I thought it would be a good idea to look at where the Tigers are in relationship to other MLB teams in terms of payroll as the trade deadline approaches.

This data is circa April 7, 2006, so if anybody else has more current data, post it here and we can edit in over this info:


2006 MLB Team Payrolls
Based Upon 2006 Season as of April 7, 2006

Rank Team Total Payroll
1 New York Yankees $194,663,079
2 Boston Red Sox $120,099,824
3 Los Angeles Angels $103,472,000
4 Chicago White Sox $102,750,667
5 New York Mets $101,084,963
6 Los Angeles Dodgers $98,447,187
7 Chicago Cubs $94,424,499
8 Houston Astros $92,551,503
9 Atlanta Braves $90,156,876
10 San Francisco Giants $90,056,419
11 St. Louis Cardinals $88,891,371
12 Philadelphia Phillies $88,273,333
13 Seattle Mariners $87,959,833
14 Detroit Tigers $82,612,866
15 Baltimore Orioles $72,585,582
16 Toronto Blue Jays $71,915,000
17 San Diego Padres $69,896,141
18 Texas Rangers $68,228,662
19 Minnesota Twins $63,396,006
20 Washington Nationals $63,143,000
21 Oakland Athletics $62,243,079
22 Cincinnati Reds $60,909,519
23 Arizona Diamondbacks $59,684,226
24 Milwaukee Brewers $57,568,333
25 Cleveland Indians $56,031,500
26 Kansas City Royals $47,294,000
27 Pittsburgh Pirates $46,717,750
28 Colorado Rockies $41,233,000
29 Tampa Bay Devil Rays $35,417,967
30 Florida Marlins $14,998,500

source: http://www.onestopbaseball.com/TeamPayroll.asp

Don't get me wrong. There was a time (not so long ago) when being in the middle of the pack when it comes to team payroll would have been just fine and dandy with me.

But now I'm getting greedy.

He said he would spend if the team was in contention, and that time is now.

What will the pizza man do?

It's going to be an exciting week, for sure.

this isnt the first time illitch has been willing to spend. in fact, he's always been willing to spend. the difference is we have a gm now who knows who to give the money to.

but he's obviously getting pumped about the tigers. suddenly, he's not an absentee owner. he even said its time for the tigers to carry the wings. WOW.

I'm gonna have to disagree with your "Ilitch has always been willing to spend" comment.

For example, our 2004 payroll figure was just over $46m, compared to over $82m this year.

There were some years that he simply just wasn't willing to spend the money to put a quality team on the field, and part of me will never forgive him for that.

I don't really want to dwell on the negative right now, but I couldn't let that comment just slide.

back in 98 (?) randy smith paid all the young tigers- easly, higginson in particular. 2004 we were still facing the consequences of that. when dombroski stepped in, economics was a big factor. we had a bunch of money tied up in dead contracts. no one was coming to the games so we couldnt add players without going into the red. so dombroski built up the farm while we waited out the contracts ("you try to trade bobby higginson"). but when a contract expired, dombrowski replaced that chunk of payroll with a new, quality player.

baseball is a game of economics (as opposed to basketball, with its salary cap and huge network tv contract). you cant begrudge a smaller market baseball team that was stuck in the mud because it didnt spend like the yankees. i'd be pissed at illitch if we sold off young studs rather than paying them (kinda like the weaver deal, but that trade was genius), or had an up and coming team and didnt add to it.

imo, you can be mad at illitch for giving randy smith so much time. but beyond that i'd have a hard time blaming him for the tiger's fortunes for the last 15 years.

I'm aware that we had some bad contracts that we were stuck with (I don't even want to think about what would have happened if Juan Gone would have accepted that $140m deal that he turned down), but I disagree that you don't spend because people aren't coming to the games, I think it's the other way around.

And since I've already said that being middle of the pack in payroll would have made me giddy, that "spending like the Yankees" analogy is not quite apropos. $60-70m instead of $46 would have kept a lot of disenchanted fans from turning on him, and some of those would have forked over some cash to come to some games if they felt like the owner hadn't abandoned the team in favor of his hockey team, like I did.

It has been reported by ESPN both in the offseason and during recent trade talks the Tigers may go as high a 100-110 million in payroll.

This years payroll in reality is closer to 76 million since Percival's deal is being paid by insurance. So I think Detroit can add as much payroll as they want, given the team's sucess (Attendence, Merchandise,and Advertising)and middle of the road payroll, even if it means taking on a bad contract or two.

So the Tigers are willing to add another 18-28 million? Wow. If that's is true, why aren't they out there advertising that to every team looking to cut payroll? Seriously. Anyone with a high-priced player desperate to cut payroll would jump at the chance. The Phillies basically gave Thome to the White Sox. Now he's one of the best hitters in the AL again.
So who will give their players to us? Choose your AA prospect and you can have him straight up for your high priced player. Seriously. Helton, Berkman, Abreau, Andruw Jones, Griffey, even A-Rod. Yeah, the Yankees don't care about salary but clearly A-Rod in NY isn't working for anyone. Let's go get him.

I'm aware that we had some bad contracts that we were stuck with (I don't even want to think about what would have happened if Juan Gone would have accepted that $140m deal that he turned down), but I disagree that you don't spend because people aren't coming to the games, I think it's the other way around.

And since I've already said that being middle of the pack in payroll would have made me giddy, that "spending like the Yankees" analogy is not quite apropos. $60-70m instead of $46 would have kept a lot of disenchanted fans from turning on him, and some of those would have forked over some cash to come to some games if they felt like the owner hadn't abandoned the team in favor of his hockey team, like I did.

if we spent a little extra, maybe maroth doesnt lose 20 games one year. would you really want to lose that fantastic memory?

it looks like you and me are going to have to agree to disagree on this one. i have no problem with an owner who wont build on a faulty foundation. (wheres kstat to tell me mike illitch doesnt owe me shit?).

i say, spend when its time to win, go cheep and develop your young guys when its time to lose. whats the point of being 'middle of the pack in payroll' (and therefore middle of the pack in the standings?). im a man of extremes. i need the dizzying highs, the terrifying lows, and the creamy middles.

So the Tigers are willing to add another 18-28 million? Wow. If that's is true, why aren't they out there advertising that to every team looking to cut payroll? Seriously. Anyone with a high-priced player desperate to cut payroll would jump at the chance. The Phillies basically gave Thome to the White Sox. Now he's one of the best hitters in the AL again.
So who will give their players to us? Choose your AA prospect and you can have him straight up for your high priced player. Seriously. Helton, Berkman, Abreau, Andruw Jones, Griffey, even A-Rod. Yeah, the Yankees don't care about salary but clearly A-Rod in NY isn't working for anyone. Let's go get him.

Lets.

it looks like you and me are going to have to agree to disagree on this one. i have no problem with an owner who wont build on a faulty foundation. (wheres kstat to tell me mike illitch doesnt owe me shit?).

i say, spend when its time to win, go cheep and develop your young guys when its time to lose. whats the point of being 'middle of the pack in payroll' (and therefore middle of the pack in the standings?). im a man of extremes. i need the dizzying highs, the terrifying lows, and the creamy middles.

Fair enough on the agree to disagree.

In closing, to play off of a Nate Robinson quote, Mike Ilitch stole my joy for the game for the past 15 years.

It's time for him to step up and pay me back.

it looks like you and me are going to have to agree to disagree on this one. i have no problem with an owner who wont build on a faulty foundation. (wheres kstat to tell me mike illitch doesnt owe me shit?).

i say, spend when its time to win, go cheep and develop your young guys when its time to lose. whats the point of being 'middle of the pack in payroll' (and therefore middle of the pack in the standings?). im a man of extremes. i need the dizzying highs, the terrifying lows, and the creamy middles.

Fair enough on the agree to disagree.

In closing, to play off of a Nate Robinson quote, Mike Ilitch stole my joy for the game for the past 15 years.

It's time for him to step up and pay me back.

But Ilitch will insist he was being a tight owner "the right way"

I'm with B-Diddy on this one. We pissed money down the drain for 10 years. Damion Easley, Bobby Higginson, Dimitri Young, Dean Palmer, Hideo Nomo, Greg Jeffries, Masao Kida, huge bonuses for Anderson and Munson...I think Ilitch got a bad rap. he tried to spend like crazy at first, but things were all in the hands of clueless individuals. Rather than throw good money after bad, he let them strip things down and put them back together again.

Would you rather have had 10 more wins in 03, even if it meant that there wasn't enough money left over to sign Pudge and Maggs? And Rogers? No matter what, the money supply is FINITE. You can only overspend so much. Add A-Rod to those teams back then and we still barely squeak out 74 wins, not enough to put enough fans in the seats to make a difference. It's hard to recognize sometimes, but overspend by 20 million 4 years ago, that's 20 million less overall to go around. If you're gonna suck, might as well suck real bad and save it for when it'll do some good.

Uh oh, if Vinny disagrees with me I think I lose, lol.

I thought more about this last night and I actually started getting angry about it all over again, so after this post I'm going to drop it.

The thing that really got me going last night was thinking about the cut-rate managers that Ilitch brought in over the past decade. Luis Pujols? Larry Parrish? Tram? Buddy Bell? All bargain basement options without major league management experience (that screamed "why bother" to me and to many of my friends that are/were Tiger fans) . In fact, Phil Garner was the only guy that he brought in over the past 10 years (6 managers) that actually had a MLB management pedigree, and it was a losing pedigree at that.

Enter Jim Leyland. A high profile (not cheap) manager with a track record of success and voilà!!

Okay, no more about the past from me, there's too many bad memories and too many good things happening now to dwell on that. Before the season, Ilitch said:


"I haven't had an opportunity where I've had a ballclub that's displayed some talent, some will and desire and performed at a high level," he said. "When you get to that point, then you want to do everything possible for a team to win, and then you want to go out and get the players that you feel you should to fill the holes because you know it's going to mean something, because you've got a tremendous foundation.

"I haven't been able to make a difference -- in other words, to be able to get in there and say, 'This is what we need. OK, let's go get him, because you know you're on a roll now and you've got a chance.' I've never been in that position in baseball, and that's the position I want to be in."
http://wtfdetroit.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5136

It's now or never, Pizza Man.

Luis Pujols? Larry Parrish? Tram? Buddy Bell? All bargain basement options without major league management experience (that screamed "why bother" to me and to many of my friends that are/were Tiger fans) . In fact, Phil Garner was the only guy that he brought in over the past 10 years (6 managers) that actually had a MLB management pedigree, and it was a losing pedigree at that.

Enter Jim Leyland. A high profile (not cheap) manager with a track record of success and voilÃfudge!!


I'll agree on that. Luis frigging Pujols....what a clown that guy was.

Wow. We went through quite a spell where we only hired guys that had the same last name as someone who currently or once played the game very well, even if it was that manager himself.
I remember the consensus was that Pujols wasn't even the manager, but bench coach Felipe Alou was calling more of the shots. Lights and mirrors, hunderds of losses. Dark days indeed.

So the Tigers are willing to add another 18-28 million? Wow. If that's is true, why aren't they out there advertising that to every team looking to cut payroll? Seriously. Anyone with a high-priced player desperate to cut payroll would jump at the chance. The Phillies basically gave Thome to the White Sox. Now he's one of the best hitters in the AL again.
So who will give their players to us? Choose your AA prospect and you can have him straight up for your high priced player. Seriously. Helton, Berkman, Abreau, Andruw Jones, Griffey, even A-Rod. Yeah, the Yankees don't care about salary but clearly A-Rod in NY isn't working for anyone. Let's go get him.

Rowand and a high end prospect(or 2?) for an injured Thome wasn't giving him away, IMO.

Helton, Abreu, and Jones are the ones I could possibly see and/or want. Griffey could be a FA this year anyway(not sure if/what options are there), not a killer.

I think that DD will wait till FA and go after a LF, SP, and possibly a RP, and LH backup.

Drop 15-20 mil in Percival, Young, and our FA's that we don't want. So we would be around the 65 mark, say 100 would be the number. Though I think that Mags and Pudge's contract might be upping for next year, not sure.

Soriano and Lee are bigtime LF's. Zito, Mussina, Mulder, and others are available as SP's(even though we are already deep there, we could do a trade, and you never pass up an opprotunity to get good pitching). There are a few relievers that are decent.