Two Ways To Count The Mets' Payroll

[Buster]

http://www.amazinavenue.com/2013/1/2...s-payroll-2013

Two Ways To Count The Mets' Payroll

The Mets are either at their spending limit or more than $20 million below their limit. They know best, but in one way this is all about counting.

The Mets are done spending, most likely, so maybe this is all moot. Maybe they didn't even begin spending. But last week, Adam Rubin pointed out that, according to the way the team accounts for deferred obligations, the payroll is already at $94.9 million. It was $94.5 million last year.

But if you count differently, the payroll is much lower. Like almost $20 million dollars lower.

Here are the 2013 obligations for the current roster. This is counting only money the team will have to pay in 2013.


(See the web page for the list)


That doesn't look like $95 million. In fact, the total obligations for the Mets this year only tally $71.25 million. That's counting Wright's salary as $8m, since he deferred $3m of it into the future. That's counting Santana's salary as $20.5m and worrying about the $5.5m buyout next year and the $5m deferred seven years from now. That's counting only the $6m of the $21.125m still owed Jason Bay, as $6m is what the team will have to pay in 2013.

It's an eye-opening thing to say that the Mets could also be seen as $20 million short of the same salary they paid out last year. And it's tempting to use that to decry the lack of free agency signings seen from the front office. A few minor league free agents, a couple trades, stop $20m short and call it quits doesn't seem like enough for a fan base used to a team that costs $100m most seasons.

But I asked around with some team officials from other teams, and Rubin is correct. There has to be some accounting for future obligations that have a link to 2013. In that way, you can take Bonilla off the list... but you have to add the other guys back in.

There is a wrinkle. Next year's money is worth less than this year's money. And so, what you really want to do is add in future 2013-related obligations in today's dollars. That probably made the deferments to Bonilla seem a lot more reasonable, but let's do it here too. Even if we have to guesstimate a little.

Inflation is down some -- we even had some deflation recently -- but the most common number, year-in and year-out, is three percent. Using 3% inflation, Santana's $5.5m buyout is worth $5.335m in today's money. And Santana also has five million deferred annually for seven years, but at 1.25% interest. That means the current value of his $5m deferred is $4.5m. By the best information we have, Jason Bay will be paid $6m this year and $15m over the next two years. Let's call it $7.5m in each year after this year. That means that Bay's buyout is actually worth another $14.56m over the next two years. Wright's deal is fairly complicated, but the $3m that was deferred without interest will begin entering his bank account in 2021. That makes the extra $3m worth only $2.35m this year.

The team saved about almost two million dollars in present value by deferring those deals. That might be enough to go get Chris Young one more time, but it's not enough for the guys the fan base wants.

What's the new tally? Add up all the future obligations related to the 2013 roster in 2013 dollars, subtract Beltran and Bonilla, and you get another $22.3m. Add that to our $71.25m in today's obligations in today's dollars, and you get $93.6m.

That's the whammy sound you hear.

Perhaps the deferments could open the door for a conversation about Michael Bourn, but it doesn't seem likely. And if a high-priced outfielder is coming in a trade, there might need to be money leaving the payroll to make it work. Which makes that sort of deal less likely.

It might be a painful year. But it makes sense to consider future obligations that are tied to the current roster. If you don't, you could end up owing half your payroll to players that no longer play for you, and that's even more painful.

[24]

I'm happy with the direction the Mets are going.

[Buster]

Originally Posted by 24

I'm happy with the direction the Mets are going.

I hope your feelings about the Mets and their actions are right and mine are wrong.

My entire childhood was spent watching the Mets finishing low in the standings and having good draft picks. And they managed to never be very good. The problem is the MLB amateur draft is a crap shoot.

[Scott Dierking]

Originally Posted by Buster

I hope your feelings about the Mets and their actions are right and mine are wrong.

My entire childhood was spent watching the Mets finishing low in the standings and having good draft picks. And they managed to never be very good. The problem is the MLB amateur draft is a crap shoot.

It all depends on who is doing the picking.

Frank Cashen was very good at building a farm system under the Mets, and it worked very well.

Sure it is somewhat a crapshoot, but if you have an approach, you can make it less risky.

[24]

Originally Posted by Scott Dierking

It all depends on who is doing the picking.

Frank Cashen was very good at building a farm system under the Mets, and it worked very well.

Sure it is somewhat a crapshoot, but if you have an approach, you can make it less risky.

FRank Cashen is still around you know. He plays Pinnacle with my uncle every weekend. Last time I saw him was in Port St. Lucie a couple years back. He still knows his stuff.

[adb280z]

Originally Posted by Buster

I hope your feelings about the Mets and their actions are right and mine are wrong.

My entire childhood was spent watching the Mets finishing low in the standings and having good draft picks. And they managed to never be very good. The problem is the MLB amateur draft is a crap shoot.

It can also take a VERY long time to build exclusively through the draft.

[Scott Dierking]

Originally Posted by adb280z

It can also take a VERY long time to build exclusively through the draft.

The Mets have in a few years gone from one of the lowest ranked farm systems, to a mid tiered farm system.

There is pitching at all depths, which is the most valuable commodity.They still need work in developing more position players.

Once the pitching matures a little more, they can use some of the pitching for trades and even bring in some free agents that make sense.

You don't build exclusively through the system, but it is the right way to start

[Ven0m]

Not really relying on the draft anymore as much as they're banking on Wheeler, d'Arnaud, Harvey being the real deal.

If they pan out, you've got your catcher, the Infield looks pretty reasonable quality with our internal options, you've got 2 top of rotation pitchers to pair with Niese and Gee, you just need to piece together an Outfield and a bullpen.

I think that's part of why they're flirting with Bourn because is there gonna be a better CF type available in the next couple offseasons?

[Bay Ridge Jet]

Originally Posted by Ven0m

Not really relying on the draft anymore as much as they're banking on Wheeler, d'Arnaud, Harvey being the real deal.

If they pan out, you've got your catcher, the Infield looks pretty reasonable quality with our internal options, you've got 2 top of rotation pitchers to pair with Niese and Gee, you just need to piece together an Outfield and a bullpen.

I think that's part of why they're flirting with Bourn because is there gonna be a better CF type available in the next couple offseasons?

Ellsbury

I do get the idea of Bourn. I think if we could keep the 11th pick, a 4 year deal with an opt out would be great for all parties.

[Ven0m]

Originally Posted by Bay Ridge Jet

Ellsbury

I do get the idea of Bourn. I think if we could keep the 11th pick, a 4 year deal with an opt out would be great for all parties.

I would much rather give a contract to Bourn then Ellsbury, considering Ellsbury has missed 144 and 88 games in 2 of the last 3 seasons. Obviously Ellsbury has more upside, but what good does it do if you're missing 50% of your teams games? Bourn on the other hand, averages 150 games a season.

[Buster]

Originally Posted by Ven0m

Not really relying on the draft anymore as much as they're banking on Wheeler, d'Arnaud, Harvey being the real deal.

If they pan out, you've got your catcher, the Infield looks pretty reasonable quality with our internal options, you've got 2 top of rotation pitchers to pair with Niese and Gee, you just need to piece together an Outfield and a bullpen.

I think that's part of why they're flirting with Bourn because is there gonna be a better CF type available in the next couple offseasons?

You still are counting on guys who have played ZERO MLB games to avoid injury and live up to their POTENTIAL. What is the success rate for that in MLB?

The Mets are more about having slick accountants than slick infield play. The organization’s # 1 goal is to get on a sound financial footing not winning a pennant. I often wonder if winning a pennant is # 2. I understand the sound financial footing goal but it is a little hard to swallow when they OWN their stadium and OWN a big chunk of the team’s cable network. Something is funky.

All i want for christmas is new ownership.

[Dreamers]

Originally Posted by Buster

I hope your feelings about the Mets and their actions are right and mine are wrong.

My entire childhood was spent watching the Mets finishing low in the standings and having good draft picks. And they managed to never be very good. The problem is the MLB amateur draft is a crap shoot.

It just has no structure. There are like 50 rounds and like 60 picks in some rounds. It varies but I'll say 1500 players a year get "drafted". So very few matured ready prospects get drafted I think I've seen 15 year olds drafted. I knew a guy that was drafted in like round 50 or some junk and they never even called him. He wasn't even good. If they put a age limit on and cut the rounds to say 20 your talent pool for the draft would actually be better.