “Rays method” so we are talking apples to apples.
Clarify ‘analytics-based players.’ Soto is an analytic dream player. So is Judge. Judge’s contract is WAR based. Soto’s most likely will not be….long term.
@Yankee Clipper
They’ve been paying the luxury tax for years now. Which year did they not pay it and were filling the roster with analytic-based players?
@CleaverGreene
We’ll see how Soto’s contract works out. Last year, Boras was humbled a bit by the owners and didn’t get his key FAs the money they wanted and he even lost a client. I get that Soto is an analytics dream player but which teams are honestly going to be spending big dollars unless they do it the Dodger way of deferring payment to years in advance and by then, the threshold for the tax will be higher anyway.
2018 – 2021 they had two years where they surpassed only the first threshold, and two years where they were under the first threshold.
Look at the players they had during those years versus the players they passed up – it’s a notable diversion from their normal acquisitions.
But you haven’t answered what the “Rays method” is…. What are you referring to?
Cleaver, I am referring to those who are the moneyball types that Cashman tried to stick the roster with and failed, miserably.
Soto and Judge are not analytics darlings, but Gallo certainly was, and he’s a prime example of the player to whom I was referring. Then IKF, etc.
@Yankee Clipper
Essentially, turning out successful seasons each year at a minimum budget through outstanding talent in their pipeline. While some rivals tend to use farm systems as trade collateral in the spirit of “win now,” this organization has the sheer patience to cultivate its homegrown prospects, thus keeping their overall payroll down while the quality of the roster remains fairly high and without damaging turnover.
Well, I’d argue the Rays haven’t been necessarily successful, but that’s a debatable opinion.
Moreover, although the Yankees didn’t {complete} their payroll reduction goals, it was only because their analytics acquisitions failed so spectacularly. There was a clear deviation from their normal roster-construction approach where they passed on many upper-tier FAs in favor of a lower payroll.
Despite the Giants current payroll, I’d throw them and the Red Sox into the same Rays-type processes.
In fact, Cashman openly said they’re trying to be more like the Rays during those years. It wasn’t something one had to deduce.
Yankees only made $16 million in profits last year… the A’s made $62 million
@28rings
Good for the A’s. We need more teams like them making big profits. Players are overpaid for what they do. Should move to a compensation system where if you play, you’re paid. If you don’t, you get league minimum. Problem solved.
Old York
Why do you favor the owners getting paid instead of the players?
players are making LESS now compared to what teams are worth than they were BEFORE the reserve clause was abolished in 1975 and the free agency era began… the “profits” are AFTER their expenses – and just about every owner takes a salary, has his wife, children, nieces, nephews on team payroll as vice president of concessions or vice president of the fan club or vice president of social media or some other made up title so they can cry poor and get their city to chip in half the money for a new stadium (threatening to move the team if they don’t get what they want) – even those teams that are LOSING money aren’t really LOSING money in the long run they’ll buy a team for $100 million and sell it 10-15 years later for a billion.
Can you please provide your source for the full breakdown of Yankees’ financials?
Even the Yankees, the team that has notoriously spent the most, has to lower payroll
Inflation guys, am I right? So many fans can’t go to games (like me) or even watch games anymore
If your team has a huge payroll yes the fans tend to pay for that at least some of it. If you want to see a Rockies game it’s cheap. But you don’t want to do that right?
Yet, houses (RE) is still sky high, restaurants packed and luxury cars still selling big.
You may not afford it, but it appears, a lot of people can.
You used to be able to go to a game and maybe get a 15 inning edge of the seat classic. Now with the courtesy runner, games are over in 10 or 11 innings.
Shrinkflation.
The timing of these statements is weird in the sense that the team is playing really well and the fans are riding the high. Be vague at least until the trade deadline.
The Steinbruner family has never realized a world exists outside of their inner bubble lol
You’re not wrong. I mean read the room, Hal. Even the NY media has stopped ragging about Stanton and they’ve gone easy on Torres’ continued struggles at the plate.
I can’t remember the last time I heard a Cashman criticism either. Last season it was non-stop. This season it’s non-existent. Ditto for Aaron Boone. Funny how that works.
Fans want the dopamine they get when their teams wins. When they get it they are happy. When they don’t, they act like drug addicts not getting their fix and it gets ugly.
ISOB: If it means anything, I still think Boone should be fired and Cashman should move on to greener pastures! Lol.
deej
100
it’s actually PERFECT timing… 2 days after saying he’d be open to discussions for signing Soto… if you read between the lines, this means that Scott Boras probably started the negotiations asking for WAY too much for Soto to forgo free agency and this is the Yankees response to that
Bingo! Scott started at 15/ 700M
Yankees complaining they can’t “only” spend 250 mill a season… while teams like the Marlins, Pirates, A’s, Rockies, and others have payrolls less than that COMBINED…… WHY IS THERE NO SALARY CAP IN BASEBALL YET?!
Because the salary cap creates a fixed amount for compensation of all players, meaning that they would be competing against each other.
The MLBPA will never accept a cap, and the owners aren’t willing to try busting it to force a salary cap like they did in 1994-95.
@Blue Baron given your argumentation here, are you also against the salary cap in the NFL ? Or is that completely different?
In the NFL all revenue is shared 100% between teams, the team and league books are open to the union, and players are guaranteed 50% of that revenue. Its definitely different.
Not that different IMO in the NFL, NBA, or NHL.
As I said, it creates a fixed pie which results in a zero sum situation for player compensation, ie if one player makes more, another player must make less.
The difference in those sports is that the players associations aren’t as strong and well-organized as the MLBPA.
When the NFL players walked out in 1987, the owners hired replacements and played the games anyway, and the regular players started crossing the picket line within 3 weeks.
In the NBA and the NHL, owners locked players out for entire seasons to force them into accepting the ridiculous hard caps they have today.
No star player in those sports is paid as much as top baseball players. I’m not saying that’s good, bad, or otherwise, but it’s a fact.
Lavish spending on player salaries ain’t limited to Murica. Even the Premier League in England is seriously considering a salary cap. (Though that may be on hold given the upcoming General Election.)
Several NBA players make more than every MLB player, when you use Ohtani’s contract at present-day value.
He’s only one player, and that’s BS anyway.
Blue Baron, why do you think the MLBPA is so strong and well organized? They are a joke compared to all other sports leagues. MLBPA has incompetently rejected a salary cap/floor model like other leagues and the result is that MLB players make a lower % of the leagues revenue than any other north american sports league. The fraction of money going to MLB players is continuing to decline whereas NFL, NBA, and NHL continue to collectively bargain bigger pieces of the pie. MLBPA is hurting its members and the game as whole by rejecting the salary cap/floor model that all the other leagues have adopted to great success.
Because a salary cap creates a fixed amount for compensation of all players and thus a zero sum scenario where the total doesn’t increase when a player’s salary increases.
In fact, it’s a situation where players compete with each other for the same dollars in the fixed pie created by the cap instead of a salary increase essentially benefiting all players.
Salary caps are great for owners, but not for players and fans.
If you understand the mechanism of salary caps and the zero-sum concept of collective bargaining, you will see why the MLBPA steadfastly refuses to negotiate such an arrangement.
It’s not zero sum since salary caps scale with league revenue. If the game of baseball is doing better the players are doing better. Salary caps benefit fans because fans of all teams feel that their team has a chance. There are countless baseball fans that dont follow the professional game because they think the system is rigged for LA and NY.
Salary caps are better for players than the current system because it leads to higher pay because all salary cap leagues have a salary floor, The players are always competing against each other for contracts because you need non-replacable skills. Having more money allocated to player salaries than the current system can only help players and will allow the MLBPA to make headwinds in further salary increases instead of continuing to increase the owners share of the revenues like they do now.
MLB players already have a salary floor known as minimum salary, and without a salary cap.
That’s a big sign of the union’s strength.
A salary cap creates a fixed pie by definition, no matter how much it increases with league revenue – it’s still a fixed, maximum amount for all players collectively.
Players simply benefit more by not having their collective compensation capped. All that does is unilaterally increase ownership profits.
And the perception of fans who don’t follow the game is not measurable and thus not a factor in collective bargaining nor the financial health of the industry.
Plus, there is no less competitive parity in MLB vs salary cap leagues, and revenues and franchise values are steadily increasing.
Even if it was possible to implement in MLB, a salary cap is a solution looking for a problem.
You keep saying players benefit and owners get richer under a salary cap which isn’t true because the owners are making more money than ever with a lower share going to the players. The MLBPA is losing compared to the NFLPA because a minimum floor of the minimum MLB salary is pitiful compared to the minimum floor 89% of the salary cap that the NFL has. The current system is not player friendly at all since the players receive such a lower portion of the profits compared to other leagues. I don’t get how you keep arguing that less money for the players is a good thing.
Read my post again.
“Players simply benefit more by NOT having their collective compensation capped. All that does is unilaterally increase ownership profits.”
Then reconsider your response. Or don’t.
Yeah a hard cap in a vacuum doesnt help the players but no one is advocating for that or has ever done that so I am unsure why you are attacking an imaginary system.
The advocates of the hard cap are looking for a system closer to the NBA or NFL systems that include the salary floor which would benefit the players far more than the draw backs of having a salary cap resulting in more money for the players. Switching to a cap/floor system like the other leagues has resulted in more money for the players in every league it has been implemented so don’t pretend that the current system is to the benefit of the players.
The NHL has a hard cap that creates an extremely onerous system for the players.
Yet NHL players still get a bigger slice of the pie than MLB players. The issue with the NHL is the pie is a lot smaller that restricts earnings. Issue is with growing the sport not how to divide the earnings like MLB.
Several QBs in NFL do as well.
I don’t think you understand what zero sum means. Baron is right about that.
The problems are MLB players make garbage the 1st 6 seasons with only a handful of players making decent money and that has resulted in overall compensation for players only adding up to 37-41% of total MLB revenue.
1) in every league (NFL, NHL, NBA, MLS) there’s a profit sharing system that controls the cap… IE the players get 55% of the gross revenue as the salary cap each year (this is how the NBA is thriving too)
2) What you just said is basically the most selfish thing imaginable.. imagine being a utility player in MLB… playing 10-15 years, but because some star needs to make 40-50 million, you’ve never made more than 2 in your career. Meanwhile in the NFL or NBA a player of your stature is making 3-5x what you are because of collective bargaining…. pretty sure there’s MANY more players like that vs. the Mike Trout’s of Ohtani’s out there
3) You’re right, the MLBPA won’t accept it… the vast majority of the PA vote against their own well being because it’s the strongest union in america.. the top controls the bottom universally
4) my 3rd point is irrelevant… MLB will never survive long term having the top 5 most profitable franchises vacuuming 100% of the talent every 5 years because of insanely unfair business practices.
Yeah I’m starting to come around to the idea that it’s a quality of ownership issue more than anything else. But how the league would judge a “worthy” owner from a “skinflint” owner when giving the green light to purchase a team is the conundrum. I suppose the ideal owner-candidate would be a Steve Cohen/Peter Seidler-type multi-billionaire who is an actual fan of baseball. Like a knowledgeable-passionate fan…and bottom-feeder equity-raider types like Bob Nutting/John Fisher/Bruce Sherman would never be allowed to purchase a MLB team. But policing that sort of thing would be untenable.
If you need proof you’re wrong.. the Cincinnati Bengals and Kansas City Chiefs have the notoriously cheapest ownerships in sports history…. before they were forced to.. the Bengals spent 30-40 mill below the cap each year… once the cap became what it is today it leveled the playing field.. the Bengals and Chiefs are both top 5 teams in the NFL now…. that hasn’t happened in MLB since the Royals in 2015 and the Marlins in 2003. Defending a defacto feudal system in sports is insane to me.
Because those teams can spend but {choose} not to. And because the union won’t agree to it.
Agree although a salary floor is needed too. Teams like the Pirates and the Marlins are just as guilty.
Blackpink, every league that has a salary cap has a salary floor as well. The NFL salary floor is 89% of the max cap space.
Maybe you don’t realize that it costs more to do business in NY, or LA, than it does in TX, or FLA. A blanket salary cap actually puts bigger market teams at a disadvantage because a 100 million dollar contract is worth more, in real dollars, in TX, or FLA, than it is in NY, or LA. A salary cap punishes the most successful businesses in the sport, i.e. the teams that bring in the most money to MLB. A salary floor is an even more stupid idea. That would raise the salaries of bench players because teams would need to pay them more to meet the salary floor. That would push the salaries of all players through the roof. It really comes down to how you spend, and how you build your farm system. A salary floor also punishes teams that spend wisely, and disincentivizes rebuilding.
Texas and Florida ain’t looking so good these days. Texas has widespread power outages after rainstorms, not to mention rising property taxes. Florida has homeowners insurance premiums going sky-high.
Not to mention rents and RE prices.
And you really think that competes with NY city, and state taxes for wealthy people? Why do you think NY, and NJ have bled wealthy residents for the last 10 years? And where do you think they are going? I’ll give you a hint…you mentioned 2 of the most prominent destinations in your post.
I’m completely against salary caps in sports, and I’m personally glad that MLB doesn’t have one.
All of those teams you mentioned could absolutely afford to spend more than they are now, their owners simply choose not to. That’s an ownership issue. Even if you add a cap with a floor, it wouldn’t help those clubs compete because guess where those owners would choose to save money then… the front office; scouting; player development; player facilities. There are reasons beyond payroll those teams are consistently bottom-feeders.
I’m sure those “small market” teams would very much like a cap. Not because it’d help them compete, but because they wouldn’t look as cheap if you start pulling better run clubs down to their level. All caps do is limit player earnings. And I know it’s probably weird to some people to choose sides when talking about millionaires versus billionaires, but I firmly support the players getting every penny they can, because they’re the guys I turn on the television to watch.
To be honest, I also couldn’t care less about parity. The A’s owner is the worst, and I don’t want to see his club stumble into any type of success. The Marlins got rid of an excellent executive that looked to have them on the right track, for what? They’re getting what they deserve.
Spending doesn’t always equate to success, either. I give you exhibit A: last year’s Mets.
To win, you need good ownership, smart executives, talent on the field… there is a lot that goes into it. A little luck doesn’t hurt, either. But in the cases where you have rot at the top, nothing short of forced ownership sales is going to fix that. It is what it is.
Appalachian_outlaw, players make more money in a salary cap/floor system than the current system. Spending may not guarantee success but it is a prerequisite for success as the only team to win a championship despite being in the bottom half of the league in payroll since 2004 is the 2017 Astros (which that championship arguably shouldn’t count).
The problem I have is that you define success by championships. If that’s the standard, then only 1 team every year is successful, regardless of what their payroll is. That isn’t an effective way to measure success. A salary cap system punishes the most successful teams, like the Yankees, Dodgers, et al. A blanket cap means that teams in larger markets are at a disadvantage because a contract in Texas for 100 mil is worth more than a contract in NY for 100 mil because of higher taxes, and cost of living, et al. The Yankees, and Dodgers are the teams that bring the most money into MLB as a whole. Do you think they really want to constrain their spending if the results are profit for MLB as a whole? I don’t think so. I also think the players are seeing lower salaries for non-star players, and that isn’t going to fly in the next CBA negotiations. I’m looking for them to strike to get rid of this system, and let the money flow to the players. They let the owners get over on them this time. I don’t think they’ll let it happen again.
It doesnt matter how you define success, payroll correlates directly with a higher win % over a large sample. A salary cap levels the playing field. The dodgers and the yankees success is at least in part due to the high payrolls.
The money will flow to the players if you move to a cap/floor system that the other leagues have where the players and owners split the profits where the players get 48%-50% of the league revenue. Right now the players are receiving about 40% in baseball and that number continues to drop in baseball but increase for other sports.
It also depends on how you define “success”. If a World Series victory is the only possible definition of success, then all teams but 1 fail every year, regardless of what their payroll is.
I would also disagree that baseball doesn’t have a salary cap system. The “Cohen” tax is, in essence, a salary cap. I don’t even think the Dodgers are going to be able to withstand a losing season, while having to pay the CBT, and penalties. They will bankrupt the franchise.
You should also mention the Yankees in the “spending doesn’t always equate to success” for last year, and the Padres…..et al
Trevor Plouffe said it best, imho: This CBT has been a complete failure and doesn’t work for its intended purpose. I think he’s right, and apparently, so does Hal Steinbrenner….
“Not sustainable” is a choice. Yankees print money – this is a poorly timed bargaining strategy.
I have no idea what they’re even bargaining for right now. It’s not like Boras is going to suddenly start negotiating an extension deal for Soto.
YBC, that was my thought, especially on the heels of the “we want Soto for life” claim. I wonder if this is a shot across the bow at Boras’ typical negotiating strategy?
He’s taking Soto to market. Boras at least has to get an offer from the Mets. And it’s in the Mets’ best interest to make an opening offer to raise the stakes for the Yankees. All parties already know this ffs.
Boras works for Soto. If Soto wants to go into free agency, he will. If he wants to sign an extension with the Yankees, he will.
Carlos Gonzales, Elvis Andrus, Steven Strasburg, Jose Altuve, and Xander Bogaerts all signed walk year extensions while being represented by Scott Boras. It is not out of the question unless Soto says it is.
It is out of the question.
Cohen pushed up Yamamota and he’ll push up Soto. Hal doesn’t have the stomach for this.
Then Soto must not have meant what he said to the NY media.
The Mets aren’t getting Soto. If Soto makes it to free agency, the Mets will make a run at him. But he isn’t coming here.
Boras does work for Soto; however, Soto has repeatedly said he’s going to defer to Boras and let him handle everything. Soto may ultimately be in charge, but Boras will be making the decisions for the process.
Yankee
“Soto has repeatedly said he’s going to defer to Boras and let him handle everything.”
Can you provide a link to one of those instances?
espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/39099701/juan-soto-brushes…
He’s repeated this multiple times during interviews since his first press conference, with some variation. Soto says they can call and talk to Scott Boras, but he’s going to remain focused on baseball and winning.
Yankee Clipper
From the article
“Scott Boras is my agent. I put everything on him and let him give his advice.”
Letting someone give their advice doesn’t seem to me the same as Horas making the decisions
Yeah, but from the context of all his other statements, that one “give his advice” is clear to me that he is making the decisions on the process. Why? Because if “everything is on him” how can Soto possibly counter that advice unless he feels it’s extreme?
Moreover, if you read excerpts from executives that know Boras, they often state “Boras always has his clients go to FA,” and similar such statements.
It’s clear that they rarely counter his advice and leave the decisions in the direction of negotiations to Boras. Do they make the final decision on signing? Sure. But everything leading up to that is in Boras’ hands.
Boras doesn’t alway have his clients go to free agency. As a matter of fact, I posted a list of players that were represented by Boras, and signed walk year extensions. There are exceptions to every rule. If Soto wants to be an exception to that rule, he can be. If he wants to sign an extension with the Yankees, and Boras won’t do it, there are other agents, and firms who can represent Juan Soto.
Yes, and there are exceptions. But the statements reference the rule, not the exceptions, and Soto clearly wants Boras to handle things Boras’ way, so Soto gets the most money he can.
Hence, Soto is following Boras’ lead. Nobody is saying Soto can’t take control IF he wanted to, because he can. But, the discussion is about who is currently directing Soto’s extension/FA decision, and that’s clearly Scott Boras. Otherwise, Soto wouldn’t have Boras as his agent.
YC
You’re reading a lot into a situation based on a few comments
You have no idea what what is happening behind the scenes.
Typically it goes like this, the agent advises the player as to what kind of market contract they can expect. The player advises the agent as to any preferences they have and how strong those preferences are.
The agent relays discussions and offers to the player along with advice.
The player takes that info and makes a decision.
There is no reason to think anything other than that is happening here.
Ok, let me put it this way:
Players hire Boras for one reason: he uses his well-known strategy to get them the most money. That’s why he uses the same approach with nearly every free agent.
So, yes, there are exceptions. But to think Boras is advising Soto differently, or that Soto isn’t taking Boras’ advice (which rarely changes), is naive.
Too many people here are trying to split hairs about who is technically in charge. What’s obvious to me is that FA come to Boras for the same reasons. When they do, he advises them the same way. When he does, they almost always follow his direction.
I don’t see how that’s not obvious here. Soto wants the biggest payday, and Boras is telling him how he thinks Soto can get it.
YC
Always try to leave a discussion in agreement on something
Soto has certain goals for his next contract, a huge payday being one of them, Boras is trying to negotiate that
Agreed?
Yes, I agree; and I didn’t mean for my response to sound snarky, if it did. I think your points are valid and true.
Perhaps I just explained my perspective poorly. To clarify, I think we are saying the same thing, but in different ways.
Nonetheless, I agree with you – Soto is trying to get the most money possible as one of his major goals.
Yankees don’t print money – they bring in a lot of money but have very high operating costs as well so their net profit was only $16 million last year. their last championship in 2009 they bought and had to sell large portions of the team and their TV network to do so (especially because Hal’s brother Hank foolishly re-signed Arod to that ridiculous contract with the “clean-HR record” bonuses.)… they had to reset the luxury tax penalty a couple of time and FINALLY bought back all those shares a few years ago. He’s not going to go in the red again.
They can keep Soto. They just need young prospects to step in and take the place of Torres, Rizzo and Verdugo.
SS Volpe
LF Soto
RF Judge
DH Dominguez
CF Spencer Jones
3B Cabrera
1B DJ
C Wells
2B Jeter Downs
Spencer Jones won’t be ready by next season. He’s been struggling in AA currently. Peraza at 2B perhaps.
At 25 and hitting .202 at AAA, Downs is no longer a prospect.
Sure he is! Plug him straight into the lineup and watch him become the greatest Red Sox ever 😉
Trading Stanton in the off-season seams guaranteed
Except he doesn’t have any value. They are stuck with him for another 3 seasons.
Nobody wants Stanton. They’d have to pay down his contract substantially.
The Marlins pay down some of the contract towards the end, making him somewhat less overpriced.
Even if they pay it all they would still be able to lose his contract for luxury tax purposes right? They still have to pay the money but the tax hit shifts to the other team? I’ll have to ask in the next Q&A session
Might the Marlins take a cheap Stanton back? They’re already paying him anyway and need a power bat
The Miami Marlins are Exhibit A when it comes to asset-stripping in baseball. Look where they are now compared to last season.
Is there a chance less than zero%?
Completely. Everything except the MLB minimum.
If he stays healthy (big if) he’s on pace to hit thirty something homeruns. That’s a worthwhile addition to almost any roster and a good reason for the Yanks to hold him until the offseason, though moving him probably would require them to add on to the Marlins 10 mill contribution.
Lol to who?
Nobody’s paying for that contract which doesn’t solve the problem.
He has a no-trade clause. Actually multiple when you also take into consideration his salary and injury history
For who exactly?
They’re worth seven billion this is just cheapness
Amazon hires contractors for a lot of their work so they can not pay benefits and let them go whenever they want. And I know they got money to spend……
“Worth seven billion..cheapness…Amazon hires contractors..not pay benefits”…That’s so weird in a capitalism-based country…It’s almost as if these online retail and sports team companies are operating as for-profit businesses that are actually trying to turn a profit.
Operating as rent seeking parasites more accurately
It’s not turning a profit that’s the problem. It’s the amount of profit they feel they need to turn that’s in question.
Amazon is evil
Sure it is
So is the evil empire.
what the team is worth and how much they can afford to lose on payroll are two completely different things. that seven billion is like the value of your house or your baseball card collection – it’s only worth that much IF you sell it (something Steinbrenner doesn’t want to do) AND find someone willing to do so….they’ve borrowed off that money in the past when they bought the 2009 championship but only recently got back in the black and bought those shares back… they only had a $16 million profit last year. if they were a public company with a $7.1 billion valuation that only made $16 million in profits, the CEO would be fired and they’d probably start to go in to bankruptcy.
Valuation doesn’t mean liquid assets. Too many 12 year olds on this site think they’re economists.
Bet you can
Trade Spencer Jones and a top SS prospect like Roderick Arias, and a few lower level prospects for Mason Miller now! Solidify the bullpen and then let Holmes walk next year. Don’t sign Torres or Rizzo. Cabrera plays third and old DJ handles second. Work on Judge to play first….Oh and sign SOTO!
lol you are not getting Mason Miller for that proposal…keep dreaming
How about Spencer and the Martian and resign Verdugo for Miller
@pando8888 For a Yankee fan, thats a very fair proposal. I wouldn’t overpay for a reliever. Probably Dominguez, Jones, and someone like Ron Marinaccio get it done. I don’t think that any Yankee fan would do that trade though
I’m for that trade! We want to win now. If we plan to resign Soto we have to start giving up young guys who play his positions.
Easy solution to retain Soto and get below the highest tax threshold. Do it the Dodgers way and just defer most of the money. Let Rizzo and Glyber go. Kick the can down the road. Win now and see if the luxury tax rises as the years go on and can apply the Soto salary when payroll is lower during a small rebuild. Yankees are never in a full rebuild.
Soto wants his money now!
no he doesn’t – he wants to test the free agency waters
He means he doesn’t want to wait until 2044 to get paid.
PutPete
“Easy solution to retain Soto and get below the highest tax threshold. Do it the Dodgers way and just defer most of the money. ”
People who say things like this don’t really understand how deferred money works.
The CB threshold factors in deferred money,
Ohtani counts $46 million against the Dodgers. Not $2 million.
While it’s true they are still paying the luxury tax on the $46 million and not the $2 million they are still saving on current payroll. Let’s say they couldn’t defer the money, they would basically be paying ohtani like $ 70 million between his salary and the tax. However now they are paying like $25 million because they are only currently paying a small portion of his salary and the luxury tax. This allows the dodgers to sign more players than they should be able. They need to get rid of deffered money
soxfan
“now they are paying like $25 million because they are only currently paying a small portion of his salary and the luxury tax.”
Where did you get that number from?
It was an example based on your numbers. Yes they still owe ohtanis all his money but deferring his salary keeps the current payroll down. They are a third time offender and in the highest lux tax threshold. Every contract you sign in the highest threshold basically doubles because I believe you pay 100 percent on all the dollars you spend after reaching that. So if ohtanis actual pay per season is say $46 million, then it would be like paying him $92 million. If you only pay ohtanis $2 million this season in salary, you are basically paying $48 million between his salary and the luxury tax for this season (I’m not talking over the life of the contract). That allowed the dodgers to use the $44 million on current years savings to sign Yamamoto
soxfan
That’s not really correct.
For, I belive, the first 2 years, yes, they only give Ohtani $2 million.
But, he counts $46 million against the CBT. Which means they pay the penalty on the $46 million. So, $48 million,,or whatever.
After the first two years, they give Ohtani $2 million, and they MUST put $44 million into a secured account that guarantees a certain amount of interest to fund the $68 million payments down the road.
So, yes, they get some cash savings the first two years only, but the full $46 million still counts toward the CBT and they are taxed on the full amount
But that’s my point about the deferred money, the are saving in current time. Yes they have to pay ohtani the full contract in the end, but what they did is save money in the current couple years to sign players they wouldn’t have signed otherwise. I’m not saying they are getting out from the luxury tax, but deferred ohtanis full salary to lower current payroll. if the dodgers couldn’t have deffered so much money you think they would be able to sign both ohtani and Yamamoto to huge contracts,? Not a chance
soxfan
“if the dodgers couldn’t have deffered so much money you think they would be able to sign both ohtani and Yamamoto to huge contracts,?”
Yes
They are only saving money for two of the ten years.
For 80% of the contracts they are paying the full amounts
I just looked up the details of ohtanis contract. I don’t get where you are seeing only 2 years are deferred. His average salary would be $70 million a season, but he is deferring $68 million a season so they are only paying him $2 million a season. The deferrals kick in between 2034-2043 where they pay him $68 million a year. So that means for 10 years they are paying him $2 million a year. They also deffered betts ($115 million deferred) and Freeman’s contracts. So your telling me they could sign all these players without deferring all this money? Freeman’s contract, Yamamoto and betts contract s will have expired by the time they start paying the $68 million a year to ohtani.
sox
As I said, the deferred money has to be put into a secured account that accrues interest to pay the deferred money
In 2026 through 2033 they will give Ohtani $2 million a year and they will put $44 million into an account (that will grow to $68 million to pay the deferred salaries). That $44 million is not available to give to other players
soxfan
“The collective bargaining agreement does not place a limit on the amount of money that can be deferred, but teams have to set aside the present-day value of the deferred money — in Ohtani’s case, around $44 million in cash each year — in an escrow account.”
espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/39092632/shohei-ohtani-def…
The team has to put the full amount deferred in to an escrow account. In Ohtani’s case, $68 million per season. Any interest accrued would go to the team. So the Dodgers are not saving money, just not paying it to Ohtani until down the road and accruing interest on that money until then.
Teams do not save in current time. They have to put the full amount deferred in an escrow account now. In Ohtani’s case its $68 million. The team will earn interest on the escrow account earns, but the principal is still gone.
BaseballisLife
Not correct. The team has to put the present value of the deferred payment into the account. So, $46 million in Ohtani’s case
He also wouldn’t be getting $70m/yr if it wasn’t deferred. The contract would be a lot closer to the $46m/yr present value.
No other player has the off the field income that Ohtani does so no other player is going to take a contract as heavily deferred.
Atleast yanks are 35-17
Muts have biggest payroll in sports history, on pace for almost 100 losses
what a pathetic hopeless franchise
Unhinged
How many World Series combined do they Yankees and Mets have the last 10 years? Both teams are having trouble bringing home titles.
21 of the 30 MLB teams haven’t won a Worlds Series in the last 10 years
funny.. A’s find themselves facing the same conundrum
The issue with the Yankees is that in the past 5 years they have had a bunch of dogs on big contracts that like to sit out a lot with “injuries” aka they don’t want to play but still want to collect. Aaron Hicks, Stanton, Rodon, etc. You can even include Judge in that category if you want. DJ Lemehiu’s contract was a total overpay and they are still paying off Donaldson’s contract. They have no margin for error at this point. What they need to do if they want to sign Soto would be to find takers for Rodon and Stanton’s horrible contracts by packaging their best prospects together
Good, it shouldn’t be.. I wish the cheap teams would spend more as well but just tax the hell out of these teams that spend over the luxury tax and they should have to make tough choices. You shouldn’t be able to keep everyone and still sign top FA’s. They kinda sat out free agency this year but still added Soto and Stroman. Even the Mets slowed down a bit because they realized they can’t just keep outspending their mistakes.
holecamels
“just tax the hell out of”
Good for baseball. Good for society
Yanks will sign him. The day they traded for him they already committed to it. They know who they’re not going to bring back, and they have a game plan for what they can do to fill those needs. The only concern they need to have is whether he’ll turn out like the other guy on the team that was amazing early in his career and simply dive bombed once the ink dried on the contract (Stanton).
The MLBPA is going to rue the day they let these taxes on spending be part of the CBA. I think they will strike to get rid of them eventually.
I think the opposite – the luxury taxes are the only thing keeping MLB from a salary cap like all the other 3 sports have when their unions caved in. the owners want to get rid of it, not the players.
Murica, F@&k Yeah! MURICA, F@&K YEAH!
So you don’t think that the change in how the middle of the road players money getting chopped will make them want to get rid of the Luxury tax? Things that make ya hmmmm… the only guys who got paid this year were top of the food chain players. And even some of them had to settle for less. I don’t know how you think that’s going to go over well in the next CBA negotiations.
exactly – the salary cap would’ve been much worse
Scotty just told Hank how much he wants for Soto.
Hank is dead
This is ridiculous that the same person that approved this payroll is complaining about how high the payroll is.
cmessick
He’s, uh, not “complaining’. He’s just saying payroll is going to come down
A new CBA is coming. Payrolls will go up. CBT thresholds will go WAY up or go away completely. Penalties for going over will decrease.
The kids are so much different than the old man. George would have fired Cashman long ago for a competent GM. How Cashman still has a job when he has had unlimited funds and no title in the last 15 years is amazing.
Rizzo, Grisham, Verdugo, Torres and Clay Holmes clear around $55 million a year. Soto is making $31 million a year. Assume you can get Soto for $45 million a year they should be able to do it. That leaves about $40 off the books. The question is what is the magic number? Does that mean they have to trade arbitration eligible guys? Trust in some kids from the farm? How much payroll do they need to drop to next year?
It wouldn’t surprise me if they win a title this year.
Goose must long for the good old days of “The Bronx Zoo” when the Yankees yo-yo’ed between good and bad. Yankees have been consistently contending most every year since The Boss stepped out of the public eye.
yes, Yankees won IN SPITE of George – never because of him… yes, he spent but the 2 dynasties were built by the great trades by Gabe Paul, the non-trades by Gene Michael and the trades by Brian Cashman – every time George tried to do things on his own he messed stuff up and put together all star teams full of a bunch of DH’s all over the field (Baylor, Phelps, Barfield, Giambi, Sheffield) and aging once great starting pitchers at the end of their careers (Kaat, Niekro, Gaylord, Rhoden, Big Unit, Kevin Brown) while trading away the future (McGriff, McGee, Buhner, Rijo,Tewksbury, Leiter) … most current Yankee fans are too old to remember (or too young to have seen) all the damage The Boss did or ignoring it through the Rose Colored Glasses of Nostalgia and/or brainwashed by watching too much Yankeeograpy reruns on YES Network
Cashman has been with the Yankees since 1986, George didn’t fire him for 23 years – Hal’s only been owner for 15 years – the first year of which Cashman got him a ring.
“still has a job when he has had unlimited funds and no title in the last 15 years is amazing.” first of all it’s 14 years, not 15 – they won in 2009. 2024 WS hasn’t been played yet… secondly, he DOESN’T have unlimited funds – that is what Hal is saying
Yankees just gave their fans their out for when Soto signs elsewhere next winter unless a miracle happens and someone is actually willing to take Stanton’s salary off their hands
What if they win a title this year and Soto being a big reason? I think they would have no choice but to sign him, plus the extra income fron a championship would help.
what if they win a title this year and Soto chokes like Judge or Arod in the postseason and Verdugo hits like Bernie Williams… which one do you keep? Soto for $50M a year, 15 years or Verdugo for $20M a year, 4 years?
28
You’re smart enough to not consider the postseason performance
His comment is a response to someone talking about postseason performance being a reason they need to keep Soto. I don’t think he’s actually saying that post season performance should be a reason, it’s actually making the opposite and same argument as you are.
The Yankees already $202 million on the books for next season and that doesn’t account for arbitration raises or if they acquire anyone under contract for next season during this season. If the goal is to get back below the first luxury tax threshold that gives them very little wiggle room to sign Soto and fill other holes. Unless of course Soto gives them the “Ohtani special”…
Do you ever say anything that isn’t stupid?
Sure Hal, but how about you open your books to the public? Matter in fact, how about MLB opens up its books and those of other owners?
Why ? So baseball fans can have something else to hammer them about ? The majority of posters who run with the greedy owners mantra don’t know the difference between revenue and profit. The books might be a bit beyond their level of expertise.
A better option is for everyone to mind their own business and direct their worry at how they spend their money.
They also don’t seem to understand that valuation =/= revenue/liquid assets.
Wanna pay Soto in pesos. Can not believe the former superpower New York Yankees are crying poor w/their empty hands out. The ol man is rolling over in his grave. “Start spreading the news …”
King George is rolling in his grave with these comments. Maybe his daughter should take over the team.
the ol man never paid his own players – he paid OTHER teams players (Gossage, Reggie, Giambi, Winfield)… he was a grass is greener on the other side type of guy who was very stingy with contract negotiations with his own players (Munson, Jeter, Bernie, Mattingly, Randolph, Guidry)… he forced Tino out to bring in Giambi… he got banned for life when he tried to get out of the Winfield contract… tried like crazy to get Reggie, Irabu, Igawa and then couldn’t wait to get rid of them… went out on his own behind everyone’s back to sign Sheffield… he made MANY players want out of the Bronx Zoo (Lyle, Gossage, Nettles, etc.)
You misspelled overrated
Crying poor while making record profits is the in thing these days.
Ain’t it though?
Great timing Hal….
Sell the team Hal to someone who cares about winning. Ridiculous
First shot of the Soto bidding wars.
Salaries are out of control
Owners need to let players dangle as free agents till they come back to earth
Captaimike
“Salaries are out of control
Owners need to let players dangle as free agents till they come back to earth”
People are willing to spend billions on baseball,
Why do you want those billions going to the owners instead of the players?
Because first it all comes out of the tax payers hands. How about baseball starts paying for their own stadiums for starters and maybe get rid of that ridiculous antitrust exemption they have so they start paying their fair share in taxes.
Let’s see where salaries are without government assistance and then we will talk.
Soto will be a Nat. Yanks won’t pay him and he won’t play for that loser or a franchise in Queens for a decade no matter how much “Uncle Stevie” throws at him. Tons of money coming off the books combined with a ton of young talent a year out, he fits the window perfectly and is loved in dc.
Hal needs the money to spend on the DJT campaign. Swamp scum has to stick together.
“They were the same person when they were born,” Peter Golenbock, author of “George: The Poor Little Rich Boy Who Built the Yankee Empire,” a critical 2010 Steinbrenner biography, told NBC News. “They were narcissistic and that’s the thing that really ties the two of them together is their narcissism, and it’s an extreme narcissism in both of their cases.”
Gonna be hard to have their cake and eat it, too. Maybe if they do some salary dump trades with varying levels of pay down. It’ll be interesting to see how timing plays into this, as a lot of top FA’s seem to be waiting longer to make up their minds.
Here’s something that threw me off doing some research on this subject. I was not expecting what I saw. I checked out Forbes top 25 sports empires. MLB was represented by 5 different ownerships in the top 25 globally. Now I’m not talking individual franchises, I’m talking the value of all the assets that owner or ownership group owns.
By far and it’s not close the biggest most valuable sports group is Liberty Media who own the Atlanta Braves. Liberty media controls $17.5 billion in assets, I think the days of them not having a top payroll in MLB are over but I don’t think they will overspend either.
#3 On the top 25 is the Fenway Sports Group which has $9.8 billion in assets. Everybody has been chastising John Henry about the Red Sox payroll. What they don’t realize is that Henry is pretty involved in commercial real estate and since people now have the ability to work at home, he’s probably getting killed on businesses pulling out.
#6 On the top 25 list is Yankee Global. Hal Steinbrenner doesn’t have the portfolio of many of others. His value is coming from the Yankee name which alone is the most valuable major league franchise. However some owners own many things, the Yankees are like 5.5 billion of Steinbrenner’s $6.8 billion in value. Having read this I think Steinbrenner wants to take some of that Yankee money and expand the Yankee empire past baseball and YES. That’s why he wants a lower payroll.
#11 On the list was Toronto Entertainment, they have bought all the Toronto franchises, the Maple Leafs, Blue Jays, and Raptors. They came in at about 4.5 billion
#19 On the list I couldn’t believe I thought was higher was the Guggeinheim group. They are only worth $3.4 billion but the Dodgers are their biggest asset by far much the same with Steinbrenner and the Yankees.
The Mets did not make this list, but Steve Ballmer did so I don’t know lol. These numbers are according to Forbes. I think it’s obvious the AL East will for the foreseeable future maintain being a powerhouse and Atlanta has the money to keep it’s team intact. I also expect the Guggeinheim group to expand it’s holdings into Japan and South Korea and that’s why they went all in on Ohtani and Yamamoto.
That’s a 2022 list
statista.com/statistics/1195929/sports-empires-val…
Here’s an updated 2024 list. Basically Liberty Media still leads the way at 18.5 billion…..FSG is now worth 12.5 billion…..Yankee Global 9.9 billion….still the analysis is the same
Sell the team, cheapo! We like it when the Yanks overpay for players. Especially when they underperform their contracts big time!