Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of highest paid Major League Baseball players/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by The Rambling Man 19:37, 28 April 2011 [1].

List of highest paid Major League Baseball players[edit]

List of highest paid Major League Baseball players (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): Staxringold talkcontribs 03:05, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

While the Athletics FLC is still up it has 3 supports with few issues (all dealt with), seems pretty well dealt with. This one may take some more focus, however, as it's a funkier one-off with no similar articles to work from as a guide. Fixed her up from the near-deletion form it was in, lemme know what you think! Staxringold talkcontribs 03:05, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from Wizardman Operation Big Bear 20:57, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Would it be possible to create a list looking at the highest-paid players in mlb history over time? That would be very difficult to make, though it would certainly go well in this article. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 00:51, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • What parameters? Source 11 is a progression table from $2.5 million to ARod. Could start w/ Nolan Ryan at $1 million/year, but I don't have any source for the 1-2.5 million folks. Staxringold talkcontribs 01:01, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    If we did highest paid per year since 1990, we'd be able to pull it off with just this source at least. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 01:47, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think a good point to aim for would be the abolition of the reserve clause (1975). Not sure if that will be possible, but if it is, you could argue that it's an objective cutoff, given that the opening paragraph of the lead highlights that as a turning point in salary progression. —WFC— 22:19, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would agree that cutoff makes sense, but I have the same issue. I have Nolan Ryan at a million and spotty facts on notable deals prior to that, so I'm not sure how to best fill it in. Staxringold talkcontribs 00:29, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • It might be worth trying to track down whoever originally created this table, assuming it wasn't you. We don't have the sources to do what I've suggested yet, but that person might. —WFC— 01:42, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • No, I didn't. Although given the closeness in both value and date between Catfish' pre-reserve clause deal and Nolan's deal maybe his was the first post-reserve clause record breaker. Then the only question is those 1-2.5 deals (and if that table is accurate it's not many). I'll do some LexisNews searching for newspaper articles, see if they refer to those deals as annual value records. Staxringold talkcontribs 12:10, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I assume Doug Pappas can be considered a reliable source, so his website could be of some use for 1985–89. While this doesn't look reliable, it does provide links to reliable sources, providing a platform to work from. —WFC— 15:39, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Implementing this table now, welcome any comments (just adding refs). Here's a fun fact I happened upon along the way. They compare Eddie Murray's (at the time) record breaking $13 million/5 year deal to businessmen, noting that "For the first time, an athlete has a higher guaranteed annual salary than any American business executive." Those were the days, when $2.6 million was an impressive salary for either a ballplayer or a business executive. Staxringold talkcontribs 20:06, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from WFC

I'll add my sig after each post, because this will probably be done in bits and pieces.

Resolved comments from WFC
*We need a key for the positions. —WFC— 22:19, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • In the Career earnings section, the "salary" column should be renamed "earnings". —WFC— 22:19, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'll reserve judgement on the lead for now, as its makeup would very much depend on the above discussion.—WFC— 22:19, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • A couple of financial footnotes are needed. One in the highest earners of 2010 section, as a disclaimer that we go by annual average salary, and outlining what is and isn't included (along the lines of the one at the top of the table in ref 11). Another in the career earnings section, clarifying that career earnings refer to salary earnings only (unless they don't, but I believe that they do). —WFC— 22:52, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'll add that 2nd footnote right now, but what do you mean by the first? That table doesn't refer to average salary, it refers to salary. By "Average" ARod would have made $27.5, but that's not how the deal was structured. Staxringold talkcontribs 00:43, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Quite right. I didn't realise that the stats tables had detailed season-by-season breakdowns of players' salaries. —WFC— 02:02, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Dunno what that's in response to (he'd obviously be on a deeper salary history list). Also he's probably the worst BBWAA Hall of Fame inductee (the old Vet's Committee inductees don't even count they're so bad) of all time. Staxringold talkcontribs 01:56, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Giants2008 (27 and counting) 22:06, 6 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comments –
  • Seeing as the 2011 season is going to begin shortly, what is the plan for when this list needs updating? We're dealing mainly with a bunch a numbers that are soon to be outdated.
  • Not really, the third table will be entirely unchanged (unless maybe Pujols' strikes a really excellent deal mid season) and only a couple fully new people will enter the 2nd table (at most) while the others can be easily updated. As for the first table, when the data is available I'll update it, not too difficult. Staxringold talkcontribs 00:05, 27 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I, for one, find the use of Alex Rodriguez's nickname to be unencyclopedic here. I use it often myself when talking, and it appears all the time in newspaper and magazine articles, but this is an encylopedia. What's wrong with just using his last name. I see no other players of that name in the list, so there's no need to differentiate.
  • "First, he signed a $252 million/10 year contract with the Texas Rangers in December 2000." I wish we could do without the slash. How about a regular comma instead?
  • Spell out the abbreviation NBA.
  • The comma after "First base is the highest paid position" would be better served as a semi-colon.
  • In the Salary progession table, de-capitalize the last two words in Annual Average Salary.

One more thing: please check that your printed reference publishers are in italics. The first general reference, and some specific cites, have this problem. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 22:06, 6 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Still see a bunch of Sports Illustrated and New York Times cites that need work on the italics. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 23:03, 8 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Done. Stupid templates, when it's "newspaper" parameter you don't italicize. Side question, any chance we could cap Wiz' comment? I've added the table that he requested, and as he's retired it just sits there outstanding, driving away reviews. Staxringold talkcontribs 04:08, 11 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I didn't know that Wizardman retired. That's unfortunate; he was a fine editor and will be missed. Personally, I don't feel comfortable capping another reviewer's comments, but that's just my opinion. Maybe the other directors feel differently. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 23:11, 13 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 12:00, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • Our article refers to him as CC, not C.C., which is correct?
  • " a luxury tax which taxes" a tax which taxes.. reads rather repetitively to my sensitive ears...
  • I think "record-breaking" should be hyphenated...
  • "10 year contract" -> I would think 10-year be hyphenated..
  • Lead image caption, replace second Rodriguez with He as there's no uncertainty as to who you're talking about.
  • Be consistent with diacritics, Aramis Ramirez doesn't have one but his article does, Manny Ramirez has one but his article doesn't...
  • 3 dabs in the progression table, Mark Davis, Dave Stewart and Kevin Brown.
  • What does # of years mean in that table? Is it the Contract duration? We avoid # to represent number ordinarily as well...
  • Pro-rata is overlinked in the notes.
  • "a 10 year deal" vs " the 10-year contract" be consistent with hyphenation. Check the lead for this as well.
  • "$2-$2.5 million " en-dash needed here.
  • "2 months" -> "two months"
  • Note d, a lot of numbers you can replace with words.

The Rambling Man (talk) 16:29, 27 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Resolved comments from Courcelles 23:47, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
*Comments
"Contract duration" need a unit in the progression table
For context, how many HR's does A-Rod have at the end of 2010?
Yes, the Evil Empire spends a lot of money. I'd actually find something on the largest contract by team interesting to include.
  • I would strongly hesitate to add that. First off it's beyond the scope of the article, it has nothing to do with the highest paid MLB player by any measure, that's on the subject of team spending habits. I made the brief Yankees' mention as obviously it needs to be noted, but you're proposing a table I think more appropriate for a page relating to MLB business practices in general. Additionally multiple teams often end up footing the bill for a deal. Staxringold talkcontribs 19:37, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The "Career earnings"- this is nominal dollars, right? If so, make that explicit.

Courcelles 10:00, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: I have just updated the list to 2011 using the 2011 USA Today salary list. Some of these values differ somewhat from the values listed on Baseball-Reference. Wells, for example, is listed at $23M on B-Ref, $26M and change on USA Today. ARod's 32 on USA Today, 31 on B-Ref. Beckett is at 17 on USAT, 15.75 on B-ref. I used this because it is one, collected list and is more up to date (the B-Ref pages still have their divider between 2010 and 2011). Staxringold talkcontribs 17:17, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Also the USA Today values seem to be more widely agreed upon. ESPN, for example, has the same values on it's pages. The only site I've found which repeats B-Ref's #s is Cot's Baseball Contracts (a great page, but I don't think it even meets WP:RS). Staxringold talkcontribs 17:33, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from KV5
Comments from KV5
  • "is New York Yankees' third baseman Alex Rodriguez" - should either be is New York Yankees third baseman Alex Rodriguez or is the New York Yankees' third baseman Alex Rodriguez. In the first, NYY is an adjective, and in the second, it's possessive. Just one or the other.
  • "American professional sports leagues" - comma after (and maybe that could use a link?)
  • What is "hard" quoted from? Anything?
  • "resulting in significantly lower salaries in that period" - "in... in" construction, would be better if second "in" was during
  • "For example" can be removed without losing encyclopedic value
  • Comma after "Herbert Hoover"
  • "two separate record-breaking contracts" - separate can be removed without losing meaning
  • "$252 million" - {{inflation}}?
  • I can add this if you want, but I tend to hold off adding inflation to relatively recent numbers (else basically every figure in every article would need it). Staxringold talkcontribs 03:41, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • I certainly don't think they all need it, but I thought it might be useful for that value since it was a record-breaker.
  • Added. My worry is just that technically as soon as one year passes a figure isn't precisely accurate and therefore there's an argument for inflation. Staxringold talkcontribs 11:58, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Understood; I think as long as you have a defendable argument for those which are shown and those which are not (which you do), you are good to go. — KV5 • Talk • 00:56, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "'stupefying'" - comma after
  • "Despite this" - comma after
  • "Under this deal" - comma after
  • Really? Doesn't feel like that's right. Staxringold talkcontribs 03:41, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • I've read over a couple things and I'm not sure myself now. After work, I'll break out a reference book and hopefully I can get a final word. — KV5 • Talk • 11:22, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • Bedford Handbook, 6th edition, says that commas should be used "after an introductory clause or phrase" (§32j, p.399). This is an introductory prepositional phrase. — KV5 • Talk • 00:56, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I mean... It's not though, it's not a clause of any kind. It's just part of the sentence. Why would you put a break there? Staxringold talkcontribs 01:58, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Because it's an introductory phrase, like I just said. — KV5 • Talk • 10:37, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Added. Still doesn't make sense to me tho, could just as easily be worded "Rodriguez also receives $6 million under this deal..." with no comma, don't see why it's different at the start. There is no break, it's not a separate clause or phrase. Staxringold talkcontribs 11:17, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, it could, and that would be just fine, but it's the sentence order in this case that determines that a comma is needed. — KV5 • Talk • 11:22, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "$252 million, 10-year contract" vs. "$4.5 million/4 year contract" - one format or the other (former preferred)
    • "4 year" still needs a hyphen on this one. — KV5 • Talk • 11:22, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would use "plainrowheaders" in the key table because none of the currently bolded entries are bold in the table
  • "second highest" - should be hyphenated (Wells' caption)
  • "4th highest" - fourth-highest
  • Note a: "Clemens salary data" - Clemens'
  • Note a: "2007 contracts" - comma after
  • Note b: "However" - comma after
  • Note c: "$7.9/3 year contract" - 3-year should be hyphenated, and I'm assuming Viola didn't sign for $7.90.
  • Yes. On this topic, should I add in a similar note that Rickey Henderson also signed a $3 million AAV contract 6 days after Puckett (with one more year)? Staxringold talkcontribs 03:41, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Agree that this would be a good idea. — KV5 • Talk • 00:56, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note d: "$10.3 million annually, three year deal" - three-year
  • Note d: "new, one year contract" - one-year

Yup, that should be all. — KV5 • Talk • 00:59, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support — KV5 • Talk • 11:23, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/List_of_highest_paid_Major_League_Baseball_players/archive1&oldid=1143879525"