Since I have already looked at the salary lost to the DL for individual player totals and teams totals from 2002 to 2009, I will now look at the individual teams by year (injury information from Josh Hermsmeyer at RotoBlog.com) . Looking over the lists the only points I noticed was that the Mets and Dodgers did not do a good job of keeping their high priced players off the DL while the Chicago White Sox did an amazing job. Here is the top 20 teams and bottom 10 by total salary lost (link to a spreadsheet with all the teams and years for reference).
| Rank | Team | Year | Salary Lost | Total Salary | Percent of Salary | Total Days | Trips |
| 1 | NYM | 2009 | $54,962,101 | $149,373,987 | 36.8% | 1212 | 15 |
| 2 | LAD | 2008 | $54,187,351 | $118,588,536 | 45.7% | 1229 | 15 |
| 3 | ATL | 2008 | $42,020,997 | $102,365,683 | 41.0% | 1383 | 17 |
| 4 | LAD | 2005 | $34,642,178 | $83,039,000 | 41.7% | 1315 | 15 |
| 5 | NYM | 2003 | $31,106,582 | $116,876,429 | 26.6% | 823 | 13 |
| 6 | NYY | 2006 | $30,146,569 | $194,663,079 | 15.5% | 904 | 12 |
| 7 | NYY | 2008 | $30,023,543 | $207,896,789 | 14.4% | 1201 | 15 |
| 8 | STL | 2008 | $29,089,973 | $99,624,449 | 29.2% | 1431 | 18 |
| 9 | DET | 2009 | $28,369,717 | $115,085,145 | 24.7% | 832 | 9 |
| 10 | SFG | 2005 | $28,003,711 | $90,199,500 | 31.0% | 450 | 8 |
| Rank | Team | Year | Salary Lost | Total Salary | Percent of Salary | Total Days | Trips |
| 11 | NYM | 2008 | $27,458,235 | $137,793,376 | 19.9% | 1429 | 14 |
| 12 | TEX | 2002 | $27,378,780 | $105,526,122 | 25.9% | 1282 | 14 |
| 13 | ARI | 2002 | $27,114,166 | $102,819,999 | 26.4% | 1148 | 17 |
| 14 | LAA | 2009 | $26,958,806 | $113,709,000 | 23.7% | 756 | 11 |
| 15 | CHC | 2006 | $26,468,356 | $94,424,499 | 28.0% | 919 | 11 |
| 16 | TEX | 2004 | $26,038,966 | $55,050,417 | 47.3% | 1496 | 18 |
| 17 | NYM | 2004 | $25,330,376 | $96,660,970 | 26.2% | 1052 | 15 |
| 18 | OAK | 2007 | $25,001,583 | $79,366,940 | 31.5% | 1111 | 14 |
| 19 | ATL | 2006 | $24,891,291 | $90,156,876 | 27.6% | 1286 | 14 |
| 20 | SEA | 2009 | $24,353,463 | $98,904,166 | 24.6% | 1030 | 14 |
| 231 | PIT | 2007 | $1,724,722 | $38,537,833 | 4.5% | 381 | 7 |
| 232 | STL | 2004 | $1,454,389 | $83,228,333 | 1.7% | 397 | 5 |
| 233 | CHA | 2005 | $1,418,144 | $75,178,000 | 1.9% | 215 | 6 |
| 234 | TB | 2005 | $1,385,350 | $29,679,067 | 4.7% | 511 | 10 |
| 235 | CHW | 2002 | $1,235,731 | $57,052,833 | 2.2% | 175 | 5 |
| 236 | MON | 2002 | $1,187,417 | $38,670,500 | 3.1% | 375 | 7 |
| 237 | CHW | 2009 | $1,070,222 | $96,068,500 | 1.1% | 284 | 6 |
| 238 | TB | 2004 | $904,778 | $29,556,667 | 3.1% | 252 | 4 |
| 239 | CHW | 2003 | $778,056 | $51,010,000 | 1.5% | 118 | 4 |
| 240 | FLO | 2006 | $533,817 | $14,998,500 | 3.6% | 189 | 5 |
Besides total amount lost, here are the leaders and laggards in Percent of Salary lost.
| Rank | Team | Year | Percent of Salary | Salary Lost | Total Salary | Total Days | Trips |
| 1 | CLE | 2003 | 48.4% | $23,498,650 | $48,584,834 | 1317 | 14 |
| 2 | TEX | 2004 | 47.3% | $26,038,966 | $55,050,417 | 1496 | 18 |
| 3 | TB | 2003 | 46.0% | $9,024,444 | $19,630,000 | 599 | 10 |
| 4 | LAD | 2008 | 45.7% | $54,187,351 | $118,588,536 | 1229 | 15 |
| 5 | LAD | 2005 | 41.7% | $34,642,178 | $83,039,000 | 1315 | 15 |
| 6 | ATL | 2008 | 41.0% | $42,020,997 | $102,365,683 | 1383 | 17 |
| 7 | NYM | 2009 | 36.8% | $54,962,101 | $149,373,987 | 1212 | 15 |
| 8 | WAS | 2008 | 36.8% | $20,213,772 | $54,961,000 | 1259 | 16 |
| 9 | SD | 2009 | 35.3% | $15,289,962 | $43,333,700 | 798 | 10 |
| 10 | DET | 2002 | 34.5% | $18,980,375 | $55,048,000 | 1275 | 12 |
| 231 | MON | 2002 | 3.1% | $1,187,417 | $38,670,500 | 375 | 7 |
| 232 | TB | 2004 | 3.1% | $904,778 | $29,556,667 | 252 | 4 |
| 233 | TOR | 2006 | 2.6% | $1,829,939 | $71,365,000 | 339 | 6 |
| 234 | SEA | 2006 | 2.4% | $2,106,361 | $87,959,833 | 278 | 5 |
| 235 | SF | 2007 | 2.2% | $2,000,156 | $90,219,056 | 318 | 6 |
| 236 | CHW | 2002 | 2.2% | $1,235,731 | $57,052,833 | 175 | 5 |
| 237 | CHW | 2005 | 1.9% | $1,418,144 | $75,178,000 | 215 | 6 |
| 238 | STL | 2004 | 1.7% | $1,454,389 | $83,228,333 | 397 | 5 |
| 239 | CHW | 2003 | 1.5% | $778,056 | $51,010,000 | 118 | 4 |
| 240 | CHW | 2009 | 1.1% | $1,070,222 | $96,068,500 | 284 | 6 |