Payroll of a Contender

So I'm getting married in about 17 months (Why 17 months from now? Tulips. Tulips are why.), and it feels weird saying that. And as anyone who has ever been in this position knows, one tries to put on a pretty big and expensive party. It is more or less expected. You spend 12 or however many months planning it - picking the venue, picking the date, getting the vendors, coordinating those vendors and the venue, inviting everyone, and then getting all of those people to actually respond to those invites. Everything builds up to this one (hopefully) joyous day ... and then life basically goes back to normal.

The Braves are essentially in the same situation. They've gotten engaged to Cobb County, and now they're planning their big day - April 3rd, 2017. Over the past however many months, they've been getting ready - picking a site for a new stadium, building the stadium, contracting vendors, coordinating those vendors, and sending out season ticket packets to all those loyal Braves fans. And we'll get all of that build up ... to basically go back to normal.

But in that lead up to the big day, they still have to decide on how big of a party. Do they go the budget-conscious route, risking that going for it in 2017 might hamper future endeavors? Or do they go for it, believing that they can give us a season to remember?

The answer remains unclear, but we talked the other day about what it would take to get to that point. As currently constituted, I think the Braves can win somewhere between 75-80 games next season, which means they need to add about 15 wins this offseason. Again without saying whether they should go for it or not, I mentioned that we need to add context.

Adding players requires resources - in money, players, or both. Acquiring 15 wins worth will likely cost the team a significant amount of both. For today, we'll stick to the money. The first thing we have to ask is how much money are they already spending.

Glad you asked. I just happen to have this chart handy.

The above chart shows the current 40-man roster and their salaries over the next 5 seasons. Anything in purple is from MLB Trade Rumors and Matt Swartz's projections. Anything in red is a team option and is mostly there for visual affect. And everything in black is either confirmed or a small enough number to not significantly skew the totals if I'm off on what they actually agree to.

For 2017, the Braves essentially already have $100-105 million dollars committed to the roster, and they've taken up 36 spots. Last year according to Cot's Contracts, the Braves spent about $108 million, which means that they've basically run up against last year's total. That, of course, leads us back to the beginning - they're entering a new stadium and about to throw a party. That should mean a significant increase in payroll, right?

I went back 10 years and looked at the teams that opened new parks. Again using Cot's, I looked at the year prior to their opening and the year they opened the new park. When you take a look at the data, it averages to an increase somewhere around 12% of the previous year's payroll, and that means that the Braves would see a boost to about $120-125 million dollars. If I did my math correctly, that means the Braves can spend (carry the one ... ) about $20 million for the rest of the offseason (I've already accounted for Bartolo Colon and RA Dickey).

Of course, not everyone fits in that average. We have a pretty wide range of numbers there - from essentially no gain by the two New York teams (which makes sense because they already spent a lot anyway ... this was before the Mets bankrupted themselves) to over 45% by Minnesota and Miami. IF we use those teams as our comparable, the Braves can get up to about $150 million, which leaves like $45 million.

The difference between $20 million and $45 million is pretty significant, but looking at the teams above, I think the Braves are more like Miami, Minnesota, and Washington - teams that should expect significant increases in revenue as attendance numbers rise. The New York teams already spent tons of money, and while they should have seen revenue increases, there was reason not to expect them to spend too much more, and while St. Louis got a new park, they were already selling out the old Busch stadium. So something in the $40 million range makes more sense. Is that enough?

I suppose it depends. If the Braves were interested in someone like Jose Bautista or Yoenis Cespedes, they'd have to trade Matt Kemp or Nick Markakis to make room, meaning they'd likely add about $15 million there. Two FA targets I like are Justin Turner (predicted at $17 million a year) and Ian Desmond ($15 million) because they fit needs, but that would instantly take up about $30 million right there, leaving us with $10 million to play with. If the Braves were to acquire Chris Sale ($12 million) or Chris Archer ($4.75 million), that would further eat into the budget, leaving about $5 million or so for another upgrade around the roster (Brett Cecil - $6 million - maybe?).

But let's stick with the big picture for now. The Braves currently have about $100 million committed in some form or fashion for 2017, and by looking at recently built stadiums, teams have generally either not gained much or gained 35-40% of payroll. My guess (and our hope) is that the Braves are the latter. If not, adding Sale would deplete the remaining payroll, which we've already discussed not being enough to put the team into contention. But it appears that the Braves have about $40 million left to spend this winter, and that's enough for probably 3 significant players, which should be enough to put the Braves in range.

They could, however, choose to go more toward the trade route to reduce costs and deplete the prodigious farm system, which (as you might expect) will be our next topic.