ask and ye shall receive. just about to post about just that topic. i think you should copy and paste what you just wrote over there.

ALL -

shut down the poll to start a new one.

Final result: 64% would make the trade, 36% wouldn’t.

I believe that I have mentioned Andrew Zimbalist here before. He is a professor of economics at Smith College and has written several books about baseball economics. I am going to make a few counter points to your counter points using Zimbalist’s book, “May The Best Team Win”.

Payrolls don’t win championships, scouting does:
This is the “It’s not the money, it’s the management” argument. Scouting certainly does matter, but if it matters so much, why don’t the Yankees move heaven and earth to get Billy Beane? Then they can cut their payroll in half (which would still be more than the Phillies’ payroll). That’s good baseball and good business, right? I’m sure the Steinbrenners would love to keep another $100 million in their pockets. According to Zimbalist, Beane wanted to sign Ben Sheets, but he didn’t have the money, so he chose Barry Zito instead. Zito certainly worked out for the A’s, but he wasn’t their first choice. If Beane had the money, he would have spent it. Scouting is only half the story. The only way moneyball truly works is when you add the money and the scouting together. Bill James is in Boston AND they are spending money. That’s why they are successful. Zimbalist goes on to say that, since the mid-1990s, the relationship between payroll size and the likelihood of on-field success is direct, dramatic, and undeniable. It’s not that a low payroll team can never succeed or that a high payroll team can never fail. What he says is that the opportunities for success are very significantly diminished by a smaller payroll, especially over the long term. Now, I’m not saying that we are a low payroll team, but you’ve got to admit that for a big market team(which we are) with a new stadium, we act like we’re on a small market budget. I would say we are on the fence. We spend enough to be good, but not enough to be great. If I were a cynic, I would say that this suits the owners just fine. As long as we stay competitive, attendance stays up, merchandise sells, and business is good. They are selling us hope. It’s like the law of diminishing returns. You know, where you can get a B by studying for 1 hour, but you need to study for 6 hours to get an A. It’s not worth all that extra effort, so you put in 1 hour and take the B. I see ownership as being happy with a B.

As far as revenues, Zimbalist has this to say: “The owners of baseball teams do not treat their teams as stand-alone profit centers; rather, each team is a cog in the larger corporate machine or investment portfolio, used to maximize the long-term profits of the larger entity.” The players produce profits for the owners both on and off the ball field. A specific example for us is that the Phillies are part owners of Comcast Sportsnet. The Phillies can overpay Comcast to broadcast the games. This increases expenses on the baseball side, which eats into the baseball revenue. Teams either own or are part owners in all kinds of related companies(like concessions, for example), which they use to drain funds away from the baseball operation. They can then show a loss on the baseball side, but in reality they are just taking money out of one pocket and putting it in another. You see underreporting revenue is advantageous in baseball because of revenue sharing. Less revenue means less sharing. No revenue means no sharing. It’s not that teams are losing money, it’s that they are REPORTING that they are losing money. It’s all paper tricks and accounting sleight of hand.

As far as the owners, here’s my take. All of these individuals have been very successful in businesses outside of baseball. Am I supposed to believe that they have lost every shred of business acumen the minute they became the owner of a baseball team? We know beyond all doubt that businesses(especially major corporations) employ accountants whose sole job is to find ways to hide money, under report revenue, over report expenses, decrease the tax burden, etc… Am I supposed to believe baseball is any different? Also, when is the last time you saw a baseball team sell for less than the previous owners paid for it? How about for the same amount? No, franchise prices continue to skyrocket. Why is that? If all these teams over spend on payroll and continually lose money, why would any shrewd businessman buy in? You know why. Because the money is there, it’s just hidden from us.

I’m not trying to go all Oliver Stone here, but come on. It’s kind of like when you buy a new car and the salesman tells you what a great deal you just got because they only made $100 on the sale. Do you believe that? Baseball is the same way. The money is there. I’m not saying that the Phillies can go out and spend $200 million on payroll.(Although we will never know because I’m sure the accounting is very well done and kept out of sight.) What I am saying is that I’m sure that there is more money there than what they are spending.

Fuentes: sharp, veteran lefthanded reliever added to already effective bullpen. 7

Holliday: brute, MVP-potential hitter added to slugging, inconsistent, underachieving line-up. 9

FOR

Victorino: Strong defensive centerfielder and basestealer, decent but inconsistent 2-slot hitter. 7.5

Carrasco: ’3 1/2 star’ “could be” #2 starting pitcher, with questions. 0

Marson: strong-hitting catcher seen as club’s future at a ‘hard to fill with quality’ position. 0

J.A. Happ: young lefty pitcher who’s acquitted himself decently in brief major league experience 3

Yes, go for it. 16 to 10.5 on ML ‘tested-function & today’s value’ post-season scale. Gillick, Gather ye rosebuds while ye may…Seize the season! For you and the city of Philadelphia, the time is NOW.

That said, I do think Holliday is a bit overrated b/c of his colorado advantage. But I don’t think it’d hurt us all that much (at least when he’s in philly). That left field bleachers section is pretty close to home plate.

How many people thought our lineup looked ridiculous before this season? On paper anyway…

Over the past 3 seasons (2005-2007) Matt Hollidays Home and Away splits are as follows:

Home
Avg: .370
OBP: .430
Slug: .676
HRs: 71

Away
Avg: .281
OBP: .343
Slug: .466
HRs: 35

A 100 point drop in average and OBP. And a whopping 200 point drop in Slugging % and a 2:1 ratio on his Home Runs at home compared to away.

Look at the career stats of Andres Gallaraga, Larry Walker, Dante Bichette, and Vinny Castilla in their seasons when they played in Colorado compared to the other teams they played for. I could even take it a step further and look at their home/road splits but I have some work to do.

Our lineup would look great on paper, but it is too much to risk.

@Pete
http://www.forbes.com/lists/2008/33/biz_baseball08_Philadelphia-Phillies_335119.html