Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand
Thursday, July 24, 2014
Billy Beane should have never written this article.
Now that we have a sense of Beane’s performance and how much it would cost to replicate it, let’s turn back to the Boston Red Sox and their failure to sign him (or even to offer him anywhere near his worth)....
But some of that money was spent and some of those wins came before the Red Sox attempted to hire Beane. To be conservative, let’s just look at the period since Henry made Beane his offer: In the last 12 years, the Red Sox spent $1.714 billion on payroll, while the A’s spent $736 million. We can then break down what it could have looked like if Beane had worked for the Red Sox like so:
Let’s say it would have cost Boston the same $736 million that it cost Oakland to get the A’s performance with Beane.
At the hypothetical $25 million-per-year salary I suggested earlier, Beane would have cost the Red Sox another $300 million. (It’s possible that Beane would have wanted more, but it’s even more possible that they could have gotten him for less.)
The difference in performance between the A’s and the Red Sox over that period (where the Sox were as successful as at any point in the franchise’s history, and the A’s were supposedly stagnating after Beane’s early success) has been about 50 games for Boston. Since we don’t know exactly how good Beane would be at procuring additional wins above his Oakland performance, let’s assume that the Red Sox would have had to pay the typical amount teams have paid for wins in the period to make up the difference. According to the year-by-year price of wins from my calculations above, those 50 wins (taking when they happened into account) would have a market value of about $370 million (though this might have been lower with Beane in charge).
If we combine these — the price of the A’s performance ($736 million) plus Super-Expensive-Billy-Beane’s salary ($300 million) plus the additional 50 Red Sox wins at high market estimates ($370 million) – merely duplicating their previous level of success still would have saved the Red Sox more than $300 million relative to what they actually spent, and that’s with reasonably conservative assumptions. That’s money they could have pocketed, or spent making themselves even better.
You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.
: OT: NFL/NHL thread
(9225 - 8:21pm, Dec 21)Last:
PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth)Newsblog
: Determining Hall vote is no easy task | New York Post
(24 - 8:18pm, Dec 21)
Last: Rennie's TenetNewsblog
: OT: Politics - December 2014: Baseball & Politics Collide in New Thriller
(5203 - 8:11pm, Dec 21)Last:
: Marty Noble's HOF Ballot
(40 - 8:08pm, Dec 21)
: OT: Monthly NBA Thread - December 2014
(769 - 7:37pm, Dec 21)Last:
: The 2015 HOF Ballot Collecting Gizmo!
(173 - 7:21pm, Dec 21)Last:
: Ruben Amaro Jr. says it would be best if Phillies move on from Ryan Howard
(45 - 7:19pm, Dec 21)
: Angels, Red Sox discontinue pension plans for non-uniformed personnel - LA Times
(26 - 7:13pm, Dec 21)
: The Yankees’ plan in case A-Rod can’t play at all
(24 - 6:59pm, Dec 21)
: The Jeff Jacobs HOF Ballot: Keep The Voting Serious And Fair
(51 - 6:24pm, Dec 21)
: OT: Soccer December 2014
(339 - 6:19pm, Dec 21)Last:
: Getting ready to gamble on Jung-Ho Kang | FOX Sports
(7 - 6:01pm, Dec 21)
Last: Steve Parris, Je t'aime Newsblog
: Giants acquire McGehee to fill third-base spot
(6 - 5:59pm, Dec 21)
: School of Roch: Wieters on his rehab and opening day
(1 - 5:51pm, Dec 21)
: JUNICHI TAZAWA & CULTURE OF DENIAL
(3 - 5:19pm, Dec 21)
Last: vortex of dissipation