October 20, 200718 yr If Olney said it, Loria will do it. At least this gets us some press. For reals?! Oh man that's awesome, let's get Olney to say that Loria can pull $4 billion dollars out of no where and buy us a stadium, cause he'll do it.
October 20, 200718 yr A-Rod: A bargain at $300 million Alex Rodriguez is the best player in baseball and his new contract will reflect that. Here's why he'll likely be worth every penny for whichever team signs him. Chris Isidore, CNNMoney.com senior writer NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Alex Rodriguez is about to do in November what he hasn't been able to do in October: Produce some real eye-popping numbers. The New York Yankees' star third baseman, already the highest paid U.S. athlete in professional team sports, is likely to sign a new multi-year contract soon that could be between $300 million and $400 million. A huge nine-figure deal is virtually certain. What's not known is where he'll sign. But you don't have to be Scott Boras, A-Rod's uber-agent, to argue that a team can give his client a hefty raise and still have the deal be a good one. Even if you don't believe all of Boras' arguments about the economic benefits of lavishing money on his top client (and I don't), the changes in the market for players' salaries, and the improvement in the game's overall economic outlook, means it makes sense to sign the game's most productive player, even at top dollar. First of all, A-Rod will bring in far more money to a team than the average fan bemoaning players' salaries might think. Vince Gennaro, a consultant to numerous major league teams and the author of "Diamonds and Dollars," a book about the economics of baseball, has done an analysis that suggests A-Rod could produce $48 million per year in revenue and asset appreciation for the Yankees, allowing the team to pay him $34 million in salary, along with a 40 percent luxury tax, and still break even. YES: The financial jewel of the Yankees empire Gennaro's estimate includes an extra $3 million a year benefit to the YES Network, the regional sports network of which the Yankees own 36 percent, along with a $9 million a year in the estimated increased value of that stake. CNNMoney.com sister publication FORTUNE has reported that the Yankees are looking at a possible sale of the team's ownership interest in YES, and that it could fetch $3.5 billion for the entire network. So re-signing A-Rod could be important for the Yankees in order to maximize the network's value. Still, some take issue with the notion that YES would suffer if A-Rod leaves the Yankees. The average number of YES viewers jumped during A-Rod's first year on the team in 2004, but fell each of the next two years. Viewership increased 9 percent this year despite the team's on-field struggles early in the season. It is worth pointing out that even when the Yankees were slumping this year, A-Rod was on his way to putting up one of the best statistical seasons in history. But Lee Berke, a consultant to regional sports networks, said that most of YES's revenue stream is already locked in through its industry-leading $2.15 monthly per-subscriber fee charged to cable and satellite TV operators that carry the network. Those long-term deals produce about two-thirds of the network's revenue, he estimates. So let's assume A-Rod leaves and that in a worst-case, but probably unlikely, scenario, viewership dips by 10 percent. A corresponding drop in ad revenue would equate to only about a 3 percent drop in overall revenue for YES. The Yankees stadium downfall What's more, it already is clear that the YES Network's fortunes aren't exclusively tied to ratings success. Revenue increased even in the years that ratings were lower, rising to $340.4 million in 2006 from $321.3 million the year before, according to SNL Kagan, a media research firm. Berke estimates YES has an operating profit margin of 60 percent -- twice the average for regional sports networks -- and this is why the network is worth so much. "A-Rod is a contributing factor, like all the players are," said Berke. "But he's not a big factor. The brand is much bigger than A-Rod." People tune into watch winning teams, not necessarily individuals. And Gennaro admits that as A-Rod gets older, he is less likely to have as much of an impact on how many games the Yankees win. So that means that if they end up paying him $30 million or more a year going forward, there's a very good chance that he will cost the team more than any extra revenue his presence brings in. Still, there is a good economic argument for the Yankees signing A-Rod, even if the deal doesn't strictly pay for itself: Because they can. Yankees face life after George The Yankees can afford to spend more than any other team. A new, albeit smaller, stadium is set to open in 2009 that will only greatly widen the revenue gap between the Yankees and the rest of the league. Even though attendance will dip because the new stadium doesn't hold as many people, the Yankees estimate that ticket and luxury suite revenue will increase by $100 million a year from 2005 levels. Having a major star like A-Rod should help the Yankees meet or pass these estimates by keeping demand for the tickets high. But A-Rod could also be a huge financial boon to many other teams, particularly those which have been underperforming in ticket sales or their television deals. The team that might see the greatest economic boost from signing A-Rod could be the lowly Florida Marlins, which paid its entire roster about $30.5 million this year, and is in negotiations with elected officials about a new stadium deal. If Miami-native A-Rod were to return to his hometown team, it wouldn't have to worry about paying 40 percent of his salary to the league as a luxury tax, as the Yankees would. And if good young players there continue to develop, A-Rod might actually help lead the team back into postseason, producing revenue that could be worth between $2 million to $15 million a year. The Yankees have a far better chance of making the playoffs without A-Rod than would the Marlins. "The Marlins are an interesting possibility," said Tim Mahon, principal for Anderson Economic Group, a business valuation service, who has studied team values. "I think it makes much more sense than it does for some of the other choices." Mahon said that for deep-pocketed successful teams like the Yankees, Mets, Cubs, Red Sox or Angels, "there's a marginal economic benefit from bringing him in, even as fabulous a player as he is. But look at the upside for the Marlins, not just in ticket revenue but also the structure of a new stadium deal." Finally, there is one reason why giving A-Rod pretty much a blank check makes sense. A 10-year deal that may seem shocking today might be considered a bargain by the end of the contract. Baseball's popularity is growing. Ticket sales are rising. Sports programming are increasingly important for advertisers in a world of TiVo and video downloads. Add in the increased dollars from new sources such as new media and international growth and that means revenue for all teams is likely to increase. Salaries should, and will, follow suit. So expect A-Rod to score huge dollars, somewhere north of $30 million a year, when he signs a new deal soon. But no team is likely to drastically overpay for him as the Texas Rangers did years ago. A-Rod would have to sign a contract worth more than $38 million a year in order for his salary to be as out of whack with the league's average salary as the $25.2 million a year deal he signed with Texas before the start of the 2001 baseball season. When the Rangers traded him to the Yankees before the 2004 season, the deal seemed so expensive that Texas agreed to assume a portion of the contract and pay $71 million to the Yankees in the coming years. But four years later, there's no question A-Rod will now do better. And his team, whichever one it is, is likely happy and better off writing those huge checks for years to come -- assuming they don't make the same mistake the Rangers did, writing the checks without keeping him on the team. Link: http://money.cnn.com/2007/10/19/commentary...tsbiz/index.htm
October 20, 200718 yr Ok, Hypothetically speaking if we were to sign A-Rod who would you like to move out of there current position? In other words Hanley to CF or Miggy to 1b?
October 20, 200718 yr He's not coming to the Marlins, but if he did I would move Miggy to first. Just because I like to dream, here is our new lineup: 1. Hanley 2. Hermida 3. Miggy 4. ARod 5. Willingham 6. Uggla 7. Ross/De Aza 8. Olivo/catcher How stacked would that lineup be? You could potentially have seven 20+ homerun guys (I think Ross can get 20 homeruns with 450 PA).
October 20, 200718 yr This won't happen, but can you imagine... CF - Hanley RF - Hermida SS - A-Rod 3B - Cabrera LF - Willingham 1B - Jacobs 2B - Uggla C - Whoever :blink:
October 20, 200718 yr This won't happen, but can you imagine... CF - Hanley RF - Hermida SS - A-Rod 3B - Cabrera LF - Bonds 1B - Willingham 2B - Uggla C - Whoever :blink: Corrected
October 20, 200718 yr I would prefer: SS - Hanley RF - Hermida 1B - Miggy 3B - ARod LF - Willingham 2B - Uggla CF - Ross/De Aza C - Olivo/catcher
October 20, 200718 yr This won't happen, but can you imagine... CF - Hanley RF - Hermida SS - A-Rod 3B - Cabrera LF - Willingham 1B - Jacobs 2B - Uggla C - Whoever :blink: lol me and you could be the pitchers for that team! They'd be scoring 10 a night! hahaha but seriously this shitznitz would be awesome if it really happened. Wow it would be like a domino effect for the fish.
October 20, 200718 yr Hanley SS Hermida RF Bonds LF A-Rod 3B Cabrera 1B Andruw CF Hammer C Uggla 2B :mischief If you believe what you hear. Offseason is FUN
October 20, 200718 yr I would rather spend the half of that money on Johan Santana and the other half to help keep miguel, dtrain, and hanley
October 20, 200718 yr dont forget about the pitching were going to add this offseason coach: mazzone starters: glavine and shilling closer: rivera
October 20, 200718 yr It's not going to happen, as much as I would like to hope it would. I know this FO all too well by now.
October 20, 200718 yr A-Rod rumor: The past few days, ESPN's Buster Olney has speculated that the Marlins may enter the bidding for Alex Rodriguez, should the Yankees third baseman opt out of his contract. Olney's report stemmed from a conversation he has had with a league executive who contends the Marlins' low payroll allows room to absorb A-Rod's projected mammoth salary. The thinking is Rodriguez, who grew up in Miami, would also help solidify funding for a new stadium. While the rumor makes for juicy talk radio conversations, it is completely unrealistic, according to a team source. Asked if the Marlins would be in position to sign A-Rod, the source said, "no way." Bottom line is the amount of money Rodriguez will command is simply out of Florida's price range. There is an irony to the argument that bringing in Rodriguez would help secure final funding on a new stadium. The Marlins tried the approach of signing popular players to help get stadium deals done in the past. In 2005, the Marlins signed Carlos Delgado for four years at $52 million. A popular pickup at the time, many saw the commitment to the slugger would enrich the team's chances that year of being awarded $60 million in sales tax relief from the state of Florida. For the past several years, the Marlins and Miami political officials have repeatedly tried and have been unable to receive state assistance for a stadium. Instead of being a move that inspired lawmakers to close the stadium deal, media reports quickly asked how a team in need of $60 million for a ballpark could sign a first baseman for $54 million? Those headlines were picked up around the state, and ultimately the Florida Legislature quashed the tax-relief request. And when Mike Lowell signed a multiyear contract with the Marlins after the 2003 World Series championship season, there was a stadium clause attached to the deal. The thinking then was by showing a long-term agreement to Lowell that local politicians would step up to get the stadium done. It didn't happen. http://florida.marlins.mlb.com/news/articl...sp&c_id=fla
October 20, 200718 yr Can we please pace ourselves? We've already gone through Bonds and A-Rod and Free Agency hasn?t even begun yet. At what point does dreaming about the impossible become depressing?
October 20, 200718 yr CF Hanley RF Hermida SS A-Rod 3B Cabrera LF Willingham 1B Jacobs 2B Uggla C (Insert name here) P Jesus Christ
October 20, 200718 yr Ok, Hypothetically speaking if we were to sign A-Rod who would you like to move out of there current position? In other words Hanley to CF or Miggy to 1b? I would say Hanley to center, why waste Cabrera's arm at first and Jakes bat on the bench?
October 20, 200718 yr We don't need A-Rod, we need pitchers that can go past 4 innings. they can go 3 innings for all I care
October 20, 200718 yr We don't need A-Rod, we need pitchers that can go past 4 innings. they can go 3 innings for all I care No, that won't do.. 3.1 innings.
October 20, 200718 yr This would require Loria to spend money. We all know how he feels about that. It would kill Loria's cash cow, meaning no more milk($$).
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.