Updated 2011 Dynamo Salaries
by Zach Woosley on Sep 12, 2011 8:13 PM CDT
Email
PrintHere are the final numbers from the Players Union for base salaries and guaranteed compensation. I don't know about you, but there sure seems to be some wasted money on this list. For example, the Dynamo are paying Carlo Costly nearly a half million in reported pay (there could be more allocation money involved) and all we've gotten is a red card...and he's only here for a handful of games. Money well spent if you ask me...do I detect some sarcasm there?
Whatever, still time to prove me wrong I suppose. Take a look at the numbers and say what you will.
| PLAYER | BASE SALARY | GUARANTEED COMPENSATION |
| Ashe | $80,000.00 | $84,500.00 |
| Boswell | $210,000.00 | $210,000.00 |
| Bruin | $80,000.00 | $125,000.00 |
| Camargo | $168,000.00 | $178,000.00 |
| Cameron | $220,000.00 | $245,000.00 |
| Carr | $74,813.00 | $79,063.00 |
| Ching | $375,000.00 | $412,500.00 |
| Clark | $93,713.00 | $98,713.00 |
| Costly | $335,000.04 | $425,583.37 |
| Cruz | $80,000.00 | $123,000.00 |
| Davis | $235,000.00 | $278,062.50 |
| Deric | $42,000.00 | $42,000.00 |
| Dixon | $45,000.00 | $50,000.00 |
| Freeman | $150,000.00 | $160,833.33 |
| Garey | $80,000.00 | $81,250.00 |
| Hainault | $135,000.00 | $148,125.00 |
| Hall | $85,000.00 | $94,375.00 |
| Moffat | $56,700.00 | $56,700.00 |
| Navas Cobo | $42,000.00 | $46,250.00 |
| Newton | $32,600.00 | $32,600.00 |
| Robinson | $120,000.00 | $120,000.00 |
| Sarkodie | $65,000.00 | $110,500.00 |
| Soto | $32,600.04 | $38,225.04 |
| Taylor | $57,500.00 | $62,500.00 |
| Watson | $75,000.00 | $91,875.00 |
| Weaver | $89,250.00 | $97,500.00 |
You can see salaries for all players in the league here.
Finally, just some food for thought...Galaxy Payroll: $14,661,978.77 - Dynamo Payroll: $3,492,155.24
48 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Hopefully
Costly’s salary is pro rated. Kudos to the FO for taking a chance on him, it was a good move despite the outcome so far.
Carlos would have to literally carry the team the rest of the way to earn his pay.
Taking a chance
I’m not at all giving Costly a pass for his red card or his performance up to now, but I think after watching his form prior to joining us many of us agreed that he seemed like a very quality striker. We’ve also talked about how you’re going to have to pay more to get more, and Costly is a glimpse of that. I do hope for his sake and ours that he starts putting it in the back of the net and soon (like, Saturday) and the floodgates will open from there. But it would take a pretty good torrid pace at this point to justify signing him if we can find someone at the same price but who is younger and quicker. Don’t get me wrong, I think he can be the bridge between Ching and Bruin but it would be tough to justify paying that much if he’s not producing.
As for some of the others on the list, we’ve gone over this quite a few times but its nice to see the compensation list so that when discussing who we should keep or trade or waive we’ve got some numbers to back it up (of course, not that the FO cares about our opinion but still). I’d like to think some of our proposals have more clarity now that we see the numbers. Boswell, Freeman and Robinson should go but I’m a bit shocked because Taylor and Watson, while the former is a fair player and the latter is a talented headache, are relatively cheap. Dixon is a steal and I can see Canetti talking to Dom (for what his input is worth) about using the kids more since they’re talented, hungry and cheap. And speaking of great deals: wow, Moffat at $56K…he’s been an absolute revelation and is cheap as chips. He will definitely be back, his value to the team and of course in terms of cap space is probably the best we’ve got. And assuming Dom puts Camargo out there the rest of the way and delivers on what he’s shown I would definitely keep him if we can sign him to around what he’s paid now. That being said, we should still look to bring in Sanchez on loan to try him out because as RedAce said in another post regardless of whether or not Camargo is our CAM we still need a backup.
Great stuff :)
Agree with Ginge
With Ching’s Columbus participation in doubt, Bruin coming back from injury- Costly’s red was an ALL ABOUT ME foul.
Missed opportunity- Costly taking the Chingless team on his shoulders against the Crew and scoring the game winner.
Instead, we have maybe not quite fit Ching (if @ all), Weaver, a no game time since injury Bruin, Carr, or Garey. YIKES!
Thanks, Carlos, for putting the im on potent- not that we weren’t somewhat toothless upfront anyway. As always- if Ching is out or not scoring, who takes up the slack (um, that involves actually scoring, not near misses).
BTW- since we know his weaknesses, let’s put it to Julius James…
Fair points
Yeah, it was bone-headed that he did that…sadly, though, he’s not alone there. Ching got himself red-carded in another game we needed at a time when we needed him…I know, we should expect more from mature players like Costly and Ching but it does happen. Again, I’m not a Costly apologist its just I’m trying to be objective about it…
As I said on another post
I don’t think Dom will be that objective. In fact, his comments would probably not be PG.
by playtherapy on Sep 13, 2011 10:03 AM CDT up reply actions
True but
then again, look at the Watson situation. Poor effort + poor choice of words seemed like a trip to the reserve team yet there he was playing at KC. Perhaps out of necessity, but that same necessity might put Costly back out there on Saturday
Proof is in da puddin
He’s gonna have to prove himself
by playtherapy on Sep 13, 2011 10:15 AM CDT up reply actions
Oh I agree
at the end of the day and the season, his results will tell the tale. Don’t score or only score meager goals then it doesn’t justify the pay. Start putting away 1 per match from here on out and then we’ll talk
5 Goals in 5 games???
Ummm, how bout scoring a first? That is, if he doesn’t get benched for the red.
by playtherapy on Sep 13, 2011 10:38 AM CDT up reply actions
????
I don’t quite get why the GUARANTEED COMPENSATION is higher than the base salary. is that how much has to be paid out if they decide to waive the player?
by Futbol anonymous on Sep 12, 2011 11:07 PM CDT reply actions
Not sure either
papabear typically has great insight on MLS salary machinations, hopefully he can weigh in on this
I don't really have any insight
I just usually have the freedom to go look stuff up and find out. Too much going on right now for me to go and try to figure it out…though the guess about performance bonuses makes as much sense as anything I can think of.
"If my hips had pockets, I wouldn't wear pants at all." @NotBurtReynolds
64 percent of all the world's statistics are made up right there on the spot
82.4 percent of people believe 'em whether they're accurate statistics or not
I don't know what you believe but I do know there's no doubt
I need another double shot of something 90 proof
I got too much to think about
Venturing a guess
I wonder if guaranteed compensation is basically performance bonuses on top of base salary…but again, strictly a guess
Say Whaaat?
Overpaid For me (off Guaranteed comp):
Boswell
Carr
Cruz
Freeman
Robinson
Sarkodie
Watson
Weaver
Underpaid:
Moffat – WTF?? Guy can barely afford a lap dance and is one of the most consistent and best first team contributors – pay the man!!
:)
For me I look at it like this: what is their value to the team vs what their compensation is. When viewed like that, I say the following need to go
Boswell (a good, solid defender but we have a much better one in Cameron)
Carr, but only if we find someone better for around the same price
Freeman (same thing as Boswell, only we need to be putting Sarkodie in his place)
Robinson
Weaver, but only if we find someone better because as much as I’m not a fan of him he is consistent
And yeah, Moffat is a steal and we need to lock him up for at least 2-3 years
I was surprised too
Moffat deserves a better pay! I say we all pitch in and give him some extra money lol. Sarkodie get’s payed WAY TOO MUCH and Dom barely pays him and same with Watson
Cruz
Remember his age- 21. Lotsa upside on this guy.
That's why
I think his & Sarkodie’s pay are justified because they’re still young and have lots of upside. Also, its their guaranteed pay as opposed to base compensation…I’m not sure what counts against the cap but I’m just speculating that guaranteed pay is base + bonuses. As we get more from our younger players we’re going to see Sarkodie and Cruz involved alot more
Important Note
Sarkodie, Bruin and Cruz are all Generation adidas and do not count against the salary cap. adidas and MLS cover their salary cost.
--
"You live and learn. At any rate, you live." -Douglas Adams
Managing Editor of Dynamo Theory
Yo si le voy, le voy al naranja!
Forgot
about that….wow, makes it all the more sweet. But is there some type of limitation on that? In other words, does their GA status count only on their initial contract and does not apply for a new contract?
GA Status applies until MLS determines the player has done enough to “graduate”. I fully expect Cruz to finally graduate next season and there’s a good chance Bruin might too. Sarkodie will probably remain in the program at least one more year.
--
"You live and learn. At any rate, you live." -Douglas Adams
Managing Editor of Dynamo Theory
Yo si le voy, le voy al naranja!
by Zach Woosley on Sep 13, 2011 10:24 AM CDT up reply actions
Grazi
ok…that’s different but I do agree with your assessment that it would be reasonable to expect Cruz to “graduate” next season and depending on Bruin’s form, he might as well. Had Sarkodie played most of the season he might too but as you said, I could see it happening after next year. But hey, if Bruin & Sarkodie remain GA next season that’s about $140K in base compensation that doesn’t count. That’s almost Camargo’s pay, which is nice to think we’d have that free cap space to either keep him (Camargo, depending on his play) or someone else. So effectively if they stay GA we get an extra player we can put on the payroll
Grazi as in Grazzini @ 48k
And we can’t find a quality CAM on the cheap…
by playtherapy on Sep 13, 2011 10:41 AM CDT up reply actions
4-2-3-1
If Dom is reading this, I’d also ike to propose an uneducted and unrealistic concept for next season – “formation change”. I was thinking about this during a particularly boring work meeting this morning and felt like we may have more success trying a 4-2-3-1 next year as below?
Costly or Ching
Davis Alvaro Sanchez Clark
Moffat Camargo
Ashe Hainault Cameron Sarkodie
And can we please ditch Watson, Weaver, Cruz, Freeman.
Was it Einstein that said doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result is the definition of insanity?? if not, he probably should have….
Consider the morning rant over :)
Cruz is a player for the future
It’s easy to forget he’s just 21.
Boy oh boy
Einstein’s quote has been working overtime here lately at DT, and that’s not a good thing. I said as much recently that our defensive and offensive combinations simply have not been putting us over the top; in other words, we concede goals at a slightly higher rate than we score them. And yet we basically keep the same line-up week in and week out.
You could make the case for a formation change and that’s actually an intriguing formation and line-up you’re proposing. Though I agree with play that we need to keep Cruz and MAAAYBE Watson, simply because he’s a relatively cheap back-up player (at least base compensation).
Galaxy Payroll: $14,661,978.77 - Dynamo Payroll: $3,492,155.24
--
"You live and learn. At any rate, you live." -Douglas Adams
Managing Editor of Dynamo Theory
Yo si le voy, le voy al naranja!
Boom. And there it is.
Do you have that as a percentage of gross income for both? Might add to the story….
I’d love to see those numbers and I have to think the Galaxy make more money, but that information is kept tightly locked away typically.
--
"You live and learn. At any rate, you live." -Douglas Adams
Managing Editor of Dynamo Theory
Yo si le voy, le voy al naranja!
by Zach Woosley on Sep 13, 2011 9:19 AM CDT up reply actions
Sadly
we might be the better ROI for AEG…and from a business perspective, why mess with something that works? Again, as Zach said unfortunately they keep that info over at Langley so we may never know…its just we seem to be run as a shoe-string operation but since we have relatively low overhead costs and operating expenses I’d imagine our income-to-expense ratio is pretty nice.
I'm sorry
but the difference is all with the price of three players. We are at the cap, so if we signed three DP’s that would replace the three highest salaried players we have. The whole they spend more in LA than here thing means nothing to me, and in fact it should mean that we have a deeper squad.
But the point is
if we’re owned by the same company (AEG), why is one team (LAG) allowed to spend almost 5x as much as the other team (HOU)? The cap for all teams is what, $3million or so? In order to get better you’re probably going to have to go above the cap, and it seems that we’re allowed to juuuuuust peek over the cap (and if we’re over the cap it seems like we’re told it damn sure better be good) whilst LA smashes through it like it was a warm-up
Interesting stuff
I wonder what the Dynamo is ranked based on the payroll and how the teams with the highest payrolls are doing based on the standings. LA has the most points and I am guessing they have the most expensive team but then again New York has to be spending somewhere around that too with very crappy results being that they are under us in the standings
Good point
and a cautionary note that its important to first of all have the money to spend and second, to spend it wisely. And perhaps NYRB falls into that second category of not spending so wisely…I’m hoping we learn lessons and we see where some of the better talent is and start aiming higher from there. We don’t need to spend LAG money but if someone quality is available we need to have the money to spend as well
There will be no new majority owner
AEG wants a piece of the Dynamo Park pie, and will never leave here because of that.
If Oscar de la Hoya and the Brener Group were more active in their ownership activities, this might help, but both seem to be passive investors at best. The truth of the matter is that AEG is in control, and will stay in control for some time.
That being said, it’s quite possible that they might invest more once the new stadium is in place. But I have no illusions that they will ever, ever invest as much here as they do in the Gals. The one hope I have is that that team will fail in the playoffs again. Interesting, isn’t it? I have no stake in that team and could not care less about them (They’re not FC Frisco, after all!) , but I want them to lose. And the only real reason for that is I want what AEG cares about to fail. They treat us like crap, and I wish only sadness and ill fate on them, and if that means the Gals suffer, then good.
Of course, they start investing in us, and I take it all back. (Though not the part about wanting the Gals to lose.)
"We don't care who finishes second." -- Celtic's Peter Lowrie
This is why
we need to start the DT Lottery Ownership Fund. Everyone chips in $1 a week and we’ll pool it together and get lottery tickets for a pot >$50MM.
Once we win, pay a small dividend to everyone and then invest the rest; a mixture of aggressive-growth, nominal growth and long-term bonds. In about 2 years, bring the pot up to about $100 million and then make our move to become either a majority or minority owner.
How can we fail??
by Michael_D on Sep 13, 2011 8:02 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Gals over the HOOPIES????
Dude, Texas teams are family.
We can kung fu kick Dallas players in the face while they’re down but supporting Cali teams over Tejas?
Quisling.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
