Free agency money spent since 2020 - All teams

[TURBO]

I have not fact checked this, but found it interesting.  I thought we'd be in the bottom 5, but ended up in the bottom 8.

 

[BlazingGunz]

Hopefully the Orioles new ownership finally decides to spend, that's pretty pathetic.

[Sixtolezcano]

For being considered a smaller market team, the Twins must be printing money in Minneapolis.

[Fear The Chorizo]

15 hours ago, BlazingGunz said:

Hopefully the Orioles new ownership finally decides to spend, that's pretty pathetic.

how do you think they got the young talent on the roster they currently have in place to be capable of winning 101 games in the AL East two seasons ago?  Their market size is much more comparable to Milwaukee than New York, so they're better off trying to extend homegrown talent rather than spending in free agency.

It's not always about overspending on guys headed past their prime to fill out a competitive MLB roster.  When it comes to free agency, sometimes it's best to not spend much at all if you're taking care of your own players internally with extensions and maximizing the talent return you get using other options (i.e. trades, international minor league signings, draft, veteran minor league non-roster invitees to spring training, etc.  If you're a small fish trying to spend with the big boys in your division, you're going to always lose out on the players you truly want, and end up with less resources to pay your own talent.

If anything, that chart shows there are multiple ways to make the postseason, and it isn't all about spending the most money in free agency.

Of course, it also shows just how disgusting the Dodgers have made things for the rest of MLB from a financial standpoint...spending $500M MORE than the Yankees just in free agency over this period is insane.

[Underachiever]

Kind of off-topic, I’ll admit, but I am not envious of all of Baltimore’s young talent, nor how they built their team. They put their fans through hell. 115 (!), 110, 108 losses in a season. So far they have an 0-5 playoff record the last two years to show for it. Glad I got to cheer for a competitive team the last decade.

[tmwiese55]

4 minutes ago, Underachiever said:

Kind of off-topic, I’ll admit, but I am not envious of all of Baltimore’s young talent, nor how they built their team. They put their fans through hell. 115 (!), 110, 108 losses in a season. So far they have an 0-5 playoff record the last two years to show for it. Glad I got to cheer for a competitive team the last decade.

That's the debate.  Will it pay off with a World Series or not?  It has worked really well for Houston, Cubs, etc. But of course other teams perpetually are bad.   They are built for it if they can get a bit of pitching help to come up or buy while their stars are still cheap, like they did with Burnes.   The key for them and new owners is will they actually pay up to keep their own guys or let them all walk. They have to find a way to keep some, it seems finding a middle ground like Houston did is probably the best way

[Fear The Chorizo]

1 hour ago, tmwiese55 said:

That's the debate.  Will it pay off with a World Series or not?  It has worked really well for Houston, Cubs, etc. But of course other teams perpetually are bad.   They are built for it if they can get a bit of pitching help to come up or buy while their stars are still cheap, like they did with Burnes.   The key for them and new owners is will they actually pay up to keep their own guys or let them all walk. They have to find a way to keep some, it seems finding a middle ground like Houston did is probably the best way

I think the big difference with Cubs and Houston is those are considered large market ballclubs...so they went through a ton of losing to get young talent they knew they could extend at market costs (if those players were open to it), plus spend wildly in free agency at times as need be.  With the Orioles, they seemed to try the Royals approach with trying to trade from a loaded farm system at the peak of their contention window to get an Ace and add other veteran talent instead of free agency....and they came up empty last season.

[tmwiese55]

Well right, that's kind of the discussion. Will they spend to keep some of the ala Houston or act like a MKE/TB type? Along with just the general will the 6ish year window allotted by the tanking win a title or not?  If it does, the tankjob was worth it, if not you probably would've preferred to just be consistently mid level the whole time.   

Really no matter the results it won't prove anything as much of it is just playoff rolls of the dice.  Royals route worked even with only 2-3 rolls of the dice. Ours hasn't in spite of like 10 now.   Tanks in the Royals route have worked, and both Cubs/Houston/Nats routes have worked.  And of course, several other tanks/losing teams just continue to lose like Pitt

[Playing Catch]

13 hours ago, Sixtolezcano said:

For being considered a smaller market team, the Twins must be printing money in Minneapolis.

Exactly. I don't know why I care, but the idea that the Twins fans have that recent ownership never spent in FA is pure fallacy.

One thing about the O's and other teams is that they decided to go young. ANY time a team has a young roster, it's going to spend less in free agency, and have a lower payroll.

[Frisbee Slider]

Spending hundreds of millions of dollars on Verlander, Scherzer, Rendon, Giancarlo Stanton or Bogarts (2024) is not often a good use of money.

Nor is it wise to pay 37 year old Jacob DeGrom for 20 innings per year. 

[liveforoctober]

Update that A's number!

[Sixtolezcano]

12 hours ago, Fear The Chorizo said:

how do you think they got the young talent on the roster they currently have in place to be capable of winning 101 games in the AL East two seasons ago?  Their market size is much more comparable to Milwaukee than New York, so they're better off trying to extend homegrown talent rather than spending in free agency.

It's not always about overspending on guys headed past their prime to fill out a competitive MLB roster.  When it comes to free agency, sometimes it's best to not spend much at all if you're taking care of your own players internally with extensions and maximizing the talent return you get using other options (i.e. trades, international minor league signings, draft, veteran minor league non-roster invitees to spring training, etc.  If you're a small fish trying to spend with the big boys in your division, you're going to always lose out on the players you truly want, and end up with less resources to pay your own talent.

If anything, that chart shows there are multiple ways to make the postseason, and it isn't all about spending the most money in free agency.

Of course, it also shows just how disgusting the Dodgers have made things for the rest of MLB from a financial standpoint...spending $500M MORE than the Yankees just in free agency over this period is insane.

Maybe them hitting on their 1st round drafts the past 10 years. It also helps with 2 picks at the top of the draft and 5 picks in the top 10. That might have something to do with it.

[Baldkin]

I'm trying to come up with 200 million in FA signings.

Turns out, I'm pretty sure they are counting Churios contract.

So that's more than 1/3 of the money.

Him and Hoskins are half.

[nate82]

This feels like the right thread to put this in.  I was going to put this in the Soto thread but that feels like it wouldn't really fit so I am going to put this here. 

MLB lost the battle for a salary cap after the 94-95 strike.  The owners were willing to put in a salary cap then but once the owners went on full greed mode and decided they didn't want to share the TV and other revenue streams with the players it died.  If I remember correctly the union wanted something around 40-50% and the owners offered 0%.  Once that died it was over for a salary cap in MLB.  This was a Selig idea and he tried to get it done but the large and mid market teams were not 100% on board.  They wanted a salary cap but to also keep all of the revenue streams coming in without having to share with the players or to increase the players salaries all that much. 

The only other way for this to happen is if the TV revenue completely dries up for a team like the Dodgers.  We will have to wait and see if the Dodgers will be able to get another deal like they got last time or if they will have to join MLB's streaming and media platform.  I am hoping the Dodgers have to join MLB's offering as that will increase the payout for the Brewers.  The Yankees I think are the only team that owns its full TV and digital rights and they own their production.  I think MLB would have to buy this out from the Yankees and I am not sure the Yankees will even sell it.

MLB's current plan is to get about just over half the league on its platform and I think they are only at 8 teams right now.  We will have to wait until 2026 or 2027 to even know what the plan maybe and then we won't know for certain until 2028.  I doubt a salary cap will be implemented unless the TV money completely dries up for the large market teams.  The Dodgers would have to see a significant loss to their TV revenue to get behind a salary cap along with the other large market teams.  I just don't see that happening so a best case scenario is more revenue sharing through MLB owning the TV and digital rights of teams and that will need to get past the players union in the next CBA.  I don't believe the owners have changed their stance all that much on sharing this revenue so baseball may see either a strike or a lockout at some point.  That may be the only option to get a salary cap and I am not sure the large market teams will be ok with this along with the players union. 

[Frisbee Slider]

I don’t envy teams signing aging stars to expensive contracts. The Angels committed $911 million dollars to Pujols, Trout and Rendon and will have nothing to show for it.

I appreciate Milwaukee would almost never be a destination for these players but it should be noted that we probably don’t want many of these aging stars on our roster, anyway.

The 2023 World Series winning Texas Rangers roster is not appreciably better than ours.

[brewcrewdue80]

Probably should be in its own thread, but looking at the league standings along with 2025 team payrolls, only 2 teams in the bottom half are making the playoffs. #16 Detroit, and #23 Our Milwaukee Brewers.   Basically taking over for Atl and Angels. Without the Tigers and us, its basically highest paid down that make the playoffs.

[valpocrewsader]

Referring to the chart in the original post? There's also the #15 Astros and #24 Mariners outside of the top ten, no?

[Mr Southpaw]

It is about 160 million. I stop counting after less than 1-million-dollar contracts.

 

L Cain    2018-22   80 mill  16 AAV

R Hoskins  2024-25   34 mill   17 AAV

J Bradley 2021-22  24 mill  12 AAV

A Garcia  2020-21 20 ,mill  10 AAV

J Smoaks 2020-20 5 mill 5 AAV

C Rea 2024 4.5 mill

W Miley 2023 4.5 mill

E Sogard 2020 4.5 mill

B Holt 2020 3.25 mill

B Boxberger 2022 2.5 mill

B Anderson 2021 2.5 mill

J Gyorko 2020 2 Mill

D Phelps 2020 1.5 mill

J Wilson 2023 1 mill

 

[Frisbee Slider]

1 hour ago, Mr Southpaw said:

It is about 160 million.

And to think perhaps the majority of that money spent made our roster worse or only marginally better, in most cases.