Is it the economy?

by rolub on Nov 26, 2008 10:24 AM EST

Latest post from The Sports Economist includes a snippet from the New York Times stating that "...A review of baseball’s transaction history since 2001 showed that the only period featuring fewer signings in the first 12 days of open bidding than this year came in the 2002-3 off-season..."

While the MLB free agent period does not get off to the bang that the NFL's does, and yes, it's a small sample size of 8 years, two guys have signed: Jeremy Affedlt, who while prized among fans such as ourselves is not exactly the big FA name the common fan has heard of; and Ryan Dempster, who from everything I've read was not really shopping his services around the league.

My thought is that talks may be slow due to the fact that none of the free agents expecting to command the top dollar contracts have signed yet. Dempster's contract isn't chump change, but is it anywhere near what Sabathia will get, or even Sheets? Market value has yet to be established, per se, for any offensive player.

On the other hand, I see from tobytobytoby's new fanpost that the Tribe just signed Greg Aquino. Maybe now the dollars will start flowing into the market.

Could it really be economic uncertainty that's causing this, or are we just getting overanxious for news, any news, other than Greg Aquino?

Tweet Comment 22 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Whatever you do, don’t check MLBTraderumors.com.

Steel Nick

by nickjs21 on Nov 26, 2008 10:45 AM EST reply actions

I hear there’s a three-team deal in the works that will send Grady to Oakland, the entire Oakland pitching staff to Pittsburgh, and 30 million Indians to become Indian Indians….

by Logodaedalus on Nov 26, 2008 10:58 AM EST up reply actions

intriguing

by hans on Nov 26, 2008 12:17 PM EST up reply actions

The Indian sub-continent did nothing wrong!

"It's hard to win when you don't score." Cliff Lee, 9/28/05.

by Harry Doyle on Nov 26, 2008 1:42 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs

This might be venturing o/t or into forbidden territory…but I do think it will be interesting to see what the broader economic climate means for sports revenues and sports salaries. As an lay observer, it seems sort of inevitable that the creep of deflation/insolvency throughout the economy will eventually reach the sports world. Perhaps sooner rather than later.

by APV on Nov 26, 2008 11:04 AM EST reply actions

I agree, it’s definitely something that the majority of owners and GMs will be cognizant of when thinking about the next few years. I don’t think that the current slow period is as much economy related as it is the lower-tier free agents waiting for the top prizes to sign and set the market. The current crop of top tier free agents is taking their time and making sure they make the right choice

by Roger Dorn on Nov 26, 2008 11:51 AM EST up reply actions

Well sure. There may be an impact in ticket sales, but the harder hit would be corporate backing: suite rentals, events, catering, ads in stadium and on proprietary networks. Those are hard purchases to justify in tough times. It would be irresponsible for any business to overspend when cash flows aren’t flow-y, and that goes for baseball teams.

I think they should occasionally pick a game nobody’s going to and do the $10 thing like at the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim at the Cleveland Indians of Milwaukee series, but that’s probably unrelated.

by fleerdon on Nov 26, 2008 12:39 PM EST up reply actions

You could actually argue that it has begun already:

GM ends contract with Tiger Woods ($7 mil)
Citibank may withdraw from naming-rights contract for NY Mets new ballpark ($400 mill)

And, while not exactly a company directly hit by the current economic crisis, Microsoft has ended it’s marketing relationship with King James of the Ego.

by macasson on Nov 26, 2008 6:32 PM EST up reply actions

I don’t think there’s any question the economic uncertainty is the main reason for the inactivity. That said, I think there’s a few other factors in play that are contributing to the Tribe’s relative inertia.

First, as mentioned in the Stark FanShot, a welcome “when does this ever happen to us” type scenario where available closers (either through FA or trade) outnumber the teams that need closers, with the closer probably being our 2nd need after the 2B/3B infielder. If you’re Shaponetti, you might as well wait this out until at least K-Rod signs.

Second, I don’t really know how many teams are looking for catching, but it also seems like this isn’t the best offseason to have Shoppach be available because there are other options. Teams are looking at Texas’s surplus first before we might make a play to move Shoppach. The Angels could deal one of Mathis or Napoli. BTW, did folks see that Boston Herald piece today (I think) that not only mentioned Shoppach and Victor, but Carlos Santana?

Third, uncertainty with the injured third-base types a la Crede and Lowell. If we’re at all interested in those guys, it probably makes sense to wait a little longer for medical reports.

All of that said, can’t help but that irrational fear that because of the economy, our payroll goes from $80MM to ($68MM to $72MM) or something.

by cheech99 on Nov 26, 2008 12:35 PM EST reply actions

On the other hand … buy low.

by fleerdon on Nov 26, 2008 12:40 PM EST up reply actions

That fear might not be irrational.

by ken from alexandria on Nov 26, 2008 5:55 PM EST up reply actions

Somewhere it has to give. Almost every year when a big free agent hits the market, the headline reads “largest contract ever”, “biggest deal ever” etc…Even though these owners have far more money and are better off than practically all their fans, they have to be feeling a crunch right now. I’m sure that every owner in the MLB is worse off now than they were a few years ago. So to run a team with a little less money to play with requires finding players with high value. Unfortunately, as we all know most free agents want to be overvalued as much as possible. So until the owners are will to put up a little more or the free agents are willing to sign for a little less, it will be a slow time on the hot stove.

by cclemens31 on Nov 26, 2008 12:47 PM EST reply actions

I think a lot of the inactivity is also because there are 2 top players on the market that will “supposedly” set the market, CC and Tex.

I actually don’t think their contracts will affect the rest of the contracts, but they may affect where the next dominos fall. (CC signs in NY, then Tex to Angels, or vice, versa, etc.)

Obviously the economy is also playing into it as well, but with once the two big studs sign, I’d expect a little more movement.

Also! The winter meetings are in December, so a lot should get rolling at that time as well.

by talonk on Nov 26, 2008 1:42 PM EST reply actions

your first point, which Roger Dorn also mentioned above, is my thought which I thought I was going to expand on, and then just decided to leave it to open discussion.

Which doesn’t mean that the answer can’t be both, in a sense. I think it’s entirely possible that team ownerships are hesitant to be the first to sign one of the more costly free agents because of their own economic concerns, thus not providng the supposed top market value that “lesser” players’ agents will want to work off of.

You know Selig? Ombudsman.

by rolub on Nov 26, 2008 2:00 PM EST up reply actions

I came in to say that.

Plus, I heard on the radio tonight that K-fraud wasn’t even going to talk to anyone until the Winter meetings.

by Toxicadam on Nov 26, 2008 10:01 PM EST up reply actions

Wall St. is waiting on baseball to tell it which way to turn.

Helium Watch: Chuck Lofgren, OF

by jhon on Nov 26, 2008 1:47 PM EST reply actions

CC is directing the economy at this point. Lebron in 2010.

by hans on Nov 26, 2008 3:44 PM EST up reply actions

Looks like Paul Dolan has answered the question as to how the economy will affect the Tribe.

by PatBordersHelmet on Nov 27, 2008 9:55 AM EST reply actions

Buster Olney has an article on ESPN.com about the economy impacting the baseball offseason. He mentions the Yankees declining to offer Bobby Abreu arbitration because they’re afraid he might accept and get a contract in the range of $16 million. Usually the Yankees would be fine with that price, but not in the current climate. Olney said most executives think Abreu will be fortunate to get $8 million, so the Yankees don’t want to risk paying him double that even if it means giving up draft picks.

He says Sabathia, Burnett, and Teixeira will still get their money, but everyone else won’t get what they thought they’d be getting.

The best thing probably is to hit [Grady] 2nd -- Jay

by Buckeye Brad on Dec 2, 2008 11:21 AM EST reply actions

The NY Times also said they’re trying to get Pettite to take a pay cut.

by peter m on Dec 2, 2008 11:32 AM EST up reply actions

What is the secondary market for Yankee luxury boxes like? How many years do the Yankees have their season ticket holders locked in for at the new stadium?

by palcal on Dec 3, 2008 3:59 PM EST reply actions