The Baltimore Orioles are the best deal in baseball, clinching the playoffs Tuesday despite $107 million in salaries that projected an 81-81 season.
They are on pace to win 17 more than their salaries justify, the 25th-best deal since 1998. This season’s Red Sox (-16 wins, 476th “best deal”) and Texas Rangers (-22 wins, 504th of 510 seasons) are among the worst deals of all time.
In raw terms, teams win an average of one game for every $1.4 million dollars spent. However, there is obviously a huge law of diminishing returns in baseball, in which there is no salary cap. In 2005, the Yankees spent $205 million in salary which would equate to $326 million dollars when you factor that salaries are now 58% higher than in 2005. Obviously, you cannot just divide their salary by $1.4 million and conclude they should have won 229 games in an 162 game schedule. The actual formula that projects a team’s wins is:
Projected Wins = 54.5 + (3 x (Squareroot of ((Salary / Average Salary) * 100)))
The following chart shows the best 25 deals and the worst 10 deals since 1998, with all 2014 teams and where they rank.
Billy Beane has put together five of the top 12 deals including the unbelievable record of more than 100 wins twice in seasons in which Oakland’s salaries were below $40 million, which would translate to below $70 million even if adjusted for 2014 averages. These were the teams that inspired the Moneyball book and movie.
The A’s project to win 13 more games than their salaries justify this year–third best behind the Orioles and Angels. However, it has become much more difficult for a team to exceed projections by the margins Beane achieved now that most of his statistical valuations of players are used by all teams.
Thanks to the Steve the Ump website for putting together the salary lists here, which I then adjusted to 2014 equivalents for this table.
Best deals | Year | Team | Wins | Salary (2014 equiv) | projW | Above $ proj |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 2001 | Seattle Mariners | 116 | 135,122,916 | 83.7 | 32.3 |
2 | 2001 | Oakland Athletics | 102 | 60,389,374 | 74.1 | 27.9 |
3 | 2002 | Oakland Athletics | 103 | 67,734,774 | 75.2 | 27.8 |
4 | 1998 | New York Yankees | 114 | 184,031,684 | 88.6 | 25.4 |
5 | 2008 | Tampa Bay (Devil) Rays | 97 | 56,340,352 | 73.4 | 23.6 |
6 | 2004 | St. Louis Cardinals | 105 | 127,033,628 | 82.9 | 22.1 |
7 | 2013 | Oakland Athletics | 96 | 67,618,570 | 75.2 | 20.8 |
8 | 2000 | Chicago White Sox | 95 | 64,393,521 | 74.7 | 20.3 |
9 | 2012 | Oakland Athletics | 94 | 65,037,986 | 74.8 | 19.2 |
10 | 2011 | Arizona Diamondbacks | 94 | 66,410,881 | 75.0 | 19.0 |
11 | 2012 | Washington Nationals | 98 | 95,533,685 | 79.1 | 18.9 |
12 | 2003 | Oakland Athletics | 96 | 81,468,819 | 77.2 | 18.8 |
13 | 2002 | Anaheim/Los Angeles Angels | 99 | 105,361,137 | 80.3 | 18.7 |
14 | 2002 | Minnesota Twins | 94 | 68,665,542 | 75.3 | 18.7 |
15 | 1998 | Atlanta Braves | 106 | 172,945,287 | 87.6 | 18.4 |
16 | 2011 | Tampa Bay (Devil) Rays | 91 | 51,915,755 | 72.6 | 18.4 |
17 | 1998 | Houston Astros | 102 | 135,378,706 | 83.8 | 18.2 |
18 | 2007 | Cleveland Indians | 96 | 85,928,887 | 77.8 | 18.2 |
19 | 2010 | San Diego Padres | 90 | 47,812,644 | 71.9 | 18.1 |
20 | 2005 | Cleveland Indians | 93 | 66,201,182 | 75.0 | 18.0 |
21 | 2012 | Cincinnati Reds | 97 | 96,552,578 | 79.2 | 17.8 |
22 | 2010 | Tampa Bay (Devil) Rays | 96 | 90,976,587 | 78.5 | 17.5 |
23 | 2013 | Tampa Bay (Devil) Rays | 92 | 64,531,901 | 74.7 | 17.3 |
24 | 2006 | Minnesota Twins | 96 | 94,110,399 | 78.9 | 17.1 |
25 | 2014 | Baltimore Orioles | 98 | 107,406,623 | 80.6 | 17.1 |
34 | 2014 | Anaheim/Los Angeles Angels | 102 | 155,692,000 | 85.9 | 15.6 |
60 | 2014 | Oakland Athletics | 90 | 83,401,400 | 77.5 | 12.8 |
81 | 2014 | Kansas City Royals | 89 | 92,034,345 | 78.6 | 10.5 |
84 | 2014 | Washington Nationals | 94 | 134,704,437 | 83.7 | 10.3 |
91 | 2014 | Pittsburgh Pirates | 86 | 78,111,667 | 76.7 | 9.7 |
116 | 2014 | Seattle Mariners | 87 | 92,081,943 | 78.6 | 8.3 |
122 | 2014 | St. Louis Cardinals | 89 | 111,020,360 | 81.0 | 8.0 |
136 | 2014 | Florida/Miami Marlins | 79 | 47,565,400 | 71.9 | 7.0 |
154 | 2014 | Cleveland Indians | 83 | 82,534,800 | 77.4 | 5.8 |
173 | 2014 | Milwaukee Brewers | 85 | 103,844,806 | 80.1 | 4.6 |
193 | 2014 | Detroit Tigers | 90 | 162,228,527 | 86.5 | 3.6 |
199 | 2014 | San Francisco Giants | 89 | 154,185,878 | 85.7 | 3.3 |
217 | 2014 | Tampa Bay (Devil) Rays | 79 | 77,062,891 | 76.6 | 2.3 |
255 | 2014 | Houston Astros | 72 | 44,544,174 | 71.3 | 0.6 |
273 | 2014 | Toronto Blue Jays | 83 | 132,628,700 | 83.5 | (0.3) |
276 | 2014 | New York Mets | 78 | 89,051,758 | 78.2 | (0.4) |
278 | 2014 | Atlanta Braves | 80 | 110,897,341 | 81.0 | (0.5) |
282 | 2014 | Los Angeles Dodgers | 92 | 235,295,219 | 93.1 | (0.8) |
319 | 2014 | San Diego Padres | 75 | 90,094,196 | 78.4 | (3.4) |
350 | 2014 | Chicago White Sox | 73 | 91,159,254 | 78.5 | (5.1) |
357 | 2014 | Cincinnati Reds | 76 | 112,390,772 | 81.2 | (5.5) |
370 | 2014 | Chicago Cubs | 72 | 89,007,857 | 78.2 | (6.4) |
395 | 2014 | New York Yankees | 82 | 203,812,506 | 90.4 | (8.3) |
405 | 2014 | Minnesota Twins | 69 | 85,776,500 | 77.8 | (9.1) |
455 | 2014 | Philadelphia Phillies | 75 | 180,052,723 | 88.3 | (13.7) |
466 | 2014 | Arizona Diamondbacks | 67 | 112,688,666 | 81.2 | (14.7) |
467 | 2014 | Colorado Rockies | 64 | 95,832,071 | 79.1 | (14.8) |
476 | 2014 | Boston Red Sox | 71 | 162,817,411 | 86.6 | (15.8) |
501 | 2012 | Boston Red Sox | 69 | 203,417,018 | 90.4 | (21.4) |
502 | 2010 | Seattle Mariners | 61 | 124,437,450 | 82.6 | (21.6) |
503 | 2002 | Milwaukee Brewers | 56 | 85,843,165 | 77.8 | (21.8) |
504 | 2014 | Texas Rangers | 62 | 136,036,172 | 83.8 | (21.9) |
505 | 2011 | Houston Astros | 56 | 87,525,456 | 78.0 | (22.0) |
506 | 2003 | New York Mets | 66 | 189,933,683 | 89.2 | (23.2) |
507 | 2002 | Detroit Tigers | 55 | 93,968,944 | 78.9 | (23.9) |
508 | 2008 | Seattle Mariners | 61 | 151,284,361 | 85.4 | (24.4) |
509 | 2004 | Arizona Diamondbacks | 51 | 117,915,895 | 81.8 | (30.8) |
510 | 2003 | Detroit Tigers | 43 | 79,697,422 | 77.0 | (34.0) |
COMMENTS
Please let us know if you're having issues with commenting.