<body><div><figure><img src="https://img.particlenews.com/image.php?type=thumbnail_580x000&amp;url=4UuPM4_0wPUQKvK00" alt="https://img.particlenews.com/image.php?url=4UuPM4_0wPUQKvK00" width="1210" height="806" ></figure>In the 21 years since the publication of Moneyball, MLB owners and their useful idiots in the media have spent a lot of time and energy trying to convince you of one thing above all else: that spending money on baseball players is a bad thing. If watching the Red Sox slide down the payroll rankings isn’t enough to convince you of how ardently FSG believe this (and if John Henry’s own words aren’t enough), here’s a new metric to consider. “The Scrooge Index” ranks teams based on the percentage of total revenue they spend on player payroll. The Mets, who spent an estimated 102% of their total revenue on payroll (meaning, if these numbers are to be believed, they are slightly in the red) ranked number one on the index, with the Dodgers, Diamondbacks, Blue Jays, and Royals rounding out the top five behind them. The Red Sox, however, are all the way down at number 25, having allocated just 40% of the team’s total revenue to payroll. The only four teams spending less than the Sox in a relative sense are the notoriously cheap Rays and A’s, and the Tigers and Reds, who play in the 12th and 31st largest markets in America, respectively, compared to the Sox, who play in the 7th.Before you go running to the pitchfork store (and if you don’t know where to go, just head to the pitchfork district in Cypress Creek; it’s on 3rd), there are a couple of things to consider. First, player payroll is far from the only expense incurred in the running of an MLB team. For instance, the Braves, who were tied with the Phillies for sixth on this list, currently carry approximately $500 million worth of debt, most of which is related to the real estate development project that surrounds Truist Park. The Braves also spend an additional ~$50 million on baseball operating costs separate and apart from player payroll. So, in other words, just because the Red Sox carried a payroll of $224 million against revenue of $577 million, that doesn’t mean they have an extra $353 million lying around to spend on starting pitching. But the other thing to consider is that, aside from the Braves, who are publicly owned and, thus, legally obligated to report their financials, these revenue numbers are merely estimates. This is because MLB owners generally refuse to open their books — not to municipal governments while they hold them hostage and demand that taxpayers build them a new ballpark, nor to the players union during CBA negotiations. In fact, it appears that the methodology used to create the Scrooge Index may actually underestimate team revenue, as it pegs the Braves’ 2023 revenue at $521 million, compared to the $582 million that the Braves actually reported to the SEC. (And, by the way, that $582 million doesn’t even include the non-baseball revenue the Braves generated from their real estate project. And, yes, the Red Sox are currently engaged in one of those real estate projects of their own.) Moreover, we’re only talking about operating income here, i.e. the money directly generated by buying and selling the product of baseball. The Scrooge Index doesn’t consider the general increase of team valuations, which is where owners really make their money. John Henry purchased the Red Sox for just $660 million in 2002. Two decades later, the team is worth an estimated $5.69 billion.So while the Scrooge Index estimates that the Sox generate $577 million every year, remember that this akin to an obstructed view seat at Fenway: we’re not getting the whole picture. If you consider team valuation, along with things the like new MGM Music Hall and the forthcoming real estate development, the Red Sox could be even richer than we think.Ok, now you can go to the pitchfork store. </div></body>

Mountain View, CA

NewsBreak

The Red Sox Are The Fifth-Cheapest Team In Baseball

In the 21 years since the publication of Moneyball, MLB owners and their useful idiots in the media have spent a lot of time and energy trying to convince you of one thing above all else: that spending money on baseball players is a bad thing. If watching the Red Sox slide down the payroll rankings isn’t enough to convince you of how ardently FSG believe this (and if John Henry’s own words aren’t enough), here’s a new metric to consider.