2023 Payroll Thread

Discuss all things Cardinals Baseball
Post Reply
WAR God
Everyday Player
Posts: 442
Joined: August 2 22, 8:47 am

Re: 2023 Payroll Thread

Post by WAR God »

I wore my Cardinals hat to the grocery store recently, as I tend to do. I don’t live in Missouri. Quite far away actually.

an older gentleman approached me and we talked baseball. He was a fan of a basement dweller team and said he admired the Cardinals ability to consistently produce contributors in their farm system and “always being in the hunt come September” because “that’s what matters.”

I do think the average baseball fan is satisfied with being relevant and having a legitimate chance at the playoffs.

dmarx114
Hall Of Famer
Posts: 24006
Joined: December 20 07, 2:45 pm

Re: 2023 Payroll Thread

Post by dmarx114 »

AWvsCBsteeeerike3 wrote:
January 19 23, 8:02 am
haltz wrote:
January 18 23, 8:37 pm
It's like he just said the quiet part, that we all know, out loud.
This is better than the coded nonsense from Mo. I mean there's something to it where they don't pull the trigger on Arenado because they owe Price, Pujols and Heyward $82M or whatever in 2021. Obviously they could, but realistically I don't think it happens. I wonder how much the playoff crapshoot math has changed though and permeated the FO and ownership, because it's not the same with the new format.
Agreed on all accounts.

Bernie goes on to break down the playoff success between the periods of 1996-2013 and 2014-2022 and it's a staggering difference in win percentage, titles, pennants, etc. Of course, that breakdown is arbitrarily set up so take it fwiw. But, there is no doubt that 'recently' whatever that means, the model has not been as effective as it was a decade + ago.

To summarize the different viewpoints I see on the board over the years, they kind of break down as follows:
1. Build juggernauts regardless of cost.
2. Keep payroll in mind, but be more aggressive with top tier FA, raise payroll as needed.
3. Mildly successful, near the playoff teams every year is great since it happens nearly every year.

Obviously 1 is a pipe dream, and we could all kind of surmise 3 was DeWitt's preference. I'm actually kind of impressed at how in tune the board is to that.

But, if there was any doubt, he just basically stated it. His goal is to get to the playoffs. And, not take on any extra risk than is necessary to do so. At least that's how I interpret it.

All that said, I do wonder, if your goal is to win as many championships as possible over an unlimited time frame in the current stratified structure where some teams are trying to build juggernauts and some teams are focused on saving money and rebuilding, what approach results in more postseaon success given there are limited but not crippling payroll limitations and keeping in mind just how fickle postseason baseball is:

A. Take a low risk approach and build a 90ish win team, get into the playoffs 80% of the time, and roll the dice.
B. Introduce more risk/contracts, raise the ceiling of some teams up to 100 wins at the cost of lowering the floor of some seasons to a below playoff threshold.

I don't know how to go about solving that question or if it is even solvable. We kind of looked at it in some other thread where we were talking about playoffs/odds earlier this offseason/during the playoffs. I think you can make the case for either A or B. But...no idea how reliable the assumptions are.
It's kind of funny that the Cardinals 2 championships in the wild card era were teams that won 83 games and won the wild card. There wasn't anything different about the model back then, compared to now.

The only thing that's changing is that we are losing close playoff games instead of winning them. But that's baseball. And that's how October works.

User avatar
Fan_In_NY
Perennial All-Star
Posts: 5184
Joined: April 18 06, 7:22 pm
Location: Birthplace of Baseball- Hoboken, NJ

Re: 2023 Payroll Thread

Post by Fan_In_NY »

Magneto2.0 wrote:
January 19 23, 5:32 am
haltz wrote:
January 18 23, 8:37 pm
It's like he just said the quiet part, that we all know, out loud.
This is better than the coded nonsense from Mo. I mean there's something to it where they don't pull the trigger on Arenado because they owe Price, Pujols and Heyward $82M or whatever in 2021. Obviously they could, but realistically I don't think it happens. I wonder how much the playoff crapshoot math has changed though and permeated the FO and ownership, because it's not the same with the new format.
I believe the Phillies run will make them double down on the "crap shoot" mentality even more.
I dont know if it is doubling down, but I certainly don't think the playoff math has changed at all. Sure it is easier to make the playoffs now than before (so even lower bar if you are just trying to make it), but with the short series it still is a crapshoot. The team with Scherzer and deGrom won as many playoff series as the Cardinals. The team with the best batting average in baseball won a many playoff games as the Cards. The team that scored 40 more runs than any other team in the sport and had one of the best run differentials in history won a single playoff game. Playoffs are and will always be a crapshoot. The team that wins the most in any given month isn't necessarily the best built team, the most talented team, the team with the most aces, best lineup, or the highest payroll team. Yes there is a slight shortcut by getting the bye, but its still about which players produce in a very very small sample size.

User avatar
haltz
Hall Of Famer
Posts: 22034
Joined: November 9 06, 6:45 am
Location: a proud midwestern metropolis

Re: 2023 Payroll Thread

Post by haltz »

But, if there was any doubt, he just basically stated it. His goal is to get to the playoffs. And, not take on any extra risk than is necessary to do so. At least that's how I interpret it.

All that said, I do wonder, if your goal is to win as many championships as possible over an unlimited time frame in the current stratified structure where some teams are trying to build juggernauts and some teams are focused on saving money and rebuilding, what approach results in more postseaon success given there are limited but not crippling payroll limitations and keeping in mind just how fickle postseason baseball is:

A. Take a low risk approach and build a 90ish win team, get into the playoffs 80% of the time, and roll the dice.
B. Introduce more risk/contracts, raise the ceiling of some teams up to 100 wins at the cost of lowering the floor of some seasons to a below playoff threshold.

I don't know how to go about solving that question or if it is even solvable. We kind of looked at it in some other thread where we were talking about playoffs/odds earlier this offseason/during the playoffs. I think you can make the case for either A or B. But...no idea how reliable the assumptions are.
You can look at playoff odds or just do the math. Wheeler and Nola leveled the field for the Phillies in a short series where otherwise the Cards are significant favorites at home.

If you're a slight favorite with a bye you are like 16% to win the World Series and the other way around, not a favorite playing an extra series your odds drop to something like 4%. It's all a crapshoot, sure, but you are throwing somewhat weighted dice with favorable pitching matchups and a bye.

I've said this more than once lately but signing an ace like Scherzer or Verlander to a short term deal seems like it satisfies all parameters of the model but it turns out they didn't even consider that. Or they can get better at drafting and developing pitching. Losing Alcantara is hand waved but there's also the argument that it's a really big deal.

Magneto2.0
Hall Of Famer
Posts: 17326
Joined: June 16 07, 2:12 pm

Re: 2023 Payroll Thread

Post by Magneto2.0 »

Fan_In_NY wrote:
January 19 23, 8:11 am
Magneto2.0 wrote:
January 19 23, 5:32 am
haltz wrote:
January 18 23, 8:37 pm
It's like he just said the quiet part, that we all know, out loud.
This is better than the coded nonsense from Mo. I mean there's something to it where they don't pull the trigger on Arenado because they owe Price, Pujols and Heyward $82M or whatever in 2021. Obviously they could, but realistically I don't think it happens. I wonder how much the playoff crapshoot math has changed though and permeated the FO and ownership, because it's not the same with the new format.
I believe the Phillies run will make them double down on the "crap shoot" mentality even more.
I dont know if it is doubling down, but I certainly don't think the playoff math has changed at all. Sure it is easier to make the playoffs now than before (so even lower bar if you are just trying to make it), but with the short series it still is a crapshoot. The team with Scherzer and deGrom won as many playoff series as the Cardinals. The team with the best batting average in baseball won a many playoff games as the Cards. The team that scored 40 more runs than any other team in the sport and had one of the best run differentials in history won a single playoff game. Playoffs are and will always be a crapshoot. The team that wins the most in any given month isn't necessarily the best built team, the most talented team, the team with the most aces, best lineup, or the highest payroll team. Yes there is a slight shortcut by getting the bye, but its still about which players produce in a very very small sample size.
Oh, I'm not saying it's wrong, just that the Phillies kinda furthered their thought process, I would think. Though I believe there are slight adjustments that can be made to give yourself a better chance in a short series, like having pitchers who miss bats in the rotation and the bullpen, but nothing is bulletproof when it comes to the post eason. If there was a way to guarantee postseason success the Dodgers would've won like 5 WS in the last decade.

I just want them to field the best team they possibly can on paper and let the chips fall where they may.

dmarx114
Hall Of Famer
Posts: 24006
Joined: December 20 07, 2:45 pm

Re: 2023 Payroll Thread

Post by dmarx114 »

Ironically, Scherzer is the biggest reason the Mets were sent home in round 1.

User avatar
go birds
-go birds
Posts: 31896
Joined: February 5 10, 9:54 am

Re: 2023 Payroll Thread

Post by go birds »

dmarx114 wrote:
January 19 23, 8:10 am
AWvsCBsteeeerike3 wrote:
January 19 23, 8:02 am
haltz wrote:
January 18 23, 8:37 pm
It's like he just said the quiet part, that we all know, out loud.
This is better than the coded nonsense from Mo. I mean there's something to it where they don't pull the trigger on Arenado because they owe Price, Pujols and Heyward $82M or whatever in 2021. Obviously they could, but realistically I don't think it happens. I wonder how much the playoff crapshoot math has changed though and permeated the FO and ownership, because it's not the same with the new format.
Agreed on all accounts.

Bernie goes on to break down the playoff success between the periods of 1996-2013 and 2014-2022 and it's a staggering difference in win percentage, titles, pennants, etc. Of course, that breakdown is arbitrarily set up so take it fwiw. But, there is no doubt that 'recently' whatever that means, the model has not been as effective as it was a decade + ago.

To summarize the different viewpoints I see on the board over the years, they kind of break down as follows:
1. Build juggernauts regardless of cost.
2. Keep payroll in mind, but be more aggressive with top tier FA, raise payroll as needed.
3. Mildly successful, near the playoff teams every year is great since it happens nearly every year.

Obviously 1 is a pipe dream, and we could all kind of surmise 3 was DeWitt's preference. I'm actually kind of impressed at how in tune the board is to that.

But, if there was any doubt, he just basically stated it. His goal is to get to the playoffs. And, not take on any extra risk than is necessary to do so. At least that's how I interpret it.

All that said, I do wonder, if your goal is to win as many championships as possible over an unlimited time frame in the current stratified structure where some teams are trying to build juggernauts and some teams are focused on saving money and rebuilding, what approach results in more postseaon success given there are limited but not crippling payroll limitations and keeping in mind just how fickle postseason baseball is:

A. Take a low risk approach and build a 90ish win team, get into the playoffs 80% of the time, and roll the dice.
B. Introduce more risk/contracts, raise the ceiling of some teams up to 100 wins at the cost of lowering the floor of some seasons to a below playoff threshold.

I don't know how to go about solving that question or if it is even solvable. We kind of looked at it in some other thread where we were talking about playoffs/odds earlier this offseason/during the playoffs. I think you can make the case for either A or B. But...no idea how reliable the assumptions are.
It's kind of funny that the Cardinals 2 championships in the wild card era were teams that won 83 games and won the wild card. There wasn't anything different about the model back then, compared to now.

The only thing that's changing is that we are losing close playoff games instead of winning them. But that's baseball. And that's how October works.
well having a first ballot HOFer in the heart of the order helps.

Here are albert pujols' stats in the playoffs, including 2022: 19 homers in 304 ABs while slashing .319/.422/.572

The cardinals have been dining off these rings for years and will continue to do so until the NL is no longer the worst division in baseball.

dmarx114
Hall Of Famer
Posts: 24006
Joined: December 20 07, 2:45 pm

Re: 2023 Payroll Thread

Post by dmarx114 »

go birds wrote:
January 19 23, 8:46 am
dmarx114 wrote:
January 19 23, 8:10 am
AWvsCBsteeeerike3 wrote:
January 19 23, 8:02 am
haltz wrote:
January 18 23, 8:37 pm
It's like he just said the quiet part, that we all know, out loud.
This is better than the coded nonsense from Mo. I mean there's something to it where they don't pull the trigger on Arenado because they owe Price, Pujols and Heyward $82M or whatever in 2021. Obviously they could, but realistically I don't think it happens. I wonder how much the playoff crapshoot math has changed though and permeated the FO and ownership, because it's not the same with the new format.
Agreed on all accounts.

Bernie goes on to break down the playoff success between the periods of 1996-2013 and 2014-2022 and it's a staggering difference in win percentage, titles, pennants, etc. Of course, that breakdown is arbitrarily set up so take it fwiw. But, there is no doubt that 'recently' whatever that means, the model has not been as effective as it was a decade + ago.

To summarize the different viewpoints I see on the board over the years, they kind of break down as follows:
1. Build juggernauts regardless of cost.
2. Keep payroll in mind, but be more aggressive with top tier FA, raise payroll as needed.
3. Mildly successful, near the playoff teams every year is great since it happens nearly every year.

Obviously 1 is a pipe dream, and we could all kind of surmise 3 was DeWitt's preference. I'm actually kind of impressed at how in tune the board is to that.

But, if there was any doubt, he just basically stated it. His goal is to get to the playoffs. And, not take on any extra risk than is necessary to do so. At least that's how I interpret it.

All that said, I do wonder, if your goal is to win as many championships as possible over an unlimited time frame in the current stratified structure where some teams are trying to build juggernauts and some teams are focused on saving money and rebuilding, what approach results in more postseaon success given there are limited but not crippling payroll limitations and keeping in mind just how fickle postseason baseball is:

A. Take a low risk approach and build a 90ish win team, get into the playoffs 80% of the time, and roll the dice.
B. Introduce more risk/contracts, raise the ceiling of some teams up to 100 wins at the cost of lowering the floor of some seasons to a below playoff threshold.

I don't know how to go about solving that question or if it is even solvable. We kind of looked at it in some other thread where we were talking about playoffs/odds earlier this offseason/during the playoffs. I think you can make the case for either A or B. But...no idea how reliable the assumptions are.
It's kind of funny that the Cardinals 2 championships in the wild card era were teams that won 83 games and won the wild card. There wasn't anything different about the model back then, compared to now.

The only thing that's changing is that we are losing close playoff games instead of winning them. But that's baseball. And that's how October works.
well having a first ballot HOFer in the heart of the order helps.

Here are albert pujols' stats in the playoffs, including 2022: 19 homers in 304 ABs while slashing .319/.422/.572

The cardinals have been dining off these rings for years and will continue to do so until the NL is no longer the worst division in baseball.
Maybe Mo should have acquired an MVP candidate.....or 2.

Welcome to October.

User avatar
Big Amoco Sign
Master of Hyperbole
Posts: 14402
Joined: December 1 17, 11:05 am

Re: 2023 Payroll Thread

Post by Big Amoco Sign »

dmarx114 wrote:
January 19 23, 8:10 am
AWvsCBsteeeerike3 wrote:
January 19 23, 8:02 am
haltz wrote:
January 18 23, 8:37 pm
It's like he just said the quiet part, that we all know, out loud.
This is better than the coded nonsense from Mo. I mean there's something to it where they don't pull the trigger on Arenado because they owe Price, Pujols and Heyward $82M or whatever in 2021. Obviously they could, but realistically I don't think it happens. I wonder how much the playoff crapshoot math has changed though and permeated the FO and ownership, because it's not the same with the new format.
Agreed on all accounts.

Bernie goes on to break down the playoff success between the periods of 1996-2013 and 2014-2022 and it's a staggering difference in win percentage, titles, pennants, etc. Of course, that breakdown is arbitrarily set up so take it fwiw. But, there is no doubt that 'recently' whatever that means, the model has not been as effective as it was a decade + ago.

To summarize the different viewpoints I see on the board over the years, they kind of break down as follows:
1. Build juggernauts regardless of cost.
2. Keep payroll in mind, but be more aggressive with top tier FA, raise payroll as needed.
3. Mildly successful, near the playoff teams every year is great since it happens nearly every year.

Obviously 1 is a pipe dream, and we could all kind of surmise 3 was DeWitt's preference. I'm actually kind of impressed at how in tune the board is to that.

But, if there was any doubt, he just basically stated it. His goal is to get to the playoffs. And, not take on any extra risk than is necessary to do so. At least that's how I interpret it.

All that said, I do wonder, if your goal is to win as many championships as possible over an unlimited time frame in the current stratified structure where some teams are trying to build juggernauts and some teams are focused on saving money and rebuilding, what approach results in more postseaon success given there are limited but not crippling payroll limitations and keeping in mind just how fickle postseason baseball is:

A. Take a low risk approach and build a 90ish win team, get into the playoffs 80% of the time, and roll the dice.
B. Introduce more risk/contracts, raise the ceiling of some teams up to 100 wins at the cost of lowering the floor of some seasons to a below playoff threshold.

I don't know how to go about solving that question or if it is even solvable. We kind of looked at it in some other thread where we were talking about playoffs/odds earlier this offseason/during the playoffs. I think you can make the case for either A or B. But...no idea how reliable the assumptions are.
It's kind of funny that the Cardinals 2 championships in the wild card era were teams that won 83 games and won the wild card. There wasn't anything different about the model back then, compared to now.

The only thing that's changing is that we are losing close playoff games instead of winning them. But that's baseball. And that's how October works.
Leaving out that top 2 teams get further automatically now. Yes they can lose but they have higher odds always.

Model is BS and has to change.

I miss when the Cubs had Theo because that’s only time DeWitt and Mo had competition to change their ways.

User avatar
Big Amoco Sign
Master of Hyperbole
Posts: 14402
Joined: December 1 17, 11:05 am

Re: 2023 Payroll Thread

Post by Big Amoco Sign »

dmarx114 wrote:
January 19 23, 8:42 am
Ironically, Scherzer is the biggest reason the Mets were sent home in round 1.
Exceptions aren’t the rule.

Banking on exceptions will make you poor.
Last edited by Big Amoco Sign on January 19 23, 9:28 am, edited 1 time in total.

Post Reply