Agree on where the Padres stand in the NL West, though by saying they have much of a disadvantage over the likes of Arizona & Colorado is splitting hairs, based on how those teams are spending. Don't agree with them being at or near the bottom in the entire league, or bottom 5 in all of the game, which is where I was coming from. If this was strictly about the NL West I wouldn't have been scratching my head about how the Padres are spending in relation to their peers.
Doesn't the Rockies payroll seem traditionally low? They're always a relatively big draw, only team in hundred's of miles, seem to have a very strong fan base. They have two 2nd place finishes in the past 5 years and have seen their attendance bounce back to the top 8 over the past three years. Entering 2007 they had a 9 year stretch of never finishing higher then 4th place and a 11 year stretch of never finishing higher then 3rd place. Not surprising their attendance has improven as the product on the field has done the same. Which is exactly what the Padres are trying to accomplish.
Looking at their attendance/payroll's the Rockies appear to be a very profitable team for their owner(s). They do a lot of things right for a team still waiting for their first division title.
The Dodgers have a huge advantage, but few teams make as many boneheaded financial decisions as them. Luckily for us I'd say if you polled the 5 most inefficient teams in the game, the two big spenders in the NL West would be feautured on that list. I know we can't count on them being poorly run forever, but it could be a TON worse. I am encouraged in the condition of those two eams farm systems. If they're having to depend heavily on pricey vets, it will swing some momentum the Padres way.
Yeah. From a revenue perspective, the way MLB is set up just isn't sustainable. Revenue sharing does a pretty good job of keeping the Padres and smaller market teams from getting totally shut out... more