NLCS Lead Up Thread - Gio, Miley, Chacin, Games 1, 2, 3

[trwi7]

Both the Dodgers and Yankees payrolls are around $160 million. Can they spend more? Yes. But they've also made it a priority to get themselves under the luxury tax so they haven't really spent much. The Yankees took advantage of the Marlins being cheap so they traded for Stanton and they gave Chapman a big deal last year but other than that they haven't really done much in terms of spending.

The Dodgers signed their own players to reasonable contracts when they were free agents (Hill, Turner, Jansen) and basically haven't gone into free agency since Friedman took over.

[Kerb Hohl]

Both the Dodgers and Yankees payrolls are around $160 million. Can they spend more? Yes. But they've also made it a priority to get themselves under the luxury tax so they haven't really spent much. The Yankees took advantage of the Marlins being cheap so they traded for Stanton and they gave Chapman a big deal last year but other than that they haven't really done much in terms of spending.

The Dodgers signed their own players to reasonable contracts when they were free agents (Hill, Turner, Jansen) and basically haven't gone into free agency since Friedman took over.

Sure, there's been this intermediate stopover of waiting out the luxury tax for some of these teams but you cannot tell me that the Brewers would be able to afford lighting Jacoby Ellsbury's contract on fire and taking on $170 million of Stanton burden or pay a pitcher like Kershaw $35 million/year all while lighting $20-25 million/year on fire for failed international signings and previous failed signings, even if they were the last guy's fault.

If Kershaw came up in the Brewers system he'd be on the Yankees or Dodgers at this point in his career. And if they bent over backwards to keep Kershaw to that mega deal, they wouldn't be able to even do something like absorb half a season of Manny Machado's deal probably.

Also, I'm not seeing where their payrolls are around $160 million. Both are right around the luxury tax threshold after their acquisitions (around $195 million).

[trwi7]

Of course not but these things always cycle back. If you're going to spend like that in free agency almost always those contracts are going to come back around. We can't afford to light Ellsbury's contract on fire but that's now $20 million that the Yankees can't spend for the next couple of years while they're waiting for his contract to end and when that contract does run out, they aren't going to be paying Judge, Sanchez and Severino the peanuts that they're making now.

[Kerb Hohl]

Of course not but these things always cycle back. If you're going to spend like that in free agency almost always those contracts are going to come back around. We can't afford to light Ellsbury's contract on fire but that's now $20 million that the Yankees can't spend for the next couple of years while they're waiting for his contract to end.

Sure, absolutely.

But they got 1-3 productive seasons out of Ellsbury, even if overpaid. It's cycling back but the cycle never ends. These teams can afford to backpay 3-4 guys $60 million dollars and go out and add Stanton for now knowing that they may have to backpay him in 3-4 years.

Add to this that, while smart, both of these teams are very likely to go back into luxury tax land next year and we're going to see more $220+ million payrolls out of those 2 teams while the Brewers again hover around their assumed new max of like $115 million.

Friedman is a good GM but if this was a smaller market team, even with the younger studs that they have, he either would not have made the playoffs the last few years or this would be the middle of his current run knowing that he has to go all in before Kershaw is gone. He wouldn't have leeway to have added Machado this year or rode the back of several $20+ million players the past few.

Take a look at the Red Sox. They reset their luxury tax number last year and they went right back into it to get JD Martinez. Are they paying Pedroia, Sandoval, and Price to not do much? Yes. Do they care? No. Having the financial backing that they do they also had no issue giving away 2 top prospects in baseball for Sale. That was even more of an aggressive move than Yelich, of which the Brewers could afford to do once and it made or broke their franchise...the Red Sox can do that with almost no recourse.

[trwi7]

Of course not but these things always cycle back. If you're going to spend like that in free agency almost always those contracts are going to come back around. We can't afford to light Ellsbury's contract on fire but that's now $20 million that the Yankees can't spend for the next couple of years while they're waiting for his contract to end.

Sure, absolutely.

But they got 1-3 productive seasons out of Ellsbury, even if overpaid. It's cycling back but the cycle never ends. These teams can afford to backpay 3-4 guys $60 million dollars and go out and add Stanton for now knowing that they may have to backpay him in 3-4 years.

Add to this that, while smart, both of these teams are very likely to go back into luxury tax land next year and we're going to see more $220+ million payrolls out of those 2 teams while the Brewers again hover around their assumed new max of like $115 million.

Friedman is a good GM but if this was a smaller market team, even with the younger studs that they have, he either would not have made the playoffs the last few years or this would be the middle of his current run. He wouldn't have leeway to have added Machado this year or rode the back of several $20+ million players the past few.

Take a look at the Red Sox. They reset their luxury tax number last year and they went right back into it to get JD Martinez. Are they paying Pedroia, Sandoval, and Price to not do much? Yes. Do they care? No. Having the financial backing that they do they also had no issue giving away 2 top prospects in baseball for Sale. That was even more of an aggressive move than Yelich, of which the Brewers could afford to do once and it made or broke their franchise...the Red Sox can do that with almost no recourse.

These teams are always going to be looking to stay under. They might go over for a year or two but they're not going to consistently be over.

Also, there's no reason we can't get a significant bump in our local TV contract. If the Bucks can get nearly $30 million per year with half the content and half the ratings, the Brewers could easily bump their yearly deal from $25 million to $50 million and that might still be selling it a little bit low. Or they could threaten to create their own channel and own 100% of it.

[Kerb Hohl]

Of course not but these things always cycle back. If you're going to spend like that in free agency almost always those contracts are going to come back around. We can't afford to light Ellsbury's contract on fire but that's now $20 million that the Yankees can't spend for the next couple of years while they're waiting for his contract to end.

Sure, absolutely.

But they got 1-3 productive seasons out of Ellsbury, even if overpaid. It's cycling back but the cycle never ends. These teams can afford to backpay 3-4 guys $60 million dollars and go out and add Stanton for now knowing that they may have to backpay him in 3-4 years.

Add to this that, while smart, both of these teams are very likely to go back into luxury tax land next year and we're going to see more $220+ million payrolls out of those 2 teams while the Brewers again hover around their assumed new max of like $115 million.

Friedman is a good GM but if this was a smaller market team, even with the younger studs that they have, he either would not have made the playoffs the last few years or this would be the middle of his current run. He wouldn't have leeway to have added Machado this year or rode the back of several $20+ million players the past few.

Take a look at the Red Sox. They reset their luxury tax number last year and they went right back into it to get JD Martinez. Are they paying Pedroia, Sandoval, and Price to not do much? Yes. Do they care? No. Having the financial backing that they do they also had no issue giving away 2 top prospects in baseball for Sale. That was even more of an aggressive move than Yelich, of which the Brewers could afford to do once and it made or broke their franchise...the Red Sox can do that with almost no recourse.

These teams are always going to be looking to stay under. They might go over for a year or two but they're not going to consistently be over.

Also, there's no reason we can't get a significant bump in our local TV contract. If the Bucks can get nearly $30 million per year with half the content and half the ratings, the Brewers could easily bump their yearly deal from $25 million to $50 million and that might still be selling it a little bit low. Or they could threaten to create their own channel and own 100% of it.

They'll start going over again unless there is truly a new era of owner cheapness/collusion. Both of these teams just wanted to reset it this year. Friedman does a good job at keeping their long term outlook in a good place and Cashman is a good big market GM, but both of these teams and the Cubs are going over next year and may not come back under for a few years when they feel the need to reset the number again.

Again, take a look at the Red Sox. They reset their luxury tax % before this year and dove right back into going over the threshold for 2018 and looking at 2019's payroll, they'd have to work a goddamn miracle or sell off half of their team to remain competitive AND get under the threshold.

Agree that the Brewers might get a bump. Maybe they could get up to $130 million in payroll one of these coming years. Maybe.

[trwi7]

Yes they want to reset it. Then they'll want to reset it again in a couple years. It's never going to be like well we're under now, let's go ape **** and put up a $300 million payroll now.

[Kerb Hohl]

Yes they want to reset it. Then they'll want to reset it again in a couple years. It's never going to be like well we're under now, let's go ape **** and put up a $300 million payroll now.

Yeah, so once every 3-5 years we'll see the mega-markets try to get under $210 million (approximate new threshold the next few years) and they can usually plan it out to do it with weaker free agency classes. Must be tough.

I've also noticed a lot of the big markets are frontloading these deals. Now, the calculation for if they're over the threshold averages the average yearly salary, but they're making it so that when they are paying a % tax surcharge that they still are probably paying the same or less on the whole anyways. They're flattening the cost through the years they're under and the years that they're over.

[H2tObes]

We need to win game 1, free burgers! Feed the people!

[sdn40]

The Brewers and Bucks can try to dictate the market on their TV deals, but one look at the commercials that run during these games, it's easy to see why they can't. If no one other than Habush Habush and whoever, and the Wisconsin Dairy whatever wants to pay to have commercials run, not much you can do. I would think Miller or Leinenkugel would want to run spots, but don't think I've ever seen them

[HaroldinGMinor]

Both the Dodgers and Yankees payrolls are around $160 million. Can they spend more? Yes. But they've also made it a priority to get themselves under the luxury tax so they haven't really spent much. The Yankees took advantage of the Marlins being cheap so they traded for Stanton and they gave Chapman a big deal last year but other than that they haven't really done much in terms of spending.

The Dodgers signed their own players to reasonable contracts when they were free agents (Hill, Turner, Jansen) and basically haven't gone into free agency since Friedman took over.

Both teams have done a good job developing their own talent too. Lots of key players on both teams are on real friendly rookie deals allowing them to splurge when needed.

[MickeyDavis]

Read on Twitter

[HaroldinGMinor]

Agree that the Brewers might get a bump. Maybe they could get up to $130 million in payroll one of these coming years. Maybe.

Just for comparison sake, Brewers payroll in 2011 was $92 million which was 17th in the league. This year they were at $109 million which was 22nd. If they were 17th this year it would have been $131 million. So assuming Mark A wants to keep up with the Joneses I think there's a real good chance they get to $130 at some point in the near future. I think he's making money hands over fist even without a sweetheart TV deal (which I believe they get a new one after next season).

[El Duderino]

Agree that the Brewers might get a bump. Maybe they could get up to $130 million in payroll one of these coming years. Maybe.

Just for comparison sake, Brewers payroll in 2011 was $92 million which was 17th in the league. This year they were at $109 million which was 22nd. If they were 17th this year it would have been $131 million. So assuming Mark A wants to keep up with the Joneses I think there's a real good chance they get to $130 at some point in the near future. I think he's making money hands over fist even without a sweetheart TV deal (which I believe they get a new one after next season).

Yea, Attanasio is a great owner, but he's already made a lot of money owning the team and that's doesn't account for the fact that the team is likely worth around three times what he paid for it.

The key is spending smartly more so than trying to hit a certain payroll target. Attanasio has shown that he'll spend reasonably well if he believes it will help a potentially contending team.

It also seems like he's chosen to stay out of free agent decisions like he did with Melvin where reports were that he was heavily involved with signing Suppan, Lohse, and Garza. Moves that backfired. I'm sure he regularly talks with Stearns about major decisions, but it looks like he mainly allows Stearns to do what he wants without interference.

[HurricaneKid]

Are you guys seeing these ticket prices? G2 is literally ~10x normal ticket price and WS tix are like 40x. Its crazy.

I'm not even exaggerating. The only WS ticket under $1000 is SRO. And its ~$900+ after fees.

Went to the NLCS in 2011 for like $80 a ticket (albeit pretty terrible seats)

[MickeyDavis]

The Bucks lost money most of the years Kohl owned them but he didn't mind a whole lot and spent a lot (most foolishly yes). He knew he'd cash in when he sold. Obviously the Bucks ownership group will cash in too but Attanasio has made it clear that the investors expect to make money every year.

Attanasio has meddled of course, I think most owners do. They're the one's writing the checks. You can bet that Stearns had to get the ok before signing Cain.

I have no complaints overall with Brewers ownership group. They've done a good job keeping MP in great shape, have made some nice upgrades and have fielded a mostly competitive team.

[PANDEMONEUM]

Are you guys seeing these ticket prices? G2 is literally ~10x normal ticket price and WS tix are like 40x. Its crazy.

I'm not even exaggerating. The only WS ticket under $1000 is SRO. And its ~$900+ after fees.

Went to the NLCS in 2011 for like $80 a ticket (albeit pretty terrible seats)

its stupid crazy.

ill b jumping on Standing Room Tickets,
as soon as theyr for sale from the Brewers.

i just paid about 90$ for them, for the NLCS, through the Brewers.
probably 120$ or so for the WS

[bizarro]

“Nobody deserves it,” said Kratz. “That’s a misnomer in our society: ‘well I put in my time.’ No. Hard work may not be rewarded, but you have to do the work. I’m not saying because I worked hard, that’s why I’m here.I’m saying because I put the work in, I’m ready.

Man. This gave me goosebumps. That is the message from a man who has put in his time and paid his dues. Mad respect to seize the moment in a beautiful way.

[MickeyDavis]

Game 2 Saturday 3:09 start. Perfect

[Wisky4life]

I expect nothing less than a sweep.