08-21-2009, 02:28 PM
<!--quoteo(post=59287:date=Aug 21 2009, 12:20 PM:name=Sandberg)-->QUOTE (Sandberg @ Aug 21 2009, 12:20 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I must be missing something here. Let's take some fake but maybe close numbers. If the Sox have a $115 payroll, and $25 million of it is being paid by another team, then really they have a $90 million in commitments because they would not (or could not) pay the salary otherwise. If the Cubs have a $140 million payroll and are paying it all, then they have a $140 million in commitments.
The bottom line is how much money a team is paying to put it's team on the field. The "payroll" moniker seems like some stupid accounting trick and is pretty much irrelevant if you're looking for information that matters to a team.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I see it the same way you do Sandberg. And, in fact, the Cubs are also on the hook this year for 11mm for Viz, Freel, Gaudin, Marquis, Gathright and Bako. Sox on the hook for 3mm for McDougal and Ozuna. That doesn't count against their respective payrolls if you just add up the guys on the roster. But it is a liability they have for players.
The bottom line is how much money a team is paying to put it's team on the field. The "payroll" moniker seems like some stupid accounting trick and is pretty much irrelevant if you're looking for information that matters to a team.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I see it the same way you do Sandberg. And, in fact, the Cubs are also on the hook this year for 11mm for Viz, Freel, Gaudin, Marquis, Gathright and Bako. Sox on the hook for 3mm for McDougal and Ozuna. That doesn't count against their respective payrolls if you just add up the guys on the roster. But it is a liability they have for players.