Unofficial Adrian Gonzalez thread.

[Dipre]

The best i could find was the 2007 chart, but it illustrates my point perfectly, since year-to-year changes aren't drastic enough to change the outlook of the total income significantly:

 

Forbes 2007 Boston Red Sox analysis.

 

According to the source i'm citing, the Sox, as of 2007, had a team value of $724 million, said value was divided as follows:

 

http://images.forbes.com/media/lists/33/2007/330700_2.gif

 

So as you can see, gate income only accounts for 23% of the team's total gains.

 

Found the 2009 version:

 

http://images.forbes.com/media/lists/33/2009/330700_2.gif

[Gom]

Fellas....

 

The Red Sox have fooled pretty much every Red Sox fan except for a700. Their payroll will be close to what...about 170 million or so? So all this complaining about the Yankees being able to outspend everyone by 60-70 million is a crock of s***. The Red Sox were always able, they just chose not to. They had you guys convinced that you "couldn't" compete with the Yankees. It was never "couldn't"...it was always "wouldn't". They maybe couldn't go dollar to dollar with the Yankees, but they sure as hell could do better than 60 cents on the dollar.

 

Finally, people realize that they've been lied to...and what you guys should be asking is this...why didn't they do this before?

[Dipre]

Fellas....

 

The Red Sox have fooled pretty much every Red Sox fan except for a700. Their payroll will be close to what...about 170 million or so? So all this complaining about the Yankees being able to outspend everyone by 60-70 million is a crock of s***. The Red Sox were always able, they just chose not to. They had you guys convinced that you "couldn't" compete with the Yankees. It was never "couldn't"...it was always "wouldn't". They maybe couldn't go dollar to dollar with the Yankees, but they sure as hell could do better than 60 cents on the dollar.

 

Finally, people realize that they've been lied to...and what you guys should be asking is this...why didn't they do this before?

 

Ok.

[Gom]

Ok.

 

I vote this as your most insightful post ever. You are improving, my friend.

[Dipre]

I vote this as your most insightful post ever. You are improving' date=' my friend.[/quote']

 

Well, i'm torn on this.

 

I believe that they could go dollar to dollar with the Yankees, but are trying to implement a different business model,because then the brand wouldn't be profitable, and if you were the owner of the Sox, i'm pretty sure you'd want to maximize both profit and winning capabilities, that being said,i believe this "crying poverty" thing is blown way out of proportion, the Sox are the second most profitable organization this decade, and like it, have spent the second most money behind the Yankees.

 

Your opinion on this is nothing more than another Red Sox bashing attempt.

[bsox0407]

I vote this as your most insightful post ever. You are improving' date=' my friend.[/quote']

 

And you are the one who said that people should not be trying to bait people. lol. You should trying doing of what you speak.

[Gom]

Well, i'm torn on this.

 

I believe that they could go dollar to dollar with the Yankees, but are trying to implement a different business model,because then the brand wouldn't be profitable, and if you were the owner of the Sox, i'm pretty sure you'd want to maximize both profit and winning capabilities, that being said,i believe this "crying poverty" thing is blown way out of proportion, the Sox are the second most profitable organization this decade, and like it, have spent the second most money behind the Yankees.

 

Your opinion on this is nothing more than another Red Sox bashing attempt.

 

No, it's a Red Sox FO bashing. They always had the ability, they chose not to do it. Every single person who defended it now feels like an idiot for being played.

 

The anger should be directed towards their own FO, not the Yankees.

And you are the one who said that people should not be trying to bait people. lol. You should trying doing of what you speak.

Who said I was baiting? I was 100% serious.

[Dipre]

No, it's a Red Sox FO bashing. They always had the ability, they chose not to do it. Every single person who defended it now feels like an idiot for being played.

 

The anger should be directed towards their own FO, not the Yankees.

 

This is your opinion, and you're absolutely entitled to it, however, it is incorrect and biased.

 

I'm not going to start an argument with you on this, seeing as you conveniently chose to avoid every point i made in my previous post, which leads me to believe this will end up a name-calling fest like it always does with you.

[bsox0407]

Who said I was baiting? I was 100% serious.

 

Oh so being an ass is just the Wonderfulness of you.

[Gom]

This is your opinion, and you're absolutely entitled to it, however, it is incorrect and biased.

 

I'm not going to start an argument with you on this, seeing as you conveniently chose to avoid every point i made in my previous post, which leads me to believe this will end up a name-calling fest like it always does with you.

 

Ok, I'll play nice. No name-calling.

 

Defend your position.

[Rdsxmbnt]

Gom, how do you know what the Red Sox can and can't do financially? IF the payroll goes up another 20mil then they will be around 170, but until then they are around 150. How do you know if the Red Sox can SUSTAIN a payroll that high for multiple years without suffering losses in player development/etc.?

[Dipre]

Ok, I'll play nice. No name-calling.

 

Defend your position.

 

2009 Boston Red Sox mainstream revenue:

 

$269 million dollars.

 

2009 Boston Red Sox player expenses:

 

$165 million dollars.

 

Revenue-player expense %:

 

61.33%

 

2009 New York Yankees mainstream revenue:

 

$375 million dollars.

 

2009 New York Yankees player expenses:

 

$236 million dollars.

 

Revenue-player expense%:

 

62.93 %

 

There are other confounders,(they will pay around $100 million in stadium expenses and luxury tax) but the revenue mentioned by Forbes does not include the massive stream generated from either TV network, which is why it mentions the Yankees making "around 450 to 500 million in actual revenue", and this is where the true difference exists between the Red Sox and Yanks, however, the fact that "mainstream" or "non-NESN or YES" including revenue-to player expense percentage is almost identical, tells you that the Sox spend just like the Yankees, but within their realm of possibility.

[Imperial59]

Fellas....

 

The Red Sox have fooled pretty much every Red Sox fan except for a700. Their payroll will be close to what...about 170 million or so?

 

Are you just saying that to bait or do you actually think that's true? The Sox currently have $135.2 million committed to players for next year. Explain to me how exactly we're going to get from that to $170 million? Are we going to sign Matt Holliday 3 times?

[ORS]

Don't worry, it's his pathological response taking over. When it comes down to brass tax, he's admitted, every time, that the Red Sox can't compete financially, not dollar for dollar, with the Yankees. Yet, despite his previous admissions, he can't resist the temptation to deflect attention from the elephant in the living room (Yankee spending).

 

The reporting on revenues is out there if you are willing to search. It's unquestionable that the Yankees earn to a degree that allows them to spend as much as $80M more than the next team with ease. Estimates of the revenues generated by the new Yankee Stadium only increase the discrepancy. If anyone is going to question "desire" to spend as it applies to profitability, then it should be Yankee fans questioning why they didn't pick up both Lackey and Holliday this offseason.

[yankees228]

Gom, what's the point? You feel one way, or you claim to feel one way. The majority of the Red Sox fans on this board feel another way, or they claim to feel another way. This discussion has repeated itself over and over and over again, usually started by you. Do you really think you're going to get a different response this time?

[yankees228]

There are two things, that in my opinion, are obvious. The Red Sox cannot compete dollar for dollar with the Yankees in the free agent market, because of the revenue that both teams bring in. However, the Red Sox, in general, can compete with the Yankees.

 

EDIT: I really don't see what else there is to discuss, as both of these points have proven themselves.

[ORS]

Gom' date=' what's the point? You feel one way, or you claim to feel one way. The majority of the Red Sox fans on this board feel another way, or they claim to feel another way. This discussion has repeated itself over and over and over again, usually started by you. Do you really think you're going to get a difference response this time?[/quote']

Is this a rhetorical question? It must be. I provided an answer that fits within the framework of human psychology that you chided as unfair speculation.

 

If he can't resist the topic, something must be compelling him to bring it up, don't you think? If it isn't what I suggested, I'd like to hear your thoughts on the cause.

[yankees228]

Is this a rhetorical question? It must be. I provided an answer that fits within the framework of human psychology that you chided as unfair speculation.

 

If he can't resist the topic, something must be compelling him to bring it up, don't you think? If it isn't what I suggested, I'd like to hear your thoughts on the cause.

 

I think your answer is a possibility. I also think it's a possibility that he truly believes what he is saying, right or wrong, and he just doesn't want to give up the argument. However, at this point, I felt compelled to say something, because it's become a redundant discussion that never goes anywhere.

[a700hitter]

The best i could find was the 2007 chart, but it illustrates my point perfectly, since year-to-year changes aren't drastic enough to change the outlook of the total income significantly:

 

Forbes 2007 Boston Red Sox analysis.

 

According to the source i'm citing, the Sox, as of 2007, had a team value of $724 million, said value was divided as follows:

 

http://images.forbes.com/media/lists/33/2007/330700_2.gif

 

So as you can see, gate income only accounts for 23% of the team's total gains.

 

Found the 2009 version:

 

http://images.forbes.com/media/lists/33/2009/330700_2.gif

Your charts are a breakdown of team value, not revenue stream. This link indicates gate receipts of of $176 million in 2008 and revenue of $269 million. They get $16 million for radio and probably less than $50 million from NESN. I read that the Yankees get $80 million from YES and that is double what every other team gets, except the Mets who get $50 million.

 

http://www.forbes.com/lists/2009/33/baseball-values-09_Boston-Red-Sox_330700.html

[Dipre]

Your charts are a breakdown of team value, not revenue stream. This link indicates gate receipts of of $176 million in 2008 and revenue of $269 million. They get $16 million for radio and probably less than $50 million from NESN. I read that the Yankees get $80 million from YES and that is double what every other team gets, except the Mets who get $50 million.

 

http://www.forbes.com/lists/2009/33/baseball-values-09_Boston-Red-Sox_330700.html

 

I know it's a breakdown of team value. It's why i said that the year-to-year changes wouldn't be significant enough not to be used as actual data for the yearly income of the team.

 

Because the problem is, that the revenue figure they use only accounts for tickets and brand management.

 

If you apply the fact that the way team worth is divided is actually the total figure that each area of revenue has added to the total team value without excluding any major components, it's much more accurate than a year-to-year look. Also, the stadium value accounts for other activities besides regular ticket prices.

[Gom]

Are you just saying that to bait or do you actually think that's true? The Sox currently have $135.2 million committed to players for next year. Explain to me how exactly we're going to get from that to $170 million? Are we going to sign Matt Holliday 3 times?

 

Where do you get this number?

 

Let me guess...you got it from Cot's baseball contracts.

 

Have you noticed that the following players do not have contracts listed [2009 salary in brackets, rounded to nearest 100K]?

 

Papelbon [6.2 mil]

Kotchman [2.9 mil]

Okajima [1.75 mil club option]

Iglesies just signed 4 year, 8.25 million, so add in about 2.06 million since I don't know the details]

Delcarmen [.48 mil]

Ellsbury [.45 mil]

R. Ramirez [.44 mil]

Lowrie [.41 mil]

Buchholz [.41 mil]

R.A. Ramirez [.4 mil]

 

Just bringing back the same players at the same salary will result in a payroll increase of 15.5 million.

 

If the rumored Lowell deal goes through, and you send 9 million, you save 3.5 million. Add in Beltre for at least 10 million AAV, and what do you get?

 

22 million above the current payroll, which jumps you to 155 million. This doesn't count the 5 players who saw time last year or figure to this year, figure each one [or similar players] at 0.4 million [bard, Bowden, Brown, Doubront, M. Wagner]. That's another 2 million.

 

Now we are up to 157 million...and that doesn't take into effect any raises you might have for any of your pre-arb players.

 

I'm not that far off..but you are.

 

Don't worry' date=' it's his pathological response taking over. When it comes down to brass tax, he's admitted, every time, that the Red Sox can't compete financially, not dollar for dollar, with the Yankees. [/quote']

 

Never denied it. However, never believed everything I read either, like yourself. You and Jacko are the same. You believe what your front office tells you to believe, they tell you what to think. He just knows more about minor league baseball than you do.

 

The Red Sox have always had the ability to spend. They chose not to. Even when it smacks you in the face, you guys fail to see it. At least one of you doesn't. The Yankees spend the most, because they are the richest team. The Red Sox don't [until this year] and they are baseball's second richest team. Your venom should be directed towards your FO.

 

Of course, they don't tell you to do that, so you won't. Sheep.

[ORS]

And the sheep comment makes it's first appearance. That came early. Already at the end of his rope.

[Dipre]

So the Sox pay Forbe's magazine and other media outlets to tell us that they make less than they actually do, so they have to pay less to keep up their earnings?

 

That's basically what you're saying here.

 

The numbers are public, and i'll take analysis of the numbers provided to me by reputable media outlets over subjective opinions every day.

[a700hitter]

I know it's a breakdown of team value. It's why i said that the year-to-year changes wouldn't be significant enough not to be used as actual data for the yearly income of the team.

 

Because the problem is, that the revenue figure they use only accounts for tickets and brand management.

 

If you apply the fact that the way team worth is divided is actually the total figure that each area of revenue has added to the total team value without excluding any major components, it's much more accurate than a year-to-year look. Also, the stadium value accounts for other activities besides regular ticket prices.

Gate receipts represent about two-thirds of revenue year over year. Team value includes capital assets like the Stadium which is owned by the Red Sox. Gate receipts have been consistently about two-thirds of revenue. TV and Radio revenues are much smaller than the gate. They don't even account for one-third of total revenues.

[Gom]

And the sheep comment makes it's first appearance. That came early. Already at the end of his rope.

 

Whatever dude...what happened this year, that you can spend like it's going out of style, but not last year?

 

How come we're going to see an increase of nearly 27% in their payroll?

 

Did they change ownership?

Win a World Series?

Increase seat capacity?

Anything?

 

No.

 

They ALWAYS could. They chose not to. What Yankee fans and smart Red Sox fans have said all along. Instead, they convinced the SHEEP that they couldn't, and they believed it. Now they spend, and you guys applaud them for it. Why not last year? The year before?

 

Answer this...why?

[ORS]

Bah-ah-ah-ah

[Gom]

Bah-ah-ah-ah

Keep bleating. Your front office will let you know when to stop.

 

Any intelligent Red Sox fan want to tackle this question?

[Dipre]

Gate receipts represent about two-thirds of revenue year over year. Team value includes capital assets like the Stadium which is owned by the Red Sox. Gate receipts have been consistently about two-thirds of revenue. TV and Radio revenues are much smaller than the gate. They don't even account for one-third of total revenues.

 

Read the legend. The revenue indicated as number 4 in the list on the lower area of the site consists only of stadium-related revenue.

[a700hitter]

So the Sox pay Forbe's magazine and other media outlets to tell us that they make less than they actually do, so they have to pay less to keep up their earnings?

 

That's basically what you're saying here.

 

The numbers are public, and i'll take analysis of the numbers provided to me by reputable media outlets over subjective opinions every day.

I'm not sure about baseball's finances being public. One of the biggest points of contention that they have had with the Players union has been the owners' steadfast refusal to open its books to the union.

[ORS]

Keep bleating. Your front office will let you know when to stop.

 

Any intelligent Red Sox fan want to tackle this question?

It's a dimwitted question, do you really need it answered?