Pirates Q&A with Dejan Kovacevic

Friday, April 20, 2007

Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

The piece comparing the payrolls of the Brewers and Pirates brought as much mail as I have seen since, well, the Buried Treasure piece from 2005.

I never comment on news articles, as it is always is best to let them stand on their own, so I will just get out of the way today and let the readers have the floor in a Q-only format ...

Q: Dejan, after reading the payroll differences between Milwaukee and Pittsburgh, it shows a club WANTING to get better as opposed to the Nuttings just running a business for profit. ... I'm tossing my Pirates stuff today.

Roger Tremont of Elizabeth

Q: Dejan: I really enjoyed your article comparing the Brewers' operation to that of the Pirates. By illustrating that the Brewers operate in an even smaller market than the Pirates, you have put pressure on management to not only raise payroll but also to put a winning team on the field. I always believed that could happen if wise management decisions were made once I read "Moneyball" and recognized the success Oakland had despite a much smaller payroll at the time.

As you have correctly shown, the Pirates have a history of making poor investment decisions and that is the real reason for their lack of success, not the size of the market.

Gus Skeadas of Springfield, Ill.

Q: The Pirates have stated (or intimated, since they don't actually speak or make public statements) that they are comfortable with their budget for a team that is this young. OK, fine. Does that mean that, when some of their young players become arbitration eligible or free agents, they will spend this money? I'd put better odds on Jason Bay being dealt for the 2009 version of Bobby Hill than the Pirates ponying up the market value for a consistent .290/35 HR/100 RBI outfielder.

Another aspect of the revenue argument is that attendance will increase if there is a decent team to support. You can only have so many bobblehead and fireworks nights.

Greg Thompson of Crofton, Md.

Q: Hmmmm, yet we spent how many millions for that new scoreboard and the new sidewalks for the stadium?

Amy Ganser of Brookline, Pittsburgh

Q: Dejan: I think the comments from Doug Melvin about the timing of spending were right on point. Personally, I'm thrilled that the Pirates didn't waste (yes, that's the right term) money on players like Jeff Suppan, Gil Meche, etc. Or worse, an aging vet like Jeromy Burnitz. What's the point in spending money on a stopgap for this team? Even the most blindly loyal fans see through that terrible strategy by now.

My question, really, is about Explanation No. 2: ("Ownership is not spending all it could."). Do you believe that ownership has any responsibility to spend? I really don't. It is, after all, a business. As long as they are getting revenue-sharing money and people continue to be enthralled by bobbleheads and fireworks, why not rake in profit? That sounds like a pretty good (if unsustainable) business model for a few years. It's totally frustrating to witness as a fan of the team. But, as a businessman, I couldn't take issue with this line of thinking.

Mike Kotowski of St. Louis

Q: Dejan, love the show. How is it that Milwaukee outdraws Pittsburgh by half a million people? Was that a one-year blip since the Brewers were OK the year before last?

Isn't that an indication that this isn't as great a baseball town as some of us would like to think it is, since the Brewers haven't exactly bathed themselves in glory over the last decade and a half?

Kevin Allen of Upper St. Clair

Q: Mark Attanasio = Mark Cuban. Got it. Good job, Dejan. I hope you keep on ownership to be at least somewhat accountable while all of us Pirates fans buy into this spend-little-on-young-talent-now-and-spend-more-later-to-keep-them business. If, after 2009, they try to start over yet again with say, Zach Duke, Brad Eldred and a new crop of beginners, I will literally throw Mark Cuban at the Nuttings. I mean it. I will find him, pick him up and throw him on top of them until they agree to sell.

Derek Linz of Burbank, Calif.

Q: The real heat has to be put on MLB, which permits the creaming. In Net conversation with Bucco fans, I keep wishing for one of Pennsylvania's senators or more powerful congressmen to seriously challenge MLB's antitrust exemption until MLB or the Buccos make a serious effort to show, publicly, that the Pirates are putting money into baseball operations.

Thanks for the comparison.

Bill Maloni of Washington, D.C.

Q: Dejan, it is hard for the fans to believe that the Pirates' owners are truly committed to winning when you see the money spent by the Brewers.

Jon McClain of Clifton, N.J.

Q: Dejan, how would the Pirates' lineup look if you added two $10 million position players? My answer: It would look like a viable, competitive major-league lineup. Mark Teixiera and Adam Dunn each has a $9 million salary for 2007, just to throw out some names.

Ian Leyda of East Liberty, Pittsburgh

Q: Don't you think the difference in attendance between the Brewers and Pirates could be made up? When ownership puts a team on the field that doesn't contend after April, no one cares in August. It's just like advertising. The more you spend, the more you can expect in return.

Matthew Greene of Montgomery, N.Y.

Q: Hi, Dejan. Great article (and discussion on ESPN Radio's "Junker and Crow" show) yesterday about the Pirates' and Milwaukee's payrolls.

Blame the Pirates' farm system, ability to draft quality players, acquire players in Latin America and other foreign markets. But to attack the Pirates' payroll as the sole or large contribution to their 14 straight losing seasons was put in its proper place in your radio interview: On hold. Those deficiencies (as you have detailed in previous articles) are the sole reason for their futility.

I know, as fans. we have waited long enough, but I'll wait a few years longer and see if we sign the Bays, LaRoches and Sanchezs beyond free agency to keep this team intact and using free agengy (as in your model, Milwaukee) to find role players and pieces of the puzzle. I just hope that my wait isn't betrayed by excuses in the future.

Brian Pickel of Dormont

Q: Is there any doubt that the Pirates' powers are not taking home every dollar they can? Their ownership doesn't care if the team wins or loses. You know it, I know it, and most Pittsburgh baseball fans know it.

If you didn't, Dejan, why else would you have written the piece about Milwaukee's management?

If you ever want to cover a good baseball team keep writing these types of articles that expose the Pirates' ownership.

Lew Wetzel of Upper St. Clair

Q: Amen.

Cory Humes of Fox Chapel

Q: The payroll question has come up again in today's paper. Who on this team deserves more money considering their production to date? If the players were paid like commissioned salesmen, they would have a hard time explaining to their wives why they did not get paycheck this month.

Arthur W. John of Detroit

Thing No. 32 that makes Pittsburgh great: The overlook at Washington's Landing.

It has one of the most unconventional and serene views of the city, stressing the flow of the Allegheny and the nature on its edges as a framework for Downtown. As much time as I spend there -- and it is quite a lot -- the contrast of so much in the distance against such quiet never stops impressing me.

Beneath the stone benches is a stone sculpture etched into the ground delineating our Point, its three rivers, the various bridges and their relation to Herrs Island, where the Landing residential community sits. It takes a while to get it, but you will.

Two ways to get there: One is to drive onto the 30th Street Bridge -- yes, 30th, not 31st -- and into the community. The other is to bike or walk up the old converted rail bridge that used to ship cattle on and off the little strip of land. But be careful on that bridge. There is a goose up there that has been nursing eggs for about two weeks now, and another goose who hangs out nearby -- the father, I presume, though I will await DNA tests -- will go all Lou Piniella on you if you disturb her.

Until Monday, when that red-eye from LAX will touch down back home and we all, finally, will have seen the last of this link ...

First published on April 19, 2007 at 8:55 pm