In 2009, the Cubs had the third highest payroll in all of baseball.*  Considering that the club is a large market team, and considering the revenue the franchise generates, the Cubs should be near the top of the charts when it comes to their payroll budget. 

*In previous posts, I’ve indicated that the Cubs had the fourth highest payroll.  I was wrong.

But what exactly are the Cubs getting for $140 million?  How does the team compare to other teams at or near the top of the list of the biggest spending teams.

Here’s the hypotheses I’m working under: I believe, based on payroll alone, that the Cubs should be a perennial play-off contender.  The Cubs outspent their next closest rival (based on payroll) in the NL Central by $32 million in 2009 (for comparison, the Florida Marlins entire 2009 payroll was about $35.5 million).  I’m quick to concede that money won’t buy a division title, but it certainly should put you in the mix year after year.

I’m also of the belief that while the Cubs spend with the big boys, they don’t get nearly the value for their money that the other big spenders get.  One example of this is that the Cubs only player on the 2009 NL All-Star team was Ted Lilly, and it could be argued that the only reason he was on the team is because the rules require that every team be represented.  Money may not buy championships, but it should at least buy all-star caliber players.

What I propose to do is compare the Cubs roster (sans bench players and bullpen arms) to the rosters of the six teams with the highest payrolls.  My hope is that this comparison will provide some clarity to this rather murcky notion I have that the Cubs roster simply does not stack up to other big spending teams.

The six teams I will be looking at, along with their 2009 player payroll are:

• New York Yankees ($206,811,689)
• New York Mets ($139,102,235)
• Chicago Cubs ($137,945,612)
• Detroit Tigers ($129,598,000)
• Philadelphia Phillies ($127,957,380)
• Boston Red Sox ($122,624,689)

I have to concede up front that my methodology is not scientific.  I’ll be relying on statistics to help me make my calls, but in the end, I’ll be going off the board if I feel it’s warranted.

For hitters, I’ll be looking primarily at WAR (Wins Above Replacement) and OPS+.  Before I go any further, let me explain each stat.

Tango Tiger, the creator of WAR, has a lengthy, detailed explanationof WAR on his site.  If you’re interested, take a look.  It really is interesting. 

For our purposes, I’ll simply define WAR as the number of wins you can expect from a player above what you could expect from a minimum wage (by baseball standards) replacement.  In other words, think of what you would get from a middle-of-the-road call up from AAA.  WAR is the number of wins you can expect from a player over or under that AAA call up.

OPS+ starts with OPS, which is determined by simply adding together a player’s On-Base Percentage (OBP) and Slugging Percentage (SLG).  A player with a .350 OBP and a .400 SLG has a .750 OPS.  To get OPS+ takes the OPS and adjusts it to the player’s league and ballpark (some ballparks are conducive to higher OBP and/or SLG than others).  The resulting number is then normalized so the average hitter has an OPS+ of 1.00.  In simple terms, a hitter with an OPS+ over 1.00 is an above average hitter.  An OPS+ below 1.00 indicates a below average hitter.

For pitchers, I’ll be looking at WAR, ERA+, and WHIP.  ERA+ is defined as a pitcher’s ERA adjusted for ballpark and normalized to 1.00.  Like OPS+, the average pitcher has an ERA+ of 1.00.  An ERA+ above 1.00 indicates an above average pitcher.  An ERA+ below 1.00 indicates a below average pitcher.

WHIP stands for Walks plus Hits per Inning Pitched.  To determine this stat, simply add the number of walks a pitcher allows to the number of hits he allows.  Then divide the sum of those two figures by the number of innings the player pitched.

For closers, I’ll be looking at the same numbers I’ll be using for starting pitchers, but I’ll also be considering the closer’s number of saves and blown saves

I’ve decided not to include bullpen pitchers (other than closers) in my analysis.  There’s no doubt that there are good bullpens and bad bullpens, but the pitchers in the bullpen tend to change throughout the year much more than other positions, so it’s tough to accurately compare one bullpen to another, especially using just the opening day roster.

Tomorrow, I’ll start my analysis by looking at first basemen.  See you then.