(The following is being syndicated from The Captain’s Blog).
Now that the All Star Game has passed, players from the American and National Leagues will go back to being strangers until the two circuits meet up again in the World Series. However, before we say goodbye to this vestige of interleague play, let’s wade once more into the never ending DH debate that has become so commonplace this time of year.
David Ortiz is one a few high-priced, full-time DHs.
Earlier in the interleague schedule, I examined the relative fairness of playing interleague games with two sets of rules and concluded that, in aggregate, the net impact was a wash (however, DH and pitcher performance at the plate does correlate to interleague success). More recently, Dan McLaughlin shifted the debate from the field to the board room by suggesting that economic impact of the DH is what creates the greatest conflict between to the two leagues.
Writing at Grantland.com, McLaughlin concludes that because the DH amounts to a full-time position, players filling the role require a higher salary, which in turn inflates the payrolls of American League teams. To prove his theory, McLaughlin points to the $13 million gap in each league’s average payroll over the last five years, a disparity that increases to $20 million when only considering teams above .500. Finally, to support the notion that the DH plays a role in this discrepancy, McLaughlin calculates an average “full-time DH” salary of $6.8 million, which is more than two times the league-wide average.
Anecdotally, the connection between the DH and payroll seems compelling. However, there are several flaws in the logic. For starters, defining a full-time DH can be an arbitrary process. McLaughlin identified 57 full-timers since 2006, but the baseball-reference play index shows only 46 who had at least 300 plate appearances as a designated hitter during one season in that period. Also, not every full-time DH was signed to fill the role. The Yankees’ Jorge Posada is a perfect example. His $13 million salary is one of the highest among all DHs in 2011, but he was signed to be a catcher. In many cases, highly paid DHs are usually winding down big money contracts signed when they played other positions.
Even if you accept the $6.8 million average salary as being accurate, you still can’t conclude the DH outlay is an incremental expense. Although some American League teams might spend more money because they have a full-time DH, others are just as likely to cut back elsewhere. For example, if a team has a prolific DH, they might decide to accept less offense at another position. If so, the added expense of the designated hitter would be mitigated. Similarly, just because a National League team doesn’t have to spend money on a DH doesn’t mean they can’t use the money elsewhere. If NL teams are really saving $7 million on average, wouldn’t at least a few spend that surplus in other areas?
Average Payroll by League: 1988 to 2010
Source: USA Today payroll database
If the DH really is a significant driver of higher payrolls in the American League, we should be able to observe that relationship over a longer period than just five years. However, one does not exist. According to USA Today’s payroll database, from 1988 to 2005, there was little difference between each league’s average payroll. Over that span, AL teams only paid out approximately $1.5 million more than their NL counterparts. Also worth noting is that NL had a higher average payroll from 1988 to 1991 and again in 2003.
So, if the DH is not the reason the American League currently has a much higher average payroll, what (or who) is? The knee jerk response would be to “blame” the Yankees, but the growing disparity between the leagues has actually occurred while the Bronx Bombers’ payroll has been leveling. Although the Yankees’ 2010 payroll was still a relatively high 15% of all AL player expenditures in 2010, when it peaked at 20% in 2005, the two leagues were only separated by an average of $3 million.
Yankees Payroll Compared to League Averages: 1988 to 2010
Source: USA Today payroll database
Even if the Yankees can’t be blamed directly, perhaps the rising tide in the Bronx has lifted all American League ships? As evidenced by the chart below, the largest payroll increases since the end of the 2005 season have belonged to American League teams. Meanwhile, the Yankees’ payroll has stayed relatively flat. After setting the bar high in the first half of the decade, it could be that the rest of the American League has since been playing catch-up, a theory that would explain why AL payrolls exploded just as the Yankees’ reached a plateau.
Payroll Increases, by Team: End of 2005 to End of 2010
Source: USAToday payroll database
Although it could take some time to reverse, especially with the financial struggles being faced by the Mets and Dodgers, the payroll discrepancy between the leagues seems to be based on the underlying competitive environment, not the DH rule. A variety of catalysts could shift the balance back toward the NL, but the most likely scenario would involve a team (maybe the Phillies?) having a similar buoying effect on the rest of the league. Until then, owners in the senior circuit should enjoy their higher profit margins while they last and quit lamenting the payroll of the Yankees.
Average Revenue and Operating Profit, by League: 2001 to 2010
Note: 2002 data not available
Source: Forbes.com
If you enjoyed this article, please consider sharing it!
9 Responses to Is the DH Really to Blame for Inflated Payrolls in the American League?
Leave a Reply
TIQ IQ
Well done. The most compelling point, to me, is that the DH argument supposes that teams look at their needs and then build their budget accordingly, when it seems more logical to assume that they build their budget based on revenues and potential revenues going forward and then figure out where they can spend. So if an NL team and AL team have the same revenues, you wouldn’t expect the NL team to pocket some money just because they don’t need a DH. They’d just spend elsewhere. The reasoning you present is more compelling and is what I suggested yesterday on twitter, that the disparity in payroll comes from the Yankees and the efforts of teams to keep up with the Yankees.
Since this is a topic on DH, I would want to bring up something Jon Heyman has brought up, and been touched on on MLB rumor.
According to Heyman C.C. Sabathia “has done some selling on the Yankees” to his friend Prince Fielder. Now I don’t see this happening, as he would cost a ton for simply a DH, but would anyone even be open to the idea if the Yankees did show interest? With Alex’s injuries piling up more and more on a yearly bases, and Teixeira being really streaky, an large middle of the order bat like Fielder wouldn’t be the worst thing the Yankees could get. If the Yankees trade Montero for Jimenez, or another starter, there would certainly be an opening at DH. The problem would come 3 or so years from now, when Alex is going to have to move off of 3rd.
While it would certainly cause a log jam in a few years the Yankees would be looking at one hell of a lineup in the mean time. the middle of the order would consist of Granderson, Teixeira, Fielder, Cano, and Rodriguez in 2-6 spots.
Again I don’t expect it to come close to being realized, but it’s a fun topic to discuss I think.
Also according to MLB Rumor J.C. Romero intends to opt out of his deal with the Nationals and sign a minor league deal with the Yankees if Washington doesn’t promote him to the Major Leagues by Friday, according to ESPN.com’s Buster Olney.
I do blame the Yanks. They raised the going payroll level and other American League teams were forced to pay more. Even though the Yanks’ payroll has leveled out recently, I think the higher level is now the default for the AL.
The analysis depends on what time period you select, doesn’t it? Looking back 10 years, the AL has clearly outspent the NL. One possibility is that the DH rule permits AL teams to sign position players, especially power bats, to longer contracts, since the possibility of being a DH in the last years makes a longer contract palatable. Therefore, elite position players tend to drift to the AL. That accounts for the AL being a better hitting league. Of course, if there are better bats, you have to hire better pitchers. Thus, overall, AL teams have to spend more to be competitive.
I would have loved to go back to 1973, but the only reliable data I could find began in 1988. The overall point is that not until recently have AL teams significantly outspent their NL counterparts. In fact, there have been times when the reverse is true. If having a DH is an inherent cost contributor, it should be evident throughout the era, not just over the last five years.
1. Since pitchers have to hit in the NL, surely they should be receiving more compensation than their AL counterparts? More seriously, wouldn’t NL teams, as members of the Church of the Double Switch, likely spend more on their bench players? And if not, why not?
2. I do agree that the answer is likely not the Yankees directly, but indirectly by forcing teams like Boston, Minnesota and Anaheim to spend more to compete. The Phillies could very well have a similar effect on the NL if they remain competetive.
Great article, William. I think you hit the nail on the head with your conclusions.
I actually wrote about the Yankees spending during the 90′s before the Yankees payroll realllly skyrocketed. Here’s the link incase your interested in some related reading.
http://www.yankeeanalysts.com/2011/02/ten-years-of-spending-1990s-edition-4
I think every problem in baseball can be traced back to the Yankees directly. We are clearly and evil organization, and the scourge of the earth. It’s like we actually want to win or something, the nerve.
I think you could argue that if not for the Yankees, there might be less interest in baseball nationwide, so therefore much fewer complaints. It really is the Yankees fault!