Pirates' Chatter 2005

[Va Beach VH Fan]

Yeah, another sparkling performance by Wells...

3 gopher balls....

I tell ya, the "McClendon must go" rhetoric is really picking up steam, and I like it....

The common opinion I've seen in the press is if they're sucking around Memorial Day, they'll make the move....

Jimmy Leyland, come on back !!!!!

[Gmoney]

What's worse....the Pirates or Pilates?

[Va Beach VH Fan]

Very funny, about as funny as "your" show is...

[Va Beach VH Fan]

Pretty impressive win last night vs. Zambrano and the Cubbies...

Overcame 3 different two run deficits...

And David Ross, courtesy of a 75,000 trade with the Dodgers, hits his 3rd HR in 19AB's with the Buccos, hitting .421....

They've got a decision to make when Cota is finished with his rehab at AAA.... Cota is out of minor league options, and they've already got Benny Santiago....

But this Ross guy is hitting the hell out of the ball, gonna be interesting what they do...

What am I saying, they'll fuck it up....

[POJO_Risin]

They'll probably trade them all to the Mets for Piazza's yet to be born son...

[Va Beach VH Fan]

But he's gay, right ???

[POJO_Risin]

Originally posted by Va Beach VH Fan
But he's gay, right ???

You're hoping...

[Va Beach VH Fan]

Bastard....

[POJO_Risin]

Wouldn't you call me a bitch?

lmfao...how you doin' Va...

and hey...you started it you slappy bitch...

[Va Beach VH Fan]

Little minor league report action for ya today...

Took my youngest son to watch the Indianapolis Indians (Buccos AAA) vs. your hometown Norfolk Tides (Mets AAA) this afternoon...

Did my research online to see who would be on the mound this weekend for the Indians, and decided on going today so we could watch Zach Duke hurl....

For the majority of the time, the dude was just throwing BB's.... Gave up a 2 run dinger late in the game, which Indy won 8-4... Overall it was a pretty much dominating performance....

This guy should be in a Buccos uniform this year, as should Ryan Doumit, their top catching prospect....

Doumit cranked a 3 run dinger in the 1st inning....

My son got about 5 autographs or so, including Rich Thompson, another prospect they're predicting will be heading to the Burgh one of these days...

Kinda disappointed in Duke and Doumit though... All of the other players signed for autographs for the kids, but those two did not... Maybe because it was after Duke's warmup session in the bullpen, but it wouldn't have hurt him to sign 10 autographs....

[POJO_Risin]

...especially in AAA...

the Pirates have some serious youth...

honestly...I hope they don't waste it...

Having Pittsburgh roll with the youth and keep some of them does us shit markets good...

I would Love to see a Pirate/Indian series...a couple of years from now...

[Va Beach VH Fan]

I'm starting to get the impression that they're really getting gunshy about promoting these guys to the dance....

I mean really, what the fuck could it hurt ??

Let's pretend for a second that I'm Littlefield, McClatchy, and McClendon all rolled up into one (no snide comments please... )....

Right off of the bat, I do everything in my power to trade Tike Redman, Ty Wigginton, Craig Wilson, Daryle Ward, Kip Wells, Josh Fogg, Jose Mesa and Benito Santiago, asking for prospects in return....

Now I realize that the return on these guys isn't going to be optimal, but the more prospects, the better the chances they might turn out to be eventually MLB-ready...

Then, I promote Ryan Doumit (for Santiago), Zach Duke (for Wells), Ian Snell (for Fogg), Rich Thompson (for Redman), Brad Eldred FROM AA (for Wilson AND Ward), and another pitcher to replace Mesa's spot... Note I didn't say for Mesa, Mike Gonzalez should be the closer now, and for the forseeable future....

And let's not forget, they've already got Sean Burnett and John VanBenschoten out for the year with arm surgery....

Then with the roster revamped, out the door goes McClendon, and Littlefield is right behind him....

I struggled with Littlefield's dismissal, but for every Giles for Bay/Perez trade, there's a Aramis Ramirez/Kenny Lofton for Jose Hernandez/Matt Brubek/Bobby Hill trade....

[Va Beach VH Fan]

A couple of excellent articles this morning about the Pirates ownership and their finances....

First, the finances...

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/05121/497194.stm

Pirates' profit is there, but where is it going?
Sunday, May 01, 2005

By Dejan Kovacevic, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

The Pirates do not, as a rule, divulge their finances. Not even when a third-string shortstop signs a contract.

But one dollar figure always is available to the public through other means, and that is, perhaps, the most relevant one for a team in jeopardy of a 13th consecutive losing season:

The player payroll of $33.6 million is second-lowest in Major League Baseball.

This is no radical departure, of course. The Pirates have been at or near the bottom of that scale most of the past decade.

The difference now is that only three teams -- the Pirates, Kansas City Royals ($36.9 million) and Tampa Bay Devil Rays ($29.7 million) -- are below $40 million this season. Only five others are below $55 million. The Pirates' payroll is less than half the average of $73 million.

Where once the Pirates could point to a wide array of have-nots and primarily blame economics for their annual failures, they are increasingly stark in their isolation.

And that raises three fresh questions this year:

Why did the Pirates' payroll increase by only $1.4 million from 2004 while two teams in similar markets, Milwaukee and Cincinnati, increased theirs by more than 30 percent?

Why has the dramatic upswing in national revenues being distributed by MLB to the Pirates made little visible impact?

What is the Pirates' ownership doing with the profit it made last year and the profit it anticipates this year if it is not spending it on the players?

The only people who can answer definitively are the Pirates' owners, but they are a private company and have no legal obligation to open their books. The team rejected the Post-Gazette's request to divulge specific financial information for this article.

A Post-Gazette analysis of the team's finances -- compiled over the past two months with the help of sources familiar with the finances of the Pirates and other teams, sports economists and trade publications -- projects that the Pirates will make a $12.8 million profit in 2005. That is before debt payments, interest and taxes, and it is assuming no additional money spent on players.

The average team last season made a profit of $4.4 million, according to Forbes magazine's annual survey.

Kevin McClatchy, the Pirates' managing general partner, is adamant that the ownership group is following a prudent business course and that it is not pocketing profits.

He said the team has chosen to apply most of that profit toward a debt that is estimated by knowledgeable sources at $110 million. The rest, he added, is being used for capital projects such as the $2 million scoreboard the Pirates bought for PNC Park this year.

"Not one owner in this group is taking dividends," McClatchy said. "We put any money that we make right back in the franchise."

Sharing the wealth

MLB's current labor agreement, ratified in 2002, was the first to bring significant revenue sharing. The system requires teams at the upper end of the revenue scale, such as the New York Yankees and Boston Red Sox, to trickle down some of their locally generated money to teams at the bottom.

Because large-revenue owners feared their money would go directly into the small-revenue owners' pockets and stay there, a rule requires teams to spend all revenue-sharing income to "improve performance on the field." Teams that receive revenue-sharing money must file a letter of certification with MLB each April that details how they did so.

The Pirates received $1.8 million in revenue sharing in 2001, the last year before the current agreement. Last season, they received $13.3 million. This season, MLB projects that they will receive $18.1 million or more.

That is roughly $17 million the Pirates were not collecting in 2001, the year that PNC Park opened. But the player payroll has fallen by nearly $25 million since that year, when it was a franchise-high $57.8 million. The team reported a $1.2 million loss after their first season in PNC Park.

Commissioner Bud Selig said last week that MLB never has had to "confront" the Pirates or any franchise about compliance with the rule.

"There is no team that has received revenue sharing that's not spending it on the team," he said.

Bob DuPuy, MLB's president and chief operating officer, said revenue-sharing beneficiaries are not limited to using the money on major-league payroll.

"Some clubs have used the funds to directly impact their major-league roster, some have used them to sign draft choices, others to improve their minor-league system," DuPuy said. "The Pirates have clearly utilized the monies received as revenue sharing to improve their team."

It is not difficult to circumvent the way revenue-sharing spending is reported, some experts say. Owners easily can disguise which money goes where by saying that it all is lumped into one central pool. From there, they can do anything with it.

Two leading economists believe that approach is common.

"Revenue sharing has enabled teams to put more money into player payroll. But the fact is, a lot of them are not doing that," said Andrew Zimbalist, noted author and professor of economics at Smith College in Northampton, Mass. "You could be paying off debt. You could be paying front-office people. You could be expanding your facilities. Or you could be taking profits. That's what's happening in some places, and I wouldn't be surprised if McClatchy was doing it."

Allen Sanderson, economist at the University of Chicago who studies baseball's inner workings, said low-spending teams now can find a way to profit from being losers, thanks to revenue sharing.

"You have owners who are doing the right thing and making their teams better, and you have owners at the other end," he said. "You could have an owner who says, 'Hey, I can go to the bar and put nine drunks out on the field and maximize my profit.' Even a bad baseball team wins 40 percent of its games. Why should he spend an extra $50 million to win that extra game or two each week?"

Sanderson made clear he was pointing to the Pirates.

"It's conceivable that somebody could just market the ballpark as having nice views of Downtown, great food and giveaways. At that point, if you can sell that, the quality of the team might not matter at all. It might not be what the fans or taxpayers of Pittsburgh want, but it's lovely from the ownership standpoint."

In December, the Post-Gazette asked McClatchy if the Pirates had spent all of their 2004 revenue-sharing money in the minor-league system. Clearly, it was not used to boost the major-league payroll, which had decreased.

"No, we didn't pour all of it into the system," he replied. "We have spent more there than we had. Much more. But we're also trying to get the team back afloat, to balance the ship with our debt."

Paying debt is not one of the permissible uses of revenue-sharing money. McClatchy has since denied using that money to address debt.

"We are in full compliance with all regulations," he said.

One way to ensure that teams spend the money appropriately would be to implement a minimum payroll. MLB's owners offered to install a $40 million payroll floor when bargaining with the players' union in 2002. But Donald Fehr, the union chief, rejected it on the grounds that the union opposes a salary floor just as it opposes a salary cap.

Sanderson said the union has been hurt by that stance because, in his view, teams such as the Pirates are not paying as much to players as they could be.

"Donald would be better off being less consistent on that position," Sanderson said. "The league should be able to say to its member teams that there is a price of admission to participate, whether that's $40 million or even more. If you don't want to pay $40 million after you're getting revenue sharing, you're better off selling the franchise."

"The rules are in place now, but they're not being enforced by the commissioner's office," Zimbalist said. "And this just doesn't make sense when you look at teams like the Yankees and Red Sox that are putting tens of millions of dollars into McClatchy's pocket and into other pockets. The idea is to create more of a balance so that teams like Pittsburgh aren't always dragging at the bottom of the division. Eventually, people in Pittsburgh will just stop going to games, and that will hurt all of baseball."

Selig and DuPuy defended their system for monitoring how revenue sharing is spent. Selig added, though, that it will "tighten up" in the next two years.

Selig expressed confidence that revenue sharing will take a greater role in restoring competitive balance to the game as the pot grows. The total pool has gone from $169 million in 2002 to $220 million last year to, Selig projects, $300 million this year.

"There are teams today that are competitive because of revenue sharing, but there's work to be done," Selig said. "There is ample revenue sharing. Do we need more? Yes, we do."

McClatchy recently criticized some of his fellow owners for what he felt was an irresponsible increase in free-agent spending. "I don't know what happened, if they drank some funny water, but they all decided they were back on the binge," he told reporters Jan. 28.

"I'm sensitive to Kevin McClatchy's comments," Selig said. "Baseball needs to succeed in those markets. We need to succeed in Middle America. Kevin McClatchy's arguments are correct in that we can't afford to do that. We think we're on the road to resolving those issues, but there's work to be done."

Counting the money

More national money is heading to the Pirates this year than the $18.1 million in revenue sharing.

They will make $19.3 million from MLB's television contracts with Fox and ESPN. They also will receive their first annual payment of $1.96 million from MLB's recently signed 11-year contract with XM satellite radio.

MLB Advanced Media, baseball's umbrella for Internet ventures, could bring the Pirates $6 million to $8 million annually in the near future. But the team is not receiving any money from it this year.

The Pirates also do not benefit directly from MLB's luxury tax that large-revenue teams must pay for having payrolls above $128 million. That money goes into a general pool for player benefits, an industry growth fund and developing foreign talent.

Total projected national revenue for the Pirates: $39.4 million.

That is enough to cover their entire major-league payroll, with almost $6 million to spare.

At the local level, the Pirates will receive $10 million for their FSN Pittsburgh television rights and $2 million for their KDKA-AM radio rights.

Revenue from ticket sales will not be known until after the season, but it is not difficult to project.

In 2001, when all teams opened their books for Congressional hearings, the Pirates reported $48.6 million in ticket sales after averaging a franchise-record 30,837 fans in PNC Park's first year. The average ticket price that year was $19.51, but the team's actual take at the gate was $19.95 per patron when luxury seats were included.

The average ticket price today is $17.08. Average attendance last season was 21,107, but season-ticket sales are up by 2,000 this year, which points toward a general attendance increase. If the team were to average 23,000, including the luxury seats, that would bring $32.6 million.

There also is revenue from ballpark concessions, advertising, a $2.3 million payment from PNC for naming rights, minor parking revenue and other ancillary income. In 2001, the Pirates reported $26.2 million in such income. Taking 76 percent of that figure to account for the drop in attendance -- then adding 4 percent to account for increases in the price of concessions and other variables -- the adjusted projection for this year would be $20.9 million.

Total projected local revenue: $65.5 million.

Grand total for revenue in 2005: $104.9 million.

The total revenue reported by the team in 2001 was $108.7 million.

The Pirates' expenses beyond the major-league payroll include the partial funding of their minor-league system, signing bonuses of draft picks that can reach seven figures, travel costs, salaries of front-office staff and $11.5 million to operate and maintain PNC Park. The latter is the team's second-largest expense. This year, the team also budgeted $3 million for capital projects, including PNC Park's new scoreboard, and $775,000 to major-league players whose contracts were bought out last season.

In 2001, the Pirates reported the sum of those types of expenses to be $58.5 million.

If that figure is the same this year -- the Pirates had 11 front-office layoffs in 2003 and PNC Park has reduced its usher staffing by more than a quarter, but the costs of scouting, developing talent and maintenance of facilities has risen industry-wide -- that would put total expenses at $92.1 million, including the major-league payroll.

That would leave an unspent $12.8 million.

Roger Noll, a professor at Stanford University with a specialty in sports economics, described that amount as "marginally profitable."

That excess could be wiped out quickly, too, if the Pirates choose.

General manager Dave Littlefield is authorized by the owners to increase the major-league payroll up to $40 million, should he choose to acquire new players. When other expenses are counted, that leaves Littlefield about $4 million in real wiggle room.

Another variable is how much the team elects to use to pay down debt. The Pirates' estimated debt of $110 million -- about $10 million less than the industry average -- generally would require an annual payment in the range of $6 million.

Debt includes all future years of contracts and deferred payments owed to players, as well as stadium cost overruns and general loans. All are issues for the Pirates. They owe $25.1 million in future contracts and deferred payments, and they still owe toward their share of the $44 million they were required to contribute toward PNC Park construction.

McClatchy, who has said that the Pirates lost $30 million in their first three years in PNC Park, described the team's debt as manageable, but he made clear he would like to reduce it.

"We're better off, I think, if we go ahead and pay down debt than if we put it into one $3 million player who isn't going to make an impact for us right now," he said. "This is the part that people aren't going to like to hear, but I'm not going to let happen to this franchise what happened to the Pittsburgh Penguins under their previous ownership."

The Penguins declared bankruptcy in 1998.

"We've done the difficult part," he added. "I see things improving from here."

McClatchy said ownership's plan is to address debt so that the Pirates can stay within MLB's required debt-to-franchise-value ratio of 40 percent and be able to sign young standouts such as Oliver Perez and Jason Bay to long-term contracts. The Pirates narrowly are in compliance with the ratio now, according to multiple sources.

McClatchy cited the Aramis Ramirez trade of two years ago as a "glaring example" of the team's failure to follow such a path. Ramirez was dealt to the Chicago Cubs for much less than his worth because the Pirates were under pressure to move salary quickly to fall into debt compliance.

"I think we're getting into shape now where we can sign who we want to sign out of our group," McClatchy said. "I think we need to keep these guys that we have, and I think we will. I see things getting brighter. I see us going in the right direction."

The Pirates have another large chunk of revenue coming their way soon, although it will be a one-shot deal.

The Washington Nationals franchise is owned by the Pirates and the other 28 teams, who united in 2002 to buy it for $120 million when it was the Montreal Expos. That franchise is for sale with a price tag of $350 million. At least seven individuals or groups have filed applications to enter the bidding, and a sale is expected by July.

The Pirates' profit if the asking price is met would appear to be $7.94 million, but the Expos/Nationals have incurred additional expenses since the original purchase. That money will be deducted from the sale profit.

Closing the books

The Milwaukee Brewers are the Pirates' cousins in too many ways.

They share 12-year losing streaks that are the longest current slumps in any of the four major professional sports. They moved into their new ballparks in the same year, 2001. They promised their fans that those facilities, funded mostly through tax money, would allow them to compete with the big spenders. And they failed to deliver. On and off the field.

Attendance soared in the Brewers' first season at Miller Park, but when the team performed poorly, attendance dropped dramatically. That brought huge losses and forced ownership to infuse capital of $11.7 million the year after the stadium opened. The franchise's debt reached a peak of $171.3 million.

Citing those hardships, ownership dropped the payroll last year to $27.5 million, lowest in baseball.

There are two differences, though, between the Brewers and Pirates.

One is that the Brewers' payroll is up to $40.2 million this season, a 46 percent increase. Cincinnati, another National League Central Division rival, did likewise, the Reds raising theirs from $46.6 million to $61.9 million, a 32 percent increase.

Two is that the Brewers have addressed the public's concerns about their finances by opening their books.

Last year, the team ceded to intense pressure and allowed two panels -- one from the Wisconsin legislature, the other a group of business executives -- to audit nearly every aspect of its finances from 1994-2003, even executive pay. The Brewers said they wanted taxpayers to understand that they were not pocketing national money or the rewards from the new stadium. MLB officials called the act unprecedented.

The Pirates' choice to keep their books closed, despite the public subsidizing of PNC Park, is their own. DuPuy, the MLB president, said, "The decision to publicly disclose club finances is entirely up to the individual clubs."

The same is true of the Reds, who made a profit of $10 million last year and will not discuss payroll, even now that they have boosted it.

There is another difference between the Brewers and Pirates.

The Brewers have a new owner, Los Angeles investor Mark Attanasio, who bought the team for $220 million in January from the Selig family, which had owned it for decades. Attanasio immediately boosted the payroll, then, last week, signed star pitcher Ben Sheets to a four-year, $38.5 million deal. He predicted that payroll could increase to as much as $55 million within a year or two. He also called for additional investors to help address the team's debt of $100 million.

The Pirates are not for sale. McClatchy allowed in December that "there could be a time when I look at taking myself out of this job," but he added that he had no plan to consider altering his role until after 2006, when the Pirates will play host to the All-Star Game.

A decision to sell the franchise would not be McClatchy's alone, even though he is the only voting member of the four-man board of directors who has two votes. Limited partner G. Ogden Nutting, a West Virginia newspaper publisher, has had a greater influence in the franchise's workings in recent years. He increased his stake with a capital infusion last year and had his son, Robert Nutting, added as a limited partner. The other limited partner is North Carolina businessman Donald Beaver.

If they were to sell, the owners could expect quite the payday. McClatchy and his original partners bought the Pirates for $90 million in February 1996. The team had the lowest revenues and attendance in baseball just before that and shared Three Rivers Stadium with the Steelers.

Because of PNC Park, the franchise reasonably could be expected to bring a price similar to the Brewers' $220 million. Forbes magazine estimated the Pirates' current worth at $218 million.

[Va Beach VH Fan]

And now, the ownership...

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/05121/497197.stm

Smizik: McClatchy has broken his promise to fans
Sunday, May 01, 2005

By Bob Smizik, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Elsewhere on these pages there is a thorough examination of the Pirates' finances and a discussion of whether owner Kevin McClatchy is in violation of, at least, the spirit of the Major League Baseball revenue-sharing plan. The money the Pirates receive from revenue sharing -- which was about $13 million last year and could be as much as $18 million this year -- is, according to the agreement, to be plowed back into baseball operations. Some people think McClatchy is not doing that.

Truth be known, it's nearly impossible to determine whether McClatchy is in compliance with the letter or the spirit of that agreement.

What is not impossible to determine is that McClatchy is in flagrant violation of the spirit of another agreement, a far more sacred one. The agreement in question is the one he has with the baseball fans of the Pittsburgh region, the one that stipulates he owes it to these fans to field a competitive team.

When McClatchy first broached the idea of building a new baseball stadium shortly after buying the team in 1996, there was strong opposition to public financing of it. In fact, a referendum that would have allocated public money to the project was overwhelmingly rejected by the voters of the region.

But the dream of a new ballpark didn't die despite the clear message sent by the voters. It didn't die because a new stadium carried with it not just the continuation of the century-old tradition of baseball in Pittsburgh but the very real possibility of a return to winning baseball. The politicians and civic leaders saw to it that McClatchy got his stadium, and, in defiance of the voters' wishes, they built it mostly with public funding

Implicit in the construction of what was to become PNC Park was the promise -- made by McClatchy -- that the Pirates would field a competitive team. We heard time and again the new stadium would be a panacea for what ailed baseball in Pittsburgh. The revenue it produced would allow the Pirates to not just compete but to be a contender.

That was a bold-faced lie.

The Pirates have had a losing season in every year of McClatchy's ownership. In his first five seasons -- 1996-2000 -- the Pirates averaged 73.7 wins a season. PNC Park opened in 2001, at which time the Pirates became worse -- not better. They averaged 70.5 wins in the first four seasons of PNC.

Time and again McClatchy has broken the spirit of the agreement he had with the fans. Not only have we seen nothing but losing baseball, but we've also seen massively disheartening moves that have weakened the franchise.

Within the past 22 months, the Pirates have traded their three best players, Aramis Ramirez, Brian Giles and Jason Kendall. Before that, they traded their best pitcher, Jason Schmidt. These were exactly the kind of trades the Pirates were not supposed to have to make once PNC Park opened.

The most egregious of these trades was the one that sent Ramirez, the best hitter the organization had developed since Barry Bonds, to the Chicago Cubs for practically nothing. But that wasn't the half of it. In making the trade, the Pirates showed they were in such a financial disarray they couldn't live up to the terms of a contract that had been drawn up little more than a year earlier.

There was another punch to the face to baseball fans this season when the Pirates' payroll came in at $33.6 million, the second lowest in baseball. The team might as well be playing at Three Rivers Stadium.

But now come the most mystifying words of all. In the Post-Gazette's examination of the Pirates' finances it was learned the team will have gross revenue exceeding $100 million this year.

In the first season of PNC Park, McClatchy let it be known the team had exceeded $100 million in revenue. It was an astonishing figure at the time and enabled McClatchy to have a payroll of almost $58 million.

Now similar gross revenues can't come close to allowing such a payroll although the Pirates have revenues to cover that payroll before they sell so much as one ticket.

McClatchy has an explanation for it all. Some of it makes sense, some of it doesn't.

Some of it probably has to do with the fact McClatchy does not control the team the way he once did. West Virginia publisher G. Ogden Nutting has put significant cash into the team in recent years and because of that has had more say in how the team is run. Nutting is a mysterious guy. Not much is known about him. But what everyone knows about him is he's a bottom-line guy.

If it were up to McClatchy the payroll probably would be higher.

But that does not alter one basic fact. McClatchy has broken his promise to Pirates fans and the way the team is going it's not likely he'll ever be able to make good on his word.

[POJO_Risin]

All that being said...

there are Leyland rumblings...