Keen strategy saved D-Backs franchise

A lot of very interesting stuff in the piece. Here are some highlights:

"When you see Conor Jackson or Mark Reynolds in the heart of the Arizona Diamondbacks batting order instead of the richly paid Manny Ramirez of the Los Angeles Dodgers, know that it's all part of the Diamondbacks' business plan."

"During the past three years with Byrnes at the helm, the Diamondbacks' average opening day payroll has been $59.3 million. That is roughly 42 percent less than the nearly $103 million team payroll the team had in 2002, when it was the fourth-highest in baseball.

In that span, the Diamondbacks spent nearly $751,000 per win, according to win-loss records through Thursday and payroll data compiled by The Republic. That made them the fifth-most-efficient team to generate wins, based on payroll. Only Florida, Tampa Bay, Pittsburgh and Colorado spent less per win."

"Byrnes has authority to make any deal he wants as long as it fits into the team's budget. But he has been forced to be frugal because of budget constraints caused largely by deferred contracts given under the previous management, which also collected a $2 million annual management fee that the new owners ended. In 2002, the team had $240 million in deferred contract payments for 17 players but has reduced that debt to $64.5 million.

The only player on the roster receiving a deferred contract payment is pitcher Randy Johnson, the team's highest-paid player who is in the final year of his contract. During the next four years, most of the deferred contracts will be retired, which could give the team more flexibility to sign younger players to long-term deals."

9 months ago Jim McLennan Comment 8 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

And,

heeeeeeeeere’s Diamondhacks….

Josh Byrnes: PLEEEEEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE RE-SIGN ADAM DUNN!!

by DbacksSkins on Sep 14, 2008 4:47 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I read that we will still be paying deferred salaries in 2017.

Simply put what does deferred salaries mean?

Max Scherzer- Flaming fastball good enough to cool down his opponets.

by damdrs1717 on Sep 14, 2008 11:00 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

It means part of the money is deferred

For example, someone signed to a contract from 2001-2004 for $30mil would get paid only $16mil from 2001-2004 and the other $14mil from 2005-2007.

by snakecharmer on Sep 15, 2008 3:14 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Simply put --

“Buy now, pay later”. The original ownership group of the Dbacks did this a lot, believing that getting free agents now will lead to success now, which will lead to more admissions/revenue later.

I suppose it did, but not nearly to the level they had expected or hoped for, and that’s what sent the franchise spiraling into debt.

Josh Byrnes: PLEEEEEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE RE-SIGN ADAM DUNN!!

by DbacksSkins on Sep 15, 2008 1:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Like a credit card.

Micah Owings will rise again.

Max Scherzer- Flaming fastball good enough to cool down his opponets.
by damdrs1717 on Sep 10, 2008 3:06 PM PDT

by damdrs1717 on Sep 15, 2008 1:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

PRE-cisely.

Josh Byrnes: PLEEEEEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE RE-SIGN ADAM DUNN!!

by DbacksSkins on Sep 15, 2008 1:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

This article

has some interesting stuff, but most of it isn’t new. We’ve been hearing about the D-Backs’ recent frugality for most of two seasons, and the results are (for the most part) impressive.

The story (and this one, which is featured on the front page of the AZCentral website today) make me question the Republic’s approach to D-Backs coverage. While the team is coming off a terrible stretch in which they lost first place, and suffered some of the most painful losses imaginable, the Republic launches a two day D-Backs booster event. Instead of looking at the team and where it is now, their featured stories look back to the successful financial moves of the last few years. Yes, the front office did a great job of turning around a franchise in financial crisis, but that’s history, not news.

When the team struggled in the past (especially when a team with high expectations struggled), the Republic put its focus on the players, the coaches and their collective performance. In Buck Showalter’s case, it ran a front page article calling for him to be fired. By the end of the day, Showalter’s precarious job prospects were national news. I remember Brenly getting a similar hard look on the AZCentral website, but I was living in St Paul at the time. I have no idea if it carried over into the newspaper.

Now a promising season is swirling around the drain and the team finds new ways to lose nearly every night, but the focus isn’t on the baseball. With the resources of the region’s largest newspaper, I would expect (or at least hope for) the Republic to provide a little insight into the causes and effects of the current slump. Instead we’re seeing love notes to the D-Backs’ front office for their fine work in financial management and uniform design. It’s a little disappointing.

"We...probed them all the way through. They're completely meat." — Terry Bisson

by Scrbl on Sep 15, 2008 10:58 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

+1

Thanks for bringing these to our attention, scrbi, and for your thoughtful comments.

In terms of quantity, timing and tone, I cant recall more compelling evidence of The Republic‘s boosterism at the expense of basic journalistic principles. This barrage is so audacious, the topic sentences so laughable, one almost cant even get mad. Or start tearing it down. And as you say, most of it is so utterly un-newsworthy. When I commented that one article was like reading Derrick Hall’s resume, I wasnt kidding. The bullet points look as if that’s exactly what they are.

Whatever happened to professional journalism, let alone investigative reporting? Hell, at this point, I’d settle for basic corroboration :- ) Notice how Piecoro, who knows far more about the club than Harris, and who’s earned respect from fans on both sides of these issues, isnt bylined on this front page Dbacks assessment/assault. Anyone else find that the least bit interesting?

Incidentally, I remember Pedro’s 2000 hatchet job very well, but always had a different take on it. My take was that Gomez was more or less reflecting Colangelo’s interest in dismissing Showalter, and maybe even greasing the skids for that departure more than forcing Jerry’s hand. Pure speculation on my part, but the brass was keenly aware of significant club dissention well before Pedro’s article.

Thanks, again!

by Diamondhacks on Sep 15, 2008 4:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs