I've been thinking about making a post on this for the last several weeks. And no I have not put anything on the blog for over a year. That's on me.
Okay, I'm going to be going in a number of directions here. The first is not money. Too many fans just get pissed off about money and don't see the bigger picture on MLB teams.
One thing I find is scouts, pitching coaches and especially GM's seem to want to find that starting pitcher who will win close to twenty games and send their team into the stratosphere vying for The World Series. Good luck with that.
The landscape has changed drastically in that most teams don't have 20 game winners. I personally think that most teams are better off to have two 12 game winners, 4 10 game winners, 5 mid relievers who win 4 games and 3 closers who win 4 each. That's 96 wins, and there's room for improvement.
It's more of a grinders game now, and too many pitching coaches want finesse and the ability to throw cutters and sinkers. They don't seem to want pitchers to actually challenge batters. They're worried about losing games. You can't be worried about that.
I was looking at Scott Kazmir the Oakland A's starter who just got a new deal for $22 Million for two seasons. He was making 6 million but has not really proven anything. Yes, he was 10-9 last season but doesn't mean his salary should go up almost twice that to being the highest paid Oakland A.
I'd rather see GM's and manager's be able to pay 4 or 5 million at most for players and for those who do perform well that their salary go up. If the MLB in it's so called wisdom keep letting players get
10's of millions a season and the fan base go down, it just makes sense not to pay players or management more and more money. If the cash isn't there from the gate or concessions don't pay them exorbitant amounts. Yeah, Yeah, you'll say that these teams have guaranteed and lucrative TV deals built in stone. Well, if these major TV corporations would get smart they would know that without them, a lot of players would only make maybe 5 million at most a season. Still damn good money, I wouldn't be complaining. And even the grinders would still be paid hundreds of thousands.
Still good. But the main premise of this article is how I would want my pitching roster to be.
I have nothing against paying a player millions of dollars, but what if the TV deals weren't there?
Most corporations who own these pro teams never think about that. They are in debt up to their eyeballs, and think those TV deals will always be there and that the public will have to pony up
so they can get these sweetheart deals from local politicians, state and federal government.
What if they had to pay for teams all on their own? Meaning a billionaire couldn't get debt in the form of bonds to pay for a stadium, and had to depend on gate receipts, concessions and any advertising or joint ventures with other businesses. No lucrative TV deals. Most billionaires wouldn't come near it if they had to pay 500 to 750 million for a team. Only the super rich billionaires could afford it.
Meaning billionaires who have 10's of billions in cash in their own bank accounts made from personal income or make even more. There are a few who have made 100 billion or more, believe me.
Yeah, I'm going off on a tangent here. I went into business with my own cash, why does a billionaire get to go into major debt?
Okay, I've ranted long enough. I think what I'd like to do is take a baseball scouting and GM course.
There is one out there from Sports Management Worldwide. I wonder what Lynn Lashbrook who own's it would think of my thoughts on pitching rosters and how they should be implemented?
For more info on Sports Management Worldwide just go to: www.smww.com
He might think i'm nuts or that yeah my thoughts do have some merit.
Who knows. If you have any thoughts just email me here. markgrove1@mail.com
No comments:
Post a Comment