David Yudkin
Footballguy
The Dice-K acquisition costs fall into a different category IMO. The Sox made that money up and then some by selling additional broadcast rights and seeding additional revenue and licensing streams. So in that case, yes, they had to shwll out $50 million to get him but if they then made $100 million by rostering him, that pretty much negates the cost argument.I suspect that this is an isolated occurance, as not may players come with added revenue streams. There are only so many untapped regions/markets where the Ichiros and Dice-Ks of the world can step in and actually bring you money on a silver platter.For example, CC and Tex may sell a few more tickets, but they are not going to get Yankee games broadcast in new markets.No it shouldn't, not if you are talking about financial flexibilityIf the whole argument is that financial constraints limit team's abilities to sign other players, it should absolutely enter the discussion, as that is $51 million they don't have to sign other playersAnd since there is no salary cap in baseball I don't really see what else his point could be in reference toif it is just a pure payroll comp, then OK, yeah, good point Peter, we know the Yanks have a higher payroll then the SoxSo what?He is talking about payroll. That 51 million should be ignored, just as signing bonuses given to drafted players and myriad other things that dont pertain to payroll.That conveniently ignores the $51 million posting fee the Sox paid for Matsuzaka