siamesedreamer said:Its not up for debate........ESPN has three mistakes that I know of:
Renteria - ESPN says $10 million when in reality its $6 million (Boston sent $12 million with Renteria in the deal)
Smoltz - he restructured so that his option was picked up next year and his salary is $8 million (not $11 million)
Hampton - this one is complicated and involves two other teams paying part of his salary.....all that matters though is that when he was acquired the Braves were on the hook for only $43 million of his contract. They did a deal with him (that was pretty publicized) and divided that by the 6 years remaining on the contract and paid him $8 million per year.
So, that's an extra ~$13 million that ESPN figures in without the Braves actually being on the hook for it. That means the Braves are actually around ~$79 million.
ESPN has the total values of the contracts figured as how they looked on the day they were signed. They don't take into account any other wrangling that have been done since. Like I said, one of the other independant sites comes out with a true tally shortly after the trade deadline.
one word: Selig
He's been great for the game in some respects, but corporate ownership has blossomed under his reign and IMO its a horrible stain on the game.
Not only is Time Warner directing the cost cutting measures on the Braves, but the are also subsidizing the Mets new TV network. Its a gross conflict of interest in which Selig is directly involved.
The Nationals had nine different ownership groups vetted for four years before Selig finally decided on the right one. But, at the same time, he's going to allow Time Warner to sell the Braves to a Denver based company called Liberty Media in a stock swap with Time Warner - all the while Arthur Blank has been on his knees begging to buy the Braves for the past six months. Its absolutely disgusting and there's not a damn thing any Braves fan can do about it. Just thank your lucky stars the Wilpons still own the Mets.
I know that Glavine restructured his deal for an option that is potentialy loaded with alot of extra bonuses for next year(should he decide to stick around) so yeah I see what you mean by this. Youre gonna have ot supply me with a link to the sites that have the real salary figures sometime because I thought for sure the Yanks were around 220 million anyways but I never really cared enough to look into that was fact or fiction.
I knew about Hampton's salary being payed by one other team but still he's been a bust(this year anyways)...thats what my comment on him was originally about. How much of that is covered through an insurance policy though? Did they ever use that money to improve other areas of the team?
Hampton-Ofcourse at the time it looked like a good deal when they got him for a fraction of what the Rockies were paying for him so it was good intentions,it just hasn't payed off for them too well this year is all.
Dunno much about selig to be honest. But its not all on him either. How many times have we heard about teams dipping into that revenue sharing money and not investing it into their teams-the Royals and Marlins are proof that its more than just selig being the problem. But for the most part youre right about big money running the sport more than fair practices,its like that with everything nowdays. A salary cap would solve the problem alot,but then you also may be looking at parody if you go that route-though the N.L. seems to be mimicking that term pretty well this year. Atleast its an exciting wild card though.