opportunity cost of allstar vs. your everyday ballplayers
Roger Clemens or a group of everyday ballplayers; who are you going to take when faced with this decision? The most common answer would probably be Roger Clemens because he is one of the best players in the game, and everyone knows him. However, did you ever think about the economic decisions teams have to make when deciding what player personnel they will keep? Each choice has a cost and benefit. In the case of paying a superstar millions of dollars you have to factor in that those millions of dollars get you to fill one position on the field. A benefit of filling only one position is the fact that a roster spot is a limited resource. On the other hand, with the same millions of dollars you could possible get 5 players instead of just one. Granted these five players are not going to be superstars, but they could be solid players which help your team win. Also, you could use these lower salaries to bring up minor league players to your roster and get them some very valuable experience which in the longrun could help progress your program. So, now that you know major league baseball teams have to weigh economic advantages and disadvantages just like the rest of the world, what would you do as the general manager of a team? Would you just go straight for the superstar, or take you money and spread it around?
1 comment:
This is the type of situation that GM's begin using the Moneyball philosophy - where teams look for "hidden superstars" or players who are bound to be superstars but are currently viewed as underrated. Teams usually have to balance their needs with their budget - often times giving up the chance at the established superstar and having to sign a younger or less known player. Often times, the big money players end up being worth less than the massive contracts they demand (just ask Philadelphia and their contract of Jim Thome or Florida and Carlos Delgado) while cheaper players have ended up producing (ask the Cleveland Indians or Oakland Athletics). Personally, I would opt for quantity over the quality of a superstar - there's a better chance of developing multiple solid players for less of a cost.
Post a Comment