Revenue disparity v Payroll disparity

[Goldfan]

https://x.com/BenVerlander/status/20160 ... 55009?s=20

[mattmitchl44]

So most teams have been from ~50% (#8 Angels at 52.3%) to ~40% (#25 Guardians at 39.4%).

With $373 million in revenue, that would project to about $150-$185 million for the Cardinals, which is where they have been until this deep rebuilding year in 2026.

[Goldfan]

I would guess Cards payroll well under that 42.9% for ‘26 season.

[mattmitchl44]

I would guess Cards payroll well under that 42.9% for ‘26 season.

Probably. If they could find suitable guys to sign on 1-2 yr deals, they might increase that percentage.

[bretto12]

The concept of the post is wrong. Yes, the Dodgers are putting 73% of their income back into the team, but look at that number. Salary of about $550 including the tax. The income disparity is so far out of balance that the Dodgers and the other big market teams can make mistakes and buy their way out of them.
A Cardinal salary of $185m does not allow them to compete with the big market teams.

[Goldfan]

The concept of the post is wrong. Yes, the Dodgers are putting 73% of their income back into the team, but look at that number. Salary of about $550 including the tax. The income disparity is so far out of balance that the Dodgers and the other big market teams can make mistakes and buy their way out of them.
A Cardinal salary of $185m does not allow them to compete with the big market teams.

If the Dodgers, Mets, Jays…..would have payrolls at the 42.9% rate of the Cards they’d STILL have significantly higher payrolls….
They choose to consume most of the their profit to put the best team on the field that Can be bought…..which is the concept or point of post

[mattmitchl44]

The concept of the post is wrong. Yes, the Dodgers are putting 73% of their income back into the team, but look at that number. Salary of about $550 including the tax. The income disparity is so far out of balance that the Dodgers and the other big market teams can make mistakes and buy their way out of them.
A Cardinal salary of $185m does not allow them to compete with the big market teams.

If the Dodgers, Mets, Jays…..would have payrolls at the 42.9% rate of the Cards they’d STILL have significantly higher payrolls….
They choose to consume most of the their profit to put the best team on the field that Can be bought…..which is the concept or point of post

IMO, if you are going to make a comparison, I think you have to compare the Cardinals to all teams, not just a minority of teams.

[JaseMan]

I know I'm not a businessman, but I would buy a baseball team to compete and win. I would not care about the profits.

Profits can come in other ways. But I would want to be a legendary owner.

[Absolut]

The concept of the post is wrong. Yes, the Dodgers are putting 73% of their income back into the team, but look at that number. Salary of about $550 including the tax. The income disparity is so far out of balance that the Dodgers and the other big market teams can make mistakes and buy their way out of them.
A Cardinal salary of $185m does not allow them to compete with the big market teams.

Also assumes the revue is correct. And even if stl put 100% of revenue into payroll (not costs and everything else) they still aren’t there with the dodgers.

Basically if Ben verlanders talking, he’s full of [shirt].hes a schill for his brother and mlbpa

[billybaseball]

Revenue does not mean profit. Teams have expenses and the owners have personal expenses too. It kills me how people are so determined to make their owner light their personal, generational wealth on fire to overpay a free agent.

[CCard]

There's just no excuse to having this low of payroll. They could spend on the team and "fix" there minor league system both. Rubes here falling for the lie only make things worse by giving them sympathy for doing it to the fans. And you know what I mean by "doing it".

[renostl]

The concept of the post is wrong. Yes, the Dodgers are putting 73% of their income back into the team, but look at that number. Salary of about $550 including the tax. The income disparity is so far out of balance that the Dodgers and the other big market teams can make mistakes and buy their way out of them.
A Cardinal salary of $185m does not allow them to compete with the big market teams.

If the Dodgers, Mets, Jays…..would have payrolls at the 42.9% rate of the Cards they’d STILL have significantly higher payrolls….
They choose to consume most of the their profit to put the best team on the field that Can be bought…..which is the concept or point of post

Correct.
Revenue isn't even counted with anything close to being accurate. Teams in large TV markets have an opportunity
to own their own network which in turn can be listed as an investment. Investment revenue isn't team revenue.
Imagine BPV bringing in $250M.

Old Ben has a singular point. IF Miami gets $70M from revenue sharing, their payroll should be much more
than $86M. There is a rule suggesting that their payroll should be 150% of that revenue check. It doesn't
get enforced.

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2026/01/ ... y-cap.html

[Goldfan]

The concept of the post is wrong. Yes, the Dodgers are putting 73% of their income back into the team, but look at that number. Salary of about $550 including the tax. The income disparity is so far out of balance that the Dodgers and the other big market teams can make mistakes and buy their way out of them.
A Cardinal salary of $185m does not allow them to compete with the big market teams.

If the Dodgers, Mets, Jays…..would have payrolls at the 42.9% rate of the Cards they’d STILL have significantly higher payrolls….
They choose to consume most of the their profit to put the best team on the field that Can be bought…..which is the concept or point of post

IMO, if you are going to make a comparison, I think you have to compare the Cardinals to all teams, not just a minority of teams.

I’m with you…..we’ll start comparing the St. Louis Cardinals to the bottom 1/3 of MLB teams…..easy enough. Don’t want to another thing about the high revenue larger market LA, NY, Phil, BOS…..fair enough?
Actually it’s a ridiculous statement. Many here complain on and on about these teams spending to where the Cards can’t be competitive.
And when facts are presented showing that LA, NY, PHil has appreciably higher % of payroll to Revs and MAKE LESS $$$ than the Cards annually. The response it that we shouldn’t look at that data. LA NY PHIl, could hit the 42.9% mark and pocket LARGE sums of money each season and still have higher payroll than Cards…..but they don’t they spend most of their Revenue on the TEAM when comparing apples to apples. The Cards are 20th and will be even lower this year