Why Larry Dolan Needs to Sell the Cleveland Indians

[Nom]

What winning team?

2005, 2007, first halves of 2011 and 2012.

Please don't turn this into the argument that 'if they won consistently, had star players and didn't trade away all their stars the fans would show up!'. We all know that. The question I am raising is if an owner can do all those things are still turn a profit. I don't think so. Which is why I don't blame Dolan for running the team the way they do.

 

[sjeppe]

If they raised the payroll to like 110 million and got players that were actually good to sign or be traded to the team i think the attendance would make up the difference in the payroll. The fans want to see something, make a bold move, sign some big free agents, or make a big trade to take payroll on, and that would put people in to seats IMO.

 

[AZ_]

Fans will quickly realize that free agency is the antithesis of how this club should build.

 

[Huber.]

If they raised the payroll to like 110 million and got players that were actually good to sign or be traded to the team i think the attendance would make up the difference in the payroll. The fans want to see something, make a bold move, sign some big free agents, or make a big trade to take payroll on, and that would put people in to seats IMO.

Only 9 teams out of 30 (all of those 9 being in a much larger market) have a payroll of over 110 million. Now why would Dolan go out and spend money that he would never see again? No matter what moves they make people are still not going to be happy. Plus, have you seen this years free agency group? It's terrible.

 

[GreasySpread36]

2005, 2007, first halves of 2011 and 2012.

Please don't turn this into the argument that 'if they won consistently, had star players and didn't trade away all their stars the fans would show up!'. We all know that. The question I am raising is if an owner can do all those things are still turn a profit. I don't think so. Which is why I don't blame Dolan for running the team the way they do.

2011 and '12 weren't winning teams, they were mediocre teams that had a couple of good months, which most mediocre teams are capable of having. That their couple of good months happened to fall at the beginning of the season doesn't make them winning teams. If a good spring makes you a winning team, a lot of the '70s and '80s teams were "winning teams" too.

Let's please not pretend the Indians are putting out some kick-ass product that Cleveland fans are too stupid to buy into. 2012 will be the fifth straight year and the eleventh year out of thirteen that this club will not finish over .500. If you want to say attendance should be higher that's fine, but just be honest about the kind of club we've been watching for the majority of the last decade.

Like I've said before, I have very little problem with the payroll. But a club in this position had better do very well in terms of drafting and player development and this organization just flat-out hasn't. My problem isn't the fact that they weren't willing to give Josh Willingham what he wanted- it's that they don't have a home-grown guy of that caliber in the organization.

 

[Nom]

2011 and '12 weren't winning teams, they were mediocre teams that had a couple of good months, which most mediocre teams are capable of having. That their couple of good months happened to fall at the beginning of the season doesn't make them winning teams. If a good spring makes you a winning team, a lot of the '70s and '80s teams were "winning teams" too.

Let's please not pretend the Indians are putting out some kick-ass product that Cleveland fans are too stupid to buy into. 2012 will be the fifth straight year and the eleventh year out of thirteen that this club will not finish over .500. If you want to say attendance should be higher that's fine, but just be honest about the kind of club we've been watching for the majority of the last decade.

Like I've said before, I have very little problem with the payroll. But a club in this position had better do very well in terms of drafting and player development and this organization just flat-out hasn't. My problem isn't the fact that they weren't willing to give Josh Willingham what he wanted- it's that they don't have a home-grown guy of that caliber in the organization.

Literally exactly what I said. If fans think the owner should spend, they should probably at least not be last in attendance when the team is decent. I'm not saying the team has been good by any stretch - but there has to be some give and take. If the team is winning, fans have to hold-up their end of the bargain, too.

Last place in attendance give the Dolans an excuse to never spend. Fans should call his bluff and actually show up to the stadium to put pressure on him to spend. Right now he has every excuse not to spend and just collect those revenue sharing checks.

 

[Huber.]

2011 and '12 weren't winning teams, they were mediocre teams that had a couple of good months, which most mediocre teams are capable of having. That their couple of good months happened to fall at the beginning of the season doesn't make them winning teams. If a good spring makes you a winning team, a lot of the '70s and '80s teams were "winning teams" too.

Let's please not pretend the Indians are putting out some kick-ass product that Cleveland fans are too stupid to buy into. 2012 will be the fifth straight year and the eleventh year out of thirteen that this club will not finish over .500. If you want to say attendance should be higher that's fine, but just be honest about the kind of club we've been watching for the majority of the last decade.

Like I've said before, I have very little problem with the payroll. But a club in this position had better do very well in terms of drafting and player development and this organization just flat-out hasn't. My problem isn't the fact that they weren't willing to give Josh Willingham what he wanted- it's that they don't have a home-grown guy of that caliber in the organization.

again that magical crystal ball that were 100% certain that the team would fail in the second half which made the team unwatchable for some reason when they weren't.

 

[elcheato]

again that magical crystal ball that were 100% certain that the team would fail in the second half which made the team unwatchable for some reason when they weren't.

You didn't need a magic crystal ball to see the team wasn't and isn't good enough to make the playoffs.

 

[Huber.]

You didn't need a magic crystal ball to see the team wasn't and isn't good enough to make the playoffs.

You can't predict the future of players getting hot randomly in one of the worst divisions in baseball. This mediocre team was was good enough to compete in the first half and could have in the second half if they didn't give up after the front office didn't make a move.

 

[Nom]

You didn't need a magic crystal ball to see the team wasn't and isn't good enough to make the playoffs.

So you're point is that any year the Indians don't make the playoffs they deserve to have dead-last attendance?

Everyone can tell me why the Indians don't sell out, but no one can explain why they're attendance is so much much worse than teams that suck and have sucked much worse than them.

If you were a businessman from the outside, would you look at this market as an opportunity to make money? Because bad news - sports owners are businessment who want to make money. Gilbert wants to make money. Haslam wants to make money. Illitich is the exception, not the rule.

 

[elcheato]

So you're point is that any year the Indians don't make the playoffs they deserve to have dead-last attendance?

Everyone can tell me why the Indians don't sell out, but no one can explain why they're attendance is so much much worse than teams that suck and have sucked much worse than them.

If you were a businessman from the outside, would you look at this market as an opportunity to make money? Because bad news - sports owners are businessment who want to make money. Gilbert wants to make money. Haslam wants to make money. Illitich is the exception, not the rule.

Yes, I definitely said that when I was just pointing out that the team wasn't good enough to make the playoffs last year and isn't good enough to make it this year.

All a fan had to do is look at the roster and see the lack of overall talent. Should there be more attendance? Sure, but the fact that the team isn't good enough to make the post-season just adds to run of only being there once in the last 10 years, which is bad for public perception.

 

[elcheato]

You can't predict the future of players getting hot randomly in one of the worst divisions in baseball. This mediocre team was was good enough to compete in the first half and could have in the second half if they didn't give up after the front office didn't make a move.

Law of averages. They played above their head in the first half and now are playing below what they should be. They've evened out to the type of team they are, just like last season.

 

[Nom]

Yes, I definitely said that when I was just pointing out that the team wasn't good enough to make the playoffs last year and isn't good enough to make it this year.

All a fan had to do is look at the roster and see the lack of overall talent. Should there be more attendance? Sure, but the fact that the team isn't good enough to make the post-season just adds to run of only being there once in the last 10 years, which is bad for public perception.

Right - but to make any sort of real difference, the owners would have to drop $20-30 million on this team.

My point is that even if the team were to win all year - I don't know that they would make that up. And it is VERY likely they have a situation like '09 when they spent over their heads on Kerry Wood and had to sell off parts because the team wasn't good and attendance stunk.

My point is that with the Browns in town, the Cavs being the darling and no new stadium - the sell-outs aren't coming back. What do you think the realistic ceiling for attendance in this town would be? And how does that number compare to the financial committment (and risk) it would take to achieve?

 

[Nom]

Does anyone know how much gate receipts are split with the road team? This Forbes article lists the Indians' gate receipts as $34 million last year - with attendance being around 1.84 million. (The link has a 'Revenue per fan' but it doesn't appear to mean the revenue of fans in the stadium, it is revenue divided by people in the market area).

If those numbers are anywhere near accurate, the gate receipts for 1.84 million fans means each person was worth $17.40.

The Indians had a payroll over $80 million in '09 and most fans say they broke their promise to 'spend when the time is right' - so I'm assuming they need a payroll of around $100 million for fans to feel they aren't being lied to.

If this year's payroll is $62 million, that means they would have needed to spend an additional $38 million to reach $100 million. At $17.40 per ticket, that is an ADDITIONAL 2.18 million fans this years to cover that much extra payroll. In 2007, with the best record in MLB, they drew 2.275 million. Total.

(I get that this exercise is completely pointless and the numbers I'm using aren't accurate - just trying to stir a conversation on how many additional tickets would have to be sold to cover the 'spending' that most fans want to see)

 

[elcheato]

Right - but to make any sort of real difference, the owners would have to drop $20-30 million on this team.

My point is that even if the team were to win all year - I don't know that they would make that up. And it is VERY likely they have a situation like '09 when they spent over their heads on Kerry Wood and had to sell off parts because the team wasn't good and attendance stunk.

My point is that with the Browns in town, the Cavs being the darling and no new stadium - the sell-outs aren't coming back. What do you think the realistic ceiling for attendance in this town would be? And how does that number compare to the financial committment (and risk) it would take to achieve?

Right now the payroll is around 80 mill, which isn't terrible. Something around 90 million could work, or even at 85 million so I don't see the need to add $20-$30 mill more. Just 5 or 10 would be fine.

Not to mention that the team was apparently willing to give Beltran $10+ million a year, and Willingham something around there for 2 years, so they would have been around the 90 mill mark this year had one of those deals come to fruition. The problem the team has now is that nearly half of their payroll is being spent on dead weight (Hafner, Sizemore, Lowe, Ubaldo, Carmona). Now, lucky for them Hafner, Sizemore and Lowe are all coming off the books this year and they actually have a chance to add a significant piece in free agency. The question now is if they will actually do it, or just use the money in arbitration and sit on the rest.

You're right, they'll never sell out like they did before. The only way the attendance is going to come back is if they string together consecutive years of success (A couple of high 80 win seasons or more). Whether that's fair or not is an entirely different question, but that seems like the only way for it to happen.