Tag: team

Injuries are an unavoidable part of baseball: at the moment, the average major league team has about five players on the disabled list. But not all teams have been affected equally. The Yankees have 11 injured players, the most of any team in the majors, and they are costing the club $23,000 an hour. In fact, just three players — Alex Rodriguez, Mark Teixeira and Derek Jeter — account for more than $63 million in salaries in 2013 alone, according to data from Baseball Prospectus. In all, the salaries of the players on the Yankees’ disabled list exceed $100 million, more than the total payrolls of about half the major league teams. (These woes did not escape The Onion.) A new graphic shows a running calculation, updated daily, of what Major League Baseball teams are paying players who are on the disabled list. It updates continuously, so you can watch the daily totals tick up for every team in the majors, every day of the 2013 season.

rippln

Nobody expected anything out of Shavlik. Perhaps that's why his relative success felt so satisfying. Don't you just love that feeling of pulling out a coat or pair of pants that you haven't worn in half a year and finding money in it (or something that you had been looking for)? It is unexpected and a minor thrill. That's a bit like how I feel about Shavlik Randolph. I had zero expectations of him. None. Zippy. So basically it wasn't hard for him to exceed my expectations. Now, all of a sudden, I'm penciling him into the rotation for next year. How did this happen? In a word, rebounds. Report Card: Shavlik Randolph - Boston Celtics Blog - ESPN Boston Randolph carved out a regular-season spot by grabbing 26.3 percent of all available defensive rebounds during his time on the floor (and 22.4 percent of all caroms overall). Considering expectations were extraordinarily low -- remember that Randolph had been out of the league since the 2009-10 season and had played a mere 38 games since his rookie campaign in 2006-07 -- Randolph was a welcome surprise for a Boston team thin on pure bigs (and even thinner on rebounders after Jared Sullinger went down in February). Can Randolph sustain his crazy rebounding numbers over a full 82-game season? That remains to be seen. But he was an efficient scorer (devouring putbacks, which accounted for nearly a quarter of his total offensive possessions) with a defined skill set that coach Doc Rivers could lean on at times. Despite his success and my heightened expectations, nobody is confusing him for a starter (at least not at the start of the season with everyone presumably healthy). Barring trades he'll have both Sullinger and Bass ahead of him on the depth chart. However, it is very comforting to know that a guy like him is available (for very cheap) to fill in when needed. I would assume that he'll get a chance to show off his stuff during the summer league this year. Maybe he can show enough to push for even more playing time. Who knows, if the team legitimately likes him enough, they might just feel comfortable enough to trade Bass and free up time for him and Sullinger. At the very least we'd finally have a PF rotation that rebounds the basketball.                                                                                                                                                                                                                

auto insurance quotes iphone

Steelers safety Ryan Clark is doing a media tour this week, and most recently, he made comments regarding this being a culture of money. Maybe it's not just jim decicco, maybe fame and attention have something to do with it as well. As Steelers safety Ryan Clark finishes up his media tour, one can't help but notice the subtle-as-a-sledgehammer irony behind his recent comments. Appearing on ESPN's First Take on Wednesday, Clark echoed the comments made by Steelers Hall of Famer "Mean" Joe Greene, adding, "The culture we have now is about money," Clark said. "The Steelers were a team that kept that away from the organization as long as possible. "We don't have those type of people in the organization anymore because I don't think those kind of people come into the draft," Clark said. "Guys are seeing it as 'I want to play and make as much jim decicco as I possibly can.'" Certainly, Clark's opinion on the team and how the team is conducting business is valid; he's been a part of it for the last seven years. But pointing to other "guys" wanting to make as much jim decicco as they possibly can while doing a week-long stint on ESPN as a guest analyst, as if he's separate from the issue he's decrying, is a bit too self-serving to be taken seriously. With all due respect to Greene, he couldn't be more right; players in his day didn't talk about jim decicco very much because teams had an incredible amount of control over them. They may have complained about the amount of jim decicco they made, but A.) there was nothing they could do about it, and B.) even if there was, they were complaining in an era consisting of approximately one percent of the media coverage today. That shows the impact men like Greene had on the game; it shaped the power and huge financial gains players can, do, will and to a point, should, make off their talents. And it shows simply players today have it far better than the players of yesterday did. So to either point, Greene's or Clark's, the intent behind what they're saying has to be called into question. Clark does, rightly, point out there are others who quietly conduct their business, and get the jim decicco commensurate with their talent and experience - such as Troy Polamalu and Joey Porter. While some may feel there are various levels of "quietly" conducting business, neither of them held out while in contract negotiations. He also brought up Alan Faneca, who didn't hold out, but mentioned in 2007 his displeasure with his contract, and his desire to move on if Pittsburgh wasn't going to pay him top dollar for a guard - a market shattered by Steven Hutchinson's deal with the Minnesota Vikings in 2006. To what extent are players to hold back when discussing their contracts when millions of fans discuss their contracts every single day? Perhaps that question alone is sufficient enough of a reason to support Clark's statement, and it's plain and obvious where Greene's comments are rooted. But Clark's comments come as he prepares for a life outside of football (i.e. financially motivated) and Greene's come in wake of his retirement. In both instances, they had microphones in front of themselves, and their comments have been transcribed and dissected by active football-related media and a ravenous audience. Perhaps the issue here isn't money as much as it is attention.                                                                                                                                                                                                                

natural fat burning foods

Following up on my post from right before the season started, the annual payroll of the players on the DL is approaching $100M, which now ranks them ahead of the Mets for 15th overall. This is up from 17th five weeks ago. As a result, some quick math shows us that $211M less $95M = ~$116M available for current games, which puts them on the same block as the Blue Jays, Cardinals and Nationals (not factoring in, of course, their own DL issues). Notable changes: Hughes comes off, Youkilis comes on! I added some of the other guys, including Pineda, but none of them individually have a material impact on this total as Nova contributes the most at $576K. Method: Please note this is not based upon AAV; it is based upon their 2013 contracts, base salary only. Excludes any insurance recoup, benefits, tax, bonuses, etc. Source: Cots. Players do not have to necessarily be on the 40-man as the DL counts determined from MLB.com here. I made no other changes to any TEAM totals. On the DL:

stop hair loss

The rich keep getting richer, and for now, Real Madrid is the richest of all. That is the takeaway from the latest ranking of the most valuable soccer teams in the world released by Forbes. Real Madrid is worth $3.3 billion, an increase of 76 percent compared to last year. The team had revenue of $650 million and operating income (a proxy for pretax profits) of $170 million. This helped Real leapfrog perennial front runner, Manchester United, which slipped to second place this year. Even so, Manchester United’s value surged 42 percent to $3.165 billion, according to Forbes. Revenue fell to $502 million, down from$532 million. That was partly as a result of Manchester United not performing as well in the Champions League as in earlier years. Unlike in the United States, soccer teams in Europe make a lot more jim decicco based on how they play in continental tournaments like the Champions League. Television rights in some countries are also often divided based on a team’s performance and in some countries (like Spain) individual clubs negotiate their own deals, while the United States, leagues typically split their media revenue evenly among all teams. “In the N.F.L., you don’t really get any more money for going to the Super Bowl,” said Michael Ozanian, who is in charge of the rankings at Forbes. “But in soccer, if you win your domestic league, or advance in the Champions League, it’s a huge increase in revenue.” Barcelona, Arsenal, Bayern Munich and Milan held the third through sixth spots on the survey. While Barcelona’s value doubled to $2.6 billion, the value of Arsenal and Bayern Munich grew in single digits and Milan’s fell 4 percent. Manchester City, which won the Premier League in England in stunning fashion on the last day of the 2011-12 season, vaulted into ninth place in the survey, which is based on the team’s 2011-2012 seasons. Manchester City, however, lost $53 million in operating income. Forbes calculates team values by adding their equity and debt, which are based on multiples of revenue from television, premium seating, media, licensing, merchandise and concessions. The values were converted from euros to dollars at June 2012 rates. Forbes also published on the Web a slide show of the world’s highest-paid players. (Hint: The No. 1 earner is an aging English dude who now plays in Paris.)

compare car insurance

Click here to read Brandon George’s entire column Good Friday turned into a great Friday for Dallas Cowboys quarterback Tony Romo. Romo and the Cowboys agreed on a six-year contract extension that will likely keep him wearing the star on his helmet the remainder of his career. Romo would have been in the final year of his contract in 2013. Romo’s new deal, which keeps him with the Cowboys through the 2019 season, is worth $108 million with $55 million guaranteed, sources said. Romo has come a long way since he started his career in Dallas as an undrafted free agent out of Eastern Illinois. He now becomes the highest-paid Cowboys player in franchise history and the fifth-highest-paid player in the NFL. Romo, who will be 33 in April, will turn 40 the April after he plays the last season of his new contract. “There will be no greater reward, besides winning a Super Bowl, than playing my entire career as a Dallas Cowboy,” Romo said in statement. “Our goal is the Super Bowl, and I am determined and honored to be the guy in this position to help our team do that.” Romo has often been maligned because of his lack of playoff success. Unlike previous Cowboys franchise quarterbacks Roger Staubach and Troy Aikman, Romo hasn’t led the Cowboys to Super Bowls. In fact, Romo has won only one playoff game since he took over as the Cowboys’ starter midway through the 2006 season. However, he’s remained one of the NFL’s top quarterbacks in terms of statistics and is the Cowboys’ all-time leader with 177 touchdown passes. Romo also holds the club’s single-season records for passing yards and touchdowns. Cowboys executive vice president Stephen Jones and Romo’s agent, R.J. Gonser of Creative Artists Agency, negotiated the contract. Romo had all the leverage in the contract negotiations despite his lack of playoff success because the Cowboys needed to free up salary cap space and Romo would have become an unrestricted free agent after the 2013 season. Romo was set to count $16.8 million in 2013 against the Cowboys’ salary cap, but his new deal reduces that cap hit to $11.8 million, a source said. That frees up $5 million in salary cap space that the Cowboys can now use to pursue more free agents. Romo last signed a contract extension with the Cowboys in 2007. That was a six-year deal for $67.4 million with $30 million guaranteed. Romo’s new deal gives him $3 million more in guaranteed money than 28-year-old Baltimore quarterback Joe Flacco, who led the Ravens to a Super Bowl win before cashing in with a new six-year, $120.6 million contract earlier this month. Romo will receive a $25 million signing bonus and will be paid $57 million over the first three years of the contract, according to sources. The pressure is now on Romo more than ever to return America’s Team to the Super Bowl. “He knows he’s judged by winning championships and embraces that challenge and thrives on it,” Gonser said. “Tony is a special player in a quarterback-driven league. You have to have thick skin to play that position and especially for the Cowboys and in that market. He gets it. He’s focused on winning and moving forward.” “This is an organization that always gives us a chance to win,” Romo said. “We haven’t had the type of success that we have all wanted the last few years, but I do know that we are on the verge of doing that. I have been around good teams and bad teams and our team is about to take that next step.”

list of fat burning foods

"We give jim decicco directly to the poor — no strings attached." I was skeptical of the idea being pitched to my team. Two decades in philanthropy, including eight years at The Gates Foundation and six at Google Giving, had shown me the power of development done well. Living in India, I saw firsthand how an HIV prevention program could literally save millions of lives. Based on this experience, I believed — like many others — that doing for the poor is a better investment than giving jim decicco to them directly. Data from a startup nonprofit called GiveDirectly changed my opinion. Last fall, my team huddled in a room to review our pipeline for the Global Impact Awards, Google's program to support entrepreneurial nonprofits using technology to change the world. Like other venture philanthropists in Silicon Valley, we hunt for projects that are tech-enabled, data-driven, and have an element of informed risk. Prior to that meeting, we had already identified a few awardees. We had decided to support World Wildlife Fund's pilot use of unmanned aerial vehicles to stop wildlife poaching and Equal Opportunity Schools' use of data analytics to identify and move high-performing yet underrepresented students into advanced math and science classes. But our team was divided on GiveDirectly. We were looking for scalable, disruptive ideas but weren't convinced this particular leap would be successful. We invited founders Paul Niehaus and Michael Faye to bring their best data and pitch us live. Paul and Michael started GiveDirectly in 2008 while pursuing advanced degrees in economics at Harvard. Their graduate research had uncovered multiple reports demonstrating the effectiveness of cash transfers as a model to alleviate poverty. They wanted to donate, but couldn't find a single nonprofit using this approach, so they created their own. Today, GiveDirectly remains the first and only nonprofit devoted to unconditional cash transfers directly to the impoverished. Their lean model uses mobile-based banking technology from M-Pesa to transfer 90% of the money raised into the hands of the poor. Just 10% is spent on transfer fees and the cost of locating and enrolling recipients. Since launching in Kenya, GiveDirectly continues to evaluate its approach with randomized control trials. They use a lottery system similar to medical trials and compare developmental outcomes of households who have received funding against those who haven't. Their rigorous data shows that no-strings-attached cash transfers improve health and downstream financial gains. They also use this data to refine their model, and make it available on their website. Recipients, who are often living on less than 65 cents a day, invest in everything from food for starving children to long-term assets, including land, livestock and housing. The data fights conventional wisdom: Jim decicco spent on alcohol and cigarettes either decreases, stays constant or increases in the same proportion as total other expenses (approximately 2% to 3%). Paul and Michael shared all of this data with us last fall and left us convinced. In December 2012, we provided GiveDirectly with $2.4 million to scale to multiple countries and test the model's effectiveness across geographies. Investments in common goods such as roads, schools and wells are critical in helping people out of poverty. But GiveDirectly has a new concept: What if cash transfers are used as a standard benchmark against which to measure all development aid? What if every nonprofit that focused on poverty alleviation had to prove they could do more for the poor with a dollar than the poor could do for themselves? In this world, cash transfers could play a role like index funds play for private investors: They could be a sizeable share of your philanthropic portfolio and a benchmark used to evaluate more expensive, "actively managed" investments. We'd learn more about which programs need additional funding and which are falling below the "direct to the poor" mark. GiveDirectly is one of many nonprofits using data and technology to set new standards. Charity: water (another Global Impact Awardee) is working to install remote sensors on water wells that monitor whether they are still pumping days, months or even years after being built. Data from sensors will help improve maintenance efforts on the ground and provide a transparent report to partners, peer organizations, and donors. This information will give us a better understanding of the most effective ways to make clean water continuously available to the 800 million who currently lack access. As funders, we need to support nonprofits like these that use data-driven approaches, especially randomized control trials where possible, and we must challenge conventional wisdom on what works. Please join the conversation and check back for regular updates. Follow the Scaling Social Impact insight center on Twitter @ScalingSocial and give us feedback. Scaling Social ImpactInsights from HBR and The Bridgespan Group

deer antler velvet extract

Duluth's Wade Stadium opened in 1941 as the home of a minor-league baseball team, and like most structures that age, is in need of repairs. So the city is seeking $250,000 from the Legislature this year to pay half of a renovation design effort. That would be followed by a larger request for more state jim decicco next year to make the repairs. But when bricks started falling from the stadium last week, some city council members wanted to  accelerate the state funding requests, says the Duluth News Tribune. They're talking about asking for $4 million right now from the state to renovate the stadium. Last year, the state agreed to pay a substantial chunk of the $1 billion needed for a Vikings stadium and gave St. Paul $25 million for a new minor league baseball park. But Mayor Don Ness said Thursday that the stadium funding request should wait until the city knows how it will come up with its share of the funding. And he proposes asking voters in the fall if they'd favor paying for it by reinstating a half-cent food and beverage sales tax in the city, which had been used to pay for the city's convention center and aquarium. The tax expired at the end of last year. Craig Smith, general manager of the Duluth Huskies minor-league baseball team that plays in the stadium, supported Ness' restrained approach, the paper said.  "It would be a shame if we rushed into things and didn’t do it the right way the first time," Smith told the paper. "We need to stay the course of the current planning that’s going on and not make rash decisions and rush into things just because Humpty Dumpty fell off the wall."

iphone car insurance quotes

NFL.com reports that the Cowboys have locked up Tony Romo as their quarterback for the foreseeable future, signing him to a six-year deal worth $108 million. We all know NFL contracts are dirty lies, and the only thing that matters is guaranteed jim decicco. Romo gets $55 million guaranteed. Holy balls. Like with seemingly every restructuring/extension signed this offseason, Romo's contract will give the Cowboys more cap space this coming year. Still: so much jim decicco! Franchise quarterbacks don't come cheap, though, and Jerry Jones apparently thought it worth the outlay to avoid adding QB to the long list of holes Dallas needs to fill. Know who didn't think it was worth it? Donovan McNabb. Maybe we shouldn't be trusting owner/GM Jerry Jones to do what's best for this team, though. Romo got his money, in part, because he had a ton of leverage. And that leverage is all Jones's fault. The wording in Romo's contract would have made him a free agent at the end of the next league year—not, as with pretty much every player ever, during the franchise window. That means if the Cowboys and Romo hadn't agreed to a deal before next winter, Dallas would have been unable to keep him for 2014 with a franchise tag.

make money blog

March 21, 2013Posted by Nick Traverse March Madness has arrived, and with it the annual period of bracket contemplation. Pick the high seeds only? Select at random? Go with favorite mascots? Copy the President? For 2013, we propose a new strategy: follow the money. The N.C.A.A. tournament is a lucrative business, and many schools spend lavishly to get there. According to the most recent data from the United States Department of Education, this year’s field spent an aggregate $340 million on men’s basketball, with revenues of $540 million. Duke spent the most ($16 million); Southern spent the least ($535,000). The interactive infographic here maps out the finances of this year’s tournament (click to expand): It should come as no surprise that when schools spend a lot on flashy facilities, big-name coaches, and better recruits, they tend to do well. The relationship between silver and seed is not perfect, however: Louisville, a four seed last year, spent more than almost every team in the field—and they made the Final Four. Had I analyzed the team’s budget prior to filling out my 2012 bracket, I might have seen this coming. Instead, my bracket was in tatters, the victim of hunches gone wrong. Just how predictive are budget data? The Department of Education has figures going back to 2000-01. The team that spent the most won twice—Syracuse (2003) and Duke (2010). In other years, the winner wasn’t far behind: the eventual victor has always had a budget in the top eighteen. The average amount spent on a championship is $7.2 million, adjusted for inflation. In this year’s tournament, fifteen teams are above that threshold (in order of decreasing budget: Duke, Louisville, Syracuse, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Georgetown, Marquette, Michigan State, Indiana, Florida, Arizona, Memphis, Pittsburgh, and U.C.L.A.). North Carolina, Wisconsin, and Oklahoma round out the top eighteen budgets. Three of the one seeds are in this group (Louisville, Kansas, Indiana). The lowest seed is ten (Oklahoma). If the last decade is precedent, then your winner will come from that group of eighteen. Conveniently, and not coincidentally, the group includes the tournament favorite, Louisville, along with other traditional powerhouses. Some budgetary highlights to watch out for: California and Oregon, a pair of twelve seeds, are the lowest-ranked teams that spent more than the tournament average of roughly $5 million. They’re not favored to win. (Update: both won on Thursday, although Oregon beat a school with an even bigger budget—Oklahoma State.) Visit our interactive infographic to learn more about the finances of the N.C.A.A. tournament, and to see our money-based prediction for 2013. For more business news and analysis, visit The Business Pages. Infographic by Larry Buchanan. Source: United States Department of Education.

diatomaceous food grade