Teixeira To Yanks (1 Viewer)

[Reaper]

So, the word is that Tex went to the Yankees cuz his wife hates Boston.

I can see that. Given the choice, sheesh.

 

[avoiding injuries]

How much are tickets increasing at the new stadium?

I'm in the upper deck and my tickets didn't go up at all. I don't think bleachers increased either. The lower level seats I believe went up though I'm not certain how much.

I saw a show a few months ago, may have been on Real Sports. About the luxury boxes that people owned at the old Yankee Stadium. The increase was something out of this world. Basically priced out all individuals and made it only affordable for corporations to own.

 

[Michael Brown]

How much are tickets increasing at the new stadium?

I'm in the upper deck and my tickets didn't go up at all. I don't think bleachers increased either. The lower level seats I believe went up though I'm not certain how much.

I saw a show a few months ago, may have been on Real Sports. About the luxury boxes that people owned at the old Yankee Stadium. The increase was something out of this world. Basically priced out all individuals and made it only affordable for corporations to own.

Oh yeah the luxury boxes are outrageous. Nobody I'll ever meet in my lifetime will be able to get one of those. It's for bigshots only, and it is pretty much the impetus behind building the new stadium. The old Stadium's luxury boxes weren't very luxurious and it's a gigantic moneymaker. As of late November, there were still a few available at $600,000 if you wanna jump in on the bidding.

 

[shadyridr]

How much are tickets increasing at the new stadium?

I'm in the upper deck and my tickets didn't go up at all. I don't think bleachers increased either. The lower level seats I believe went up though I'm not certain how much.

I saw a show a few months ago, may have been on Real Sports. About the luxury boxes that people owned at the old Yankee Stadium. The increase was something out of this world. Basically priced out all individuals and made it only affordable for corporations to own.

I dont think they were even considered luxury boxes in the old stadium. They were called Suites.

 

[Bogart]

Thank you to everyone who contributed to this thread. It has made my Monday to read it from the OP until now.

I think most everyone knows my opinion on Teixeria, a complete tool who is selfish and will destroy a clubhouse, so it will be fun to see him in Gotham. Probably more fun than I thought it would be to see him in Boston. This is a guy that could not handle the media in Texas, little Texas whose baseball writers are creampuffs that didn't get Cowboy gigs. Not to speculate, but that first 3 for 50 slump (and trust me, they come for him) is going to be very intresting.

I'm not going to fault the Yankees or the Yankee fans for spending money and having the largest payroll. If you have it, spend it. We love Mark Cuban here because "he does everything he can to put a winner on the floor." Can't fault Boras for working to get his clients (and therefore himself) the most money. Everyone wants to make the most money they can.

I'm just going to sit back and watch the ride. Buy my tickets when the Yanks come to town so I can boo both A-Rod and Tex back to back, and be extra happy if we win.

Enough blubbering....too much pain meds right now....

 

[Yankee23Fan]

Did FSU's National Title in 1999 seem any less sweet because FSU was a CFB powerhouse in a talent rich state that used its program's prestige to get recruits that smaller conference schools couldn't?

Of course not. UF and UM are in the same state, Cali and Texas schools are loaded with top recruits, as well as the schools in the SEC.I'm not saying the Yanks can't have their fans, it just seems like there is no way it can be as thrilling as it is for other teams. It's impossible.

I'll take my 1996 over your 2008 every day of the week. ETA: I'd actually probably take my 1995 as well over your 2008 even though you made the show. I got to see my hero in the postseason, and he played like a God who we knew didn't have much left because of his back, hit one of the greatest homeruns I remember and the last he hit at the stadium, and did everything he could in the final game to drag the team to a win only have the bullpen blow it. Seeing Tino in 1996 broke my heart.Just because the team I root for spends the most money doesn't mean I'm incapable of being a fan that bleeds and cries with his team like you are, nor am I incapable of the pure joy that comes from seeing my team win, or my favorite players shine. It's not impossible at all. It's sports.

 

[DropKick]

Did FSU's National Title in 1999 seem any less sweet because FSU was a CFB powerhouse in a talent rich state that used its program's prestige to get recruits that smaller conference schools couldn't?

Of course not. UF and UM are in the same state, Cali and Texas schools are loaded with top recruits, as well as the schools in the SEC.I'm not saying the Yanks can't have their fans, it just seems like there is no way it can be as thrilling as it is for other teams. It's impossible.

I'll take my 1996 over your 2008 every day of the week. ETA: I'd actually probably take my 1995 as well over your 2008 even though you made the show. I got to see my hero in the postseason, and he played like a God who we knew didn't have much left because of his back, hit one of the greatest homeruns I remember and the last he hit at the stadium, and did everything he could in the final game to drag the team to a win only have the bullpen blow it. Seeing Tino in 1996 broke my heart.Just because the team I root for spends the most money doesn't mean I'm incapable of being a fan that bleeds and cries with his team like you are, nor am I incapable of the pure joy that comes from seeing my team win, or my favorite players shine. It's not impossible at all. It's sports.

You're still talking about a different era. Your own commentary says it all. You rooted for a player; someone with loyalty who did all he could to defy the odds and lift his team to victory. Yes, that is sports.These are different times. The Yankees are loaded (bloated?) with stars. And endless parade of guys looking for a big payday. No, it hasn't worked recently. More bad press than good with the likes of Kevin Brown, Randy Johnson, A-Rod, Clemens, Sheffield, Giambi... even Petitte. How many teams can bring back a Roger Clemens for $1 million a start? Kind of tough to have that same "overcoming the odds" feeling or even a sense of accomplishment.

 

[Sammy3469]

FWIW...there are plenty of $325 seats available (along with a bunch of $500 and $800 club seats)...PLENTY...so I wouldn't be so sure that the Yankees's fiscal health will always be there.

Oh and I hope every American is happy paying for this new stadium with a $1.5 billion tax free bonds. Gracias.

 

[Yankee23Fan]

Did FSU's National Title in 1999 seem any less sweet because FSU was a CFB powerhouse in a talent rich state that used its program's prestige to get recruits that smaller conference schools couldn't?

Of course not. UF and UM are in the same state, Cali and Texas schools are loaded with top recruits, as well as the schools in the SEC.I'm not saying the Yanks can't have their fans, it just seems like there is no way it can be as thrilling as it is for other teams. It's impossible.

I'll take my 1996 over your 2008 every day of the week. ETA: I'd actually probably take my 1995 as well over your 2008 even though you made the show. I got to see my hero in the postseason, and he played like a God who we knew didn't have much left because of his back, hit one of the greatest homeruns I remember and the last he hit at the stadium, and did everything he could in the final game to drag the team to a win only have the bullpen blow it. Seeing Tino in 1996 broke my heart.Just because the team I root for spends the most money doesn't mean I'm incapable of being a fan that bleeds and cries with his team like you are, nor am I incapable of the pure joy that comes from seeing my team win, or my favorite players shine. It's not impossible at all. It's sports.

You're still talking about a different era. Your own commentary says it all. You rooted for a player; someone with loyalty who did all he could to defy the odds and lift his team to victory. Yes, that is sports.These are different times. The Yankees are loaded (bloated?) with stars. And endless parade of guys looking for a big payday. No, it hasn't worked recently. More bad press than good with the likes of Kevin Brown, Randy Johnson, A-Rod, Clemens, Sheffield, Giambi... even Petitte. How many teams can bring back a Roger Clemens for $1 million a start? Kind of tough to have that same "overcoming the odds" feeling or even a sense of accomplishment.

So basically you couldn't be a fan of a team that was so successful that it got to this point? I mean, that's what the argument is. The Yankess have been so successful for so long that they have been able to build this economic model that allows them to keep doing everything possible to be successful again and again. I'm supposed to be unable to root for that? What's the point of being a fan of any team in that case? Do you think fans of dynasties get tired of watching the wins? Would Patriot fans be bored and embarressed with another 16-0 regular season and be unable to root for it? Just because the most expensive players are on the Yankess doesn't mean I lose the ability to root for my team.As for your initial poinst about a lost era, it was a specific answer to his question. Now? I'm hoping Jeter wins another one. Joba is my favorite player now and I'm watching him about as close as I did Mattingly. I don't see how you can be a fan and waiver like you guys demand we do just because of the current payroll. A payroll, by the way, that hasn't done what you guys are complaining it does.

 

[DropKick]

Did FSU's National Title in 1999 seem any less sweet because FSU was a CFB powerhouse in a talent rich state that used its program's prestige to get recruits that smaller conference schools couldn't?

Of course not. UF and UM are in the same state, Cali and Texas schools are loaded with top recruits, as well as the schools in the SEC.I'm not saying the Yanks can't have their fans, it just seems like there is no way it can be as thrilling as it is for other teams. It's impossible.

I'll take my 1996 over your 2008 every day of the week. ETA: I'd actually probably take my 1995 as well over your 2008 even though you made the show. I got to see my hero in the postseason, and he played like a God who we knew didn't have much left because of his back, hit one of the greatest homeruns I remember and the last he hit at the stadium, and did everything he could in the final game to drag the team to a win only have the bullpen blow it. Seeing Tino in 1996 broke my heart.Just because the team I root for spends the most money doesn't mean I'm incapable of being a fan that bleeds and cries with his team like you are, nor am I incapable of the pure joy that comes from seeing my team win, or my favorite players shine. It's not impossible at all. It's sports.

You're still talking about a different era. Your own commentary says it all. You rooted for a player; someone with loyalty who did all he could to defy the odds and lift his team to victory. Yes, that is sports.These are different times. The Yankees are loaded (bloated?) with stars. And endless parade of guys looking for a big payday. No, it hasn't worked recently. More bad press than good with the likes of Kevin Brown, Randy Johnson, A-Rod, Clemens, Sheffield, Giambi... even Petitte. How many teams can bring back a Roger Clemens for $1 million a start? Kind of tough to have that same "overcoming the odds" feeling or even a sense of accomplishment.

So basically you couldn't be a fan of a team that was so successful that it got to this point? I mean, that's what the argument is. The Yankess have been so successful for so long that they have been able to build this economic model that allows them to keep doing everything possible to be successful again and again. I'm supposed to be unable to root for that? What's the point of being a fan of any team in that case? Do you think fans of dynasties get tired of watching the wins? Would Patriot fans be bored and embarressed with another 16-0 regular season and be unable to root for it? Just because the most expensive players are on the Yankess doesn't mean I lose the ability to root for my team.As for your initial poinst about a lost era, it was a specific answer to his question. Now? I'm hoping Jeter wins another one. Joba is my favorite player now and I'm watching him about as close as I did Mattingly. I don't see how you can be a fan and waiver like you guys demand we do just because of the current payroll. A payroll, by the way, that hasn't done what you guys are complaining it does.

I didn't mean to suggest that you don't root for your team. I apologize if it came across that way. The point was there is a huge difference between rooting for an underdog and a heavy favorite. The payroll does, by the way, do what I suspect... the Yankees are in the thick of contention every year. Last year was the first time they missed the play-offs in what, a dozen years? There are teams where a year in the post season is a treat not an utter failure.Look, the Yankees didn't "need" Texeira. Nor did Boston, the Mets or any other big market team. Ironically, ESPN's Steven Smith has a current article suggesting the Yankees should sign Many Ramirez now if they want to win a World Series. Think about that and what is says about individual greed and the lack of competitive balance in baseball.

 

[Yankee23Fan]

and the lack of competitive balance in baseball.

There is just as much parity in baseball as there is in the other sports.

 

[Steelers4Life]

and the lack of competitive balance in baseball.

There is just as much parity in baseball as there is in the other sports.

In baseball, you have several teams that have the resources to be competitive each and every year without exception. They don't have to rebuild, they just reload. The only reason they aren't at or near the top every year is because of terrible decision making and too many mistakes with bad contracts, and then you have the Yankees who can overcome even that by drastically outspending everyone. They spent over 30% more than even the Red Sox.Those mistakes and bad contracts can tie up a smaller market franchise for years, but the bigger market teams just spend more to make up for it.And you have the rest of the league that will fight to be the handful of teams that have to hope that everything clicks for a couple years just to compete to be the underdog that makes a run against them so that the bigger markets can point to them and say, "See, it can be done." They can't maintain it because players get too expensive, so another team steps in to take their place while the big spenders keep spending.Is that competitive balance? No, it's not. It's ridiculous.In the NFL, the top teams are the top teams because they are well-run franchise that make good decisions. In baseball, that's not the case with the teams that make it just by outspending everyone else to cover up poor decisions.

 

[Michael Brown]

and the lack of competitive balance in baseball.

There is just as much parity in baseball as there is in the other sports.

In baseball, you have several teams that have the resources to be competitive each and every year without exception. They don't have to rebuild, they just reload. The only reason they aren't at or near the top every year is because of terrible decision making and too many mistakes with bad contracts, and then you have the Yankees who can overcome even that by drastically outspending everyone. They spent over 30% more than even the Red Sox.Those mistakes and bad contracts can tie up a smaller market franchise for years, but the bigger market teams just spend more to make up for it.And you have the rest of the league that will fight to be the handful of teams that have to hope that everything clicks for a couple years just to compete to be the underdog that makes a run against them so that the bigger markets can point to them and say, "See, it can be done." They can't maintain it because players get too expensive, so another team steps in to take their place while the big spenders keep spending.Is that competitive balance? No, it's not. It's ridiculous.In the NFL, the top teams are the top teams because they are well-run franchise that make good decisions. In baseball, that's not the case with the teams that make it just by outspending everyone else to cover up poor decisions.

But don't you think that if there was a salary cap in baseball, the Yankees would be smarter with their money? With no cap right now, Cashman and the Steinbrenners can afford to cover up mistakes, sure. But if there was a cap they wouldn't take such risks on guys like A.J. Burnett, Randy Johnson, Carl Pavano, etc. So you point to these as horrible mistakes that they can cover up; I point to them as luxuries the Yankees know they'll be ABLE to cover up if it is necessary.Believe me -- if MLB instituted a cap, the Yankees would make a lot more financially sound decisions than they do now. The reason none of their contracts have crippled them is because they know that none of them can. So why not take a shot on a guy and hope it pays off?

 

[Yankee23Fan]

and the lack of competitive balance in baseball.

There is just as much parity in baseball as there is in the other sports.

In baseball, you have several teams that have the resources to be competitive each and every year without exception. They don't have to rebuild, they just reload. The only reason they aren't at or near the top every year is because of terrible decision making and too many mistakes with bad contracts, and then you have the Yankees who can overcome even that by drastically outspending everyone. They spent over 30% more than even the Red Sox.Those mistakes and bad contracts can tie up a smaller market franchise for years, but the bigger market teams just spend more to make up for it.And you have the rest of the league that will fight to be the handful of teams that have to hope that everything clicks for a couple years just to compete to be the underdog that makes a run against them so that the bigger markets can point to them and say, "See, it can be done." They can't maintain it because players get too expensive, so another team steps in to take their place while the big spenders keep spending.Is that competitive balance? No, it's not. It's ridiculous.In the NFL, the top teams are the top teams because they are well-run franchise that make good decisions. In baseball, that's not the case with the teams that make it just by outspending everyone else to cover up poor decisions.

I understand that is the perception. It's wrong and not based on any reasonable facts and review of the postseason histories of the 4 major sports. Does the NFL have more parity? Yes, but only slightly, and MLB is better then the NHL or NBA, and when you factor in that MLB has less teams making the playoffs and adjust for that, again, MLB has just as much parity as the other sports.

 

[Yankee23Fan]

and the lack of competitive balance in baseball.

There is just as much parity in baseball as there is in the other sports.

In baseball, you have several teams that have the resources to be competitive each and every year without exception. They don't have to rebuild, they just reload. The only reason they aren't at or near the top every year is because of terrible decision making and too many mistakes with bad contracts, and then you have the Yankees who can overcome even that by drastically outspending everyone. They spent over 30% more than even the Red Sox.Those mistakes and bad contracts can tie up a smaller market franchise for years, but the bigger market teams just spend more to make up for it.And you have the rest of the league that will fight to be the handful of teams that have to hope that everything clicks for a couple years just to compete to be the underdog that makes a run against them so that the bigger markets can point to them and say, "See, it can be done." They can't maintain it because players get too expensive, so another team steps in to take their place while the big spenders keep spending.Is that competitive balance? No, it's not. It's ridiculous.In the NFL, the top teams are the top teams because they are well-run franchise that make good decisions. In baseball, that's not the case with the teams that make it just by outspending everyone else to cover up poor decisions.

But don't you think that if there was a salary cap in baseball, the Yankees would be smarter with their money? With no cap right now, Cashman and the Steinbrenners can afford to cover up mistakes, sure. But if there was a cap they wouldn't take such risks on guys like A.J. Burnett, Randy Johnson, Carl Pavano, etc. So you point to these as horrible mistakes that they can cover up; I point to them as luxuries the Yankees know they'll be ABLE to cover up if it is necessary.Believe me -- if MLB instituted a cap, the Yankees would make a lot more financially sound decisions than they do now. The reason none of their contracts have crippled them is because they know that none of them can. So why not take a shot on a guy and hope it pays off?

The only cap that could work in baseball is a cap on individual major league contracts per player. A team wide cap ala the NFL simple will not and can not work.

 

[Koya]

The only cap that could work in baseball is a cap on individual major league contracts per player. A team wide cap ala the NFL simple will not and can not work.

Why is that? This is not rocket science we are talking about here... you can find mechnisms to deal with minor league contracts, etc.

 

[Steelers4Life]

and the lack of competitive balance in baseball.

There is just as much parity in baseball as there is in the other sports.

In baseball, you have several teams that have the resources to be competitive each and every year without exception. They don't have to rebuild, they just reload. The only reason they aren't at or near the top every year is because of terrible decision making and too many mistakes with bad contracts, and then you have the Yankees who can overcome even that by drastically outspending everyone. They spent over 30% more than even the Red Sox.Those mistakes and bad contracts can tie up a smaller market franchise for years, but the bigger market teams just spend more to make up for it.And you have the rest of the league that will fight to be the handful of teams that have to hope that everything clicks for a couple years just to compete to be the underdog that makes a run against them so that the bigger markets can point to them and say, "See, it can be done." They can't maintain it because players get too expensive, so another team steps in to take their place while the big spenders keep spending.Is that competitive balance? No, it's not. It's ridiculous.In the NFL, the top teams are the top teams because they are well-run franchise that make good decisions. In baseball, that's not the case with the teams that make it just by outspending everyone else to cover up poor decisions.

But don't you think that if there was a salary cap in baseball, the Yankees would be smarter with their money? With no cap right now, Cashman and the Steinbrenners can afford to cover up mistakes, sure. But if there was a cap they wouldn't take such risks on guys like A.J. Burnett, Randy Johnson, Carl Pavano, etc. So you point to these as horrible mistakes that they can cover up; I point to them as luxuries the Yankees know they'll be ABLE to cover up if it is necessary.Believe me -- if MLB instituted a cap, the Yankees would make a lot more financially sound decisions than they do now. The reason none of their contracts have crippled them is because they know that none of them can. So why not take a shot on a guy and hope it pays off?

If the Yankees thought they could be better by spending less and being more financially sound, they would do it. Yes, they throw around lots of money, and often its been to the wrong people. I don't think that's just because they CAN do it, it's because their judgement was poor, and to think they'd be better just because they CAN'T spend as much doesn't make any sense to me. Their judgement wouldn't improve, but their ability to cover up mistakes would be gone.

 

[Steelers4Life]

and the lack of competitive balance in baseball.

There is just as much parity in baseball as there is in the other sports.

In baseball, you have several teams that have the resources to be competitive each and every year without exception. They don't have to rebuild, they just reload. The only reason they aren't at or near the top every year is because of terrible decision making and too many mistakes with bad contracts, and then you have the Yankees who can overcome even that by drastically outspending everyone. They spent over 30% more than even the Red Sox.Those mistakes and bad contracts can tie up a smaller market franchise for years, but the bigger market teams just spend more to make up for it.And you have the rest of the league that will fight to be the handful of teams that have to hope that everything clicks for a couple years just to compete to be the underdog that makes a run against them so that the bigger markets can point to them and say, "See, it can be done." They can't maintain it because players get too expensive, so another team steps in to take their place while the big spenders keep spending.Is that competitive balance? No, it's not. It's ridiculous.In the NFL, the top teams are the top teams because they are well-run franchise that make good decisions. In baseball, that's not the case with the teams that make it just by outspending everyone else to cover up poor decisions.

I understand that is the perception. It's wrong and not based on any reasonable facts and review of the postseason histories of the 4 major sports. Does the NFL have more parity? Yes, but only slightly, and MLB is better then the NHL or NBA, and when you factor in that MLB has less teams making the playoffs and adjust for that, again, MLB has just as much parity as the other sports.

No, the perception isn't wrong. Teams like the Yankees, Mets, Red Sox, Angels... they'll always be able to be a contender as long as they make good use of their resources. Yes, there are teams all the time that make 1 and 2 year runs with a few home-grown pieces that all come together at the same time, but it's not right that a handful of teams will never have to rebuild because they'll never lack the resources to fill in holes no matter how poor their decision making has been.I don't expect a Yankees fan to agree with it, in this case, perception is reality. The big market teams will do well every year if they spend their money wisely. The small market teams have to hope everything comes together for a few years and then start over. FULL revenue sharing + a salary floor + a salary cap is the only answer.

 

[avoiding injuries]

and the lack of competitive balance in baseball.

There is just as much parity in baseball as there is in the other sports.

In baseball, you have several teams that have the resources to be competitive each and every year without exception. They don't have to rebuild, they just reload. The only reason they aren't at or near the top every year is because of terrible decision making and too many mistakes with bad contracts, and then you have the Yankees who can overcome even that by drastically outspending everyone. They spent over 30% more than even the Red Sox.Those mistakes and bad contracts can tie up a smaller market franchise for years, but the bigger market teams just spend more to make up for it.And you have the rest of the league that will fight to be the handful of teams that have to hope that everything clicks for a couple years just to compete to be the underdog that makes a run against them so that the bigger markets can point to them and say, "See, it can be done." They can't maintain it because players get too expensive, so another team steps in to take their place while the big spenders keep spending.Is that competitive balance? No, it's not. It's ridiculous.In the NFL, the top teams are the top teams because they are well-run franchise that make good decisions. In baseball, that's not the case with the teams that make it just by outspending everyone else to cover up poor decisions.

But don't you think that if there was a salary cap in baseball, the Yankees would be smarter with their money? With no cap right now, Cashman and the Steinbrenners can afford to cover up mistakes, sure. But if there was a cap they wouldn't take such risks on guys like A.J. Burnett, Randy Johnson, Carl Pavano, etc. So you point to these as horrible mistakes that they can cover up; I point to them as luxuries the Yankees know they'll be ABLE to cover up if it is necessary.Believe me -- if MLB instituted a cap, the Yankees would make a lot more financially sound decisions than they do now. The reason none of their contracts have crippled them is because they know that none of them can. So why not take a shot on a guy and hope it pays off?

By more financially sound decisions, you mean that if you sign ARod you wont be able to afford another free agent for a few years and probably can't lock up your young talent. That if one of your pitchers isn't living up to their potential, that you have to wait it out for a few years to see if they eventually come around instead of signing someone else. That if you have a need in for a position player and a need for another pitcher, you'll probably have to choose one, or sign a lesser player at each position. I don't think the Yankees or the fans would be able to do it at this point.

 

[Michael Brown]

and the lack of competitive balance in baseball.

There is just as much parity in baseball as there is in the other sports.

In baseball, you have several teams that have the resources to be competitive each and every year without exception. They don't have to rebuild, they just reload. The only reason they aren't at or near the top every year is because of terrible decision making and too many mistakes with bad contracts, and then you have the Yankees who can overcome even that by drastically outspending everyone. They spent over 30% more than even the Red Sox.Those mistakes and bad contracts can tie up a smaller market franchise for years, but the bigger market teams just spend more to make up for it.And you have the rest of the league that will fight to be the handful of teams that have to hope that everything clicks for a couple years just to compete to be the underdog that makes a run against them so that the bigger markets can point to them and say, "See, it can be done." They can't maintain it because players get too expensive, so another team steps in to take their place while the big spenders keep spending.Is that competitive balance? No, it's not. It's ridiculous.In the NFL, the top teams are the top teams because they are well-run franchise that make good decisions. In baseball, that's not the case with the teams that make it just by outspending everyone else to cover up poor decisions.

But don't you think that if there was a salary cap in baseball, the Yankees would be smarter with their money? With no cap right now, Cashman and the Steinbrenners can afford to cover up mistakes, sure. But if there was a cap they wouldn't take such risks on guys like A.J. Burnett, Randy Johnson, Carl Pavano, etc. So you point to these as horrible mistakes that they can cover up; I point to them as luxuries the Yankees know they'll be ABLE to cover up if it is necessary.Believe me -- if MLB instituted a cap, the Yankees would make a lot more financially sound decisions than they do now. The reason none of their contracts have crippled them is because they know that none of them can. So why not take a shot on a guy and hope it pays off?

By more financially sound decisions, you mean that if you sign ARod you wont be able to afford another free agent for a few years and probably can't lock up your young talent. That if one of your pitchers isn't living up to their potential, that you have to wait it out for a few years to see if they eventually come around instead of signing someone else. That if you have a need in for a position player and a need for another pitcher, you'll probably have to choose one, or sign a lesser player at each position. I don't think the Yankees or the fans would be able to do it at this point.

No, I mean they'd never do things like trade for A-Rod in the first place. Don't forget, they gave up a young cheap talent in Soriano who wasn't THAT far behind A-Rod in terms of ability. Not to mention, if there was a salary cap, there never would have been a $250 million A-Rod contract to absorb. People just assume that if MLB were capped that everything that happened to this point would keep on happening. Sure, the guys under contract NOW would reap the benefits but after 3-5 years, the salaries would severely tail off. And we'd see change across the board in how teams run their front office.

 

[Wrigley]

I just don't understand why Yankee fans don't want the league to be more competitive as a whole?

 

[boubucarow]

and the lack of competitive balance in baseball.

There is just as much parity in baseball as there is in the other sports.

In baseball, you have several teams that have the resources to be competitive each and every year without exception. They don't have to rebuild, they just reload. The only reason they aren't at or near the top every year is because of terrible decision making and too many mistakes with bad contracts, and then you have the Yankees who can overcome even that by drastically outspending everyone. They spent over 30% more than even the Red Sox.Those mistakes and bad contracts can tie up a smaller market franchise for years, but the bigger market teams just spend more to make up for it.And you have the rest of the league that will fight to be the handful of teams that have to hope that everything clicks for a couple years just to compete to be the underdog that makes a run against them so that the bigger markets can point to them and say, "See, it can be done." They can't maintain it because players get too expensive, so another team steps in to take their place while the big spenders keep spending.Is that competitive balance? No, it's not. It's ridiculous.In the NFL, the top teams are the top teams because they are well-run franchise that make good decisions. In baseball, that's not the case with the teams that make it just by outspending everyone else to cover up poor decisions.

I understand that is the perception. It's wrong and not based on any reasonable facts and review of the postseason histories of the 4 major sports. Does the NFL have more parity? Yes, but only slightly, and MLB is better then the NHL or NBA, and when you factor in that MLB has less teams making the playoffs and adjust for that, again, MLB has just as much parity as the other sports.

The NBA in particular should not be involved in a parity conversation among the major leagues. The influence of one dominant individual is so much greater in basketball then it is in the NFL or MLB that parity comparison between those leagues have little meaning. We all know this, if you have Tim Duncan, Michael Jordan, or Shaquille O'Neal, you have a great chance to contend for a title and if you have two great players, you are almost assured a strong shot. In baseball, you can have the ARod and Pujols on your team at their very best and easily only be a 500 team. The problem most have is the conception that in the NFL a team needs to make a series of good to great decisions to contend in one particular season. In the NBA, you needed to draft that one or two superstar athletes and build a team of role players around them. In the MLB, you have to draft and develop talent or acquire talent by shrewd trading in order to build a 25 man roster that can contend. That is if you are the Rays, Twins, Pirates, Reds, Brewers, A's, etc... But if you are the Angels, Cubs, Dodgers, Mets, or Red Sox, you can cover up numerous mistakes in drafting, developing, and transactions by buying players. Of course, the Yankees basically have to make every wrong baseball decision possible not to contend since they can always buy the players developed by the Rays, Twins, Pirates, Reds, Brewers, A's etc....In short, The Patriots have contended for a NFL title for almost a decade now because of Bill Belichick's coaching and gameplanning and Scott Pioli's ability to draft players with upside in Belicheck's system.The Spurs have contended for a NBA title for about a decade now because they have Tim Duncan and make good decisions surrounding him with the right players.The Yankees have contended for a MLB title for over a decade because they have a lot more money than anyone else.All that said,In the last 10 years of post season play, the NBA has had 17 different teams reach the conference finals while both the NFL and MLB have had 21 different teams reach the conference finals. The MLB have a bit more dominance at the top than the NFL with the Red Sox, Yankees, and Cardinals accounting for 15 out of the 40 spots. The Partriots, Eagles, and Steelers have accounted for 12 of the 40 spots. MLB does have 12 teams that have made one appearance in the conference finals while the NFL has 8 one appearance teams.By the way, the Cardinals have reached the NL Championship game as many times in the last 10 years as the Yankees have reached the AL Championship game.

 

[Yankee23Fan]

and the lack of competitive balance in baseball.

There is just as much parity in baseball as there is in the other sports.

In baseball, you have several teams that have the resources to be competitive each and every year without exception. They don't have to rebuild, they just reload. The only reason they aren't at or near the top every year is because of terrible decision making and too many mistakes with bad contracts, and then you have the Yankees who can overcome even that by drastically outspending everyone. They spent over 30% more than even the Red Sox.Those mistakes and bad contracts can tie up a smaller market franchise for years, but the bigger market teams just spend more to make up for it.And you have the rest of the league that will fight to be the handful of teams that have to hope that everything clicks for a couple years just to compete to be the underdog that makes a run against them so that the bigger markets can point to them and say, "See, it can be done." They can't maintain it because players get too expensive, so another team steps in to take their place while the big spenders keep spending.Is that competitive balance? No, it's not. It's ridiculous.In the NFL, the top teams are the top teams because they are well-run franchise that make good decisions. In baseball, that's not the case with the teams that make it just by outspending everyone else to cover up poor decisions.

I understand that is the perception. It's wrong and not based on any reasonable facts and review of the postseason histories of the 4 major sports. Does the NFL have more parity? Yes, but only slightly, and MLB is better then the NHL or NBA, and when you factor in that MLB has less teams making the playoffs and adjust for that, again, MLB has just as much parity as the other sports.

No, the perception isn't wrong. Teams like the Yankees, Mets, Red Sox, Angels... they'll always be able to be a contender as long as they make good use of their resources. Yes, there are teams all the time that make 1 and 2 year runs with a few home-grown pieces that all come together at the same time, but it's not right that a handful of teams will never have to rebuild because they'll never lack the resources to fill in holes no matter how poor their decision making has been.I don't expect a Yankees fan to agree with it, in this case, perception is reality. The big market teams will do well every year if they spend their money wisely. The small market teams have to hope everything comes together for a few years and then start over. FULL revenue sharing + a salary floor + a salary cap is the only answer.

The Red Sox have been a powerhouse for 5 years. The Angels were talked about in the contraction debates before they won the World Series. The Mets have been to 1 World Series in 20 years. The Yankees didn't make the playoffs last year.Again. Facts. Not feelings blinded by big numbers. Facts.

 

[Yankee23Fan]

and the lack of competitive balance in baseball.

There is just as much parity in baseball as there is in the other sports.

In baseball, you have several teams that have the resources to be competitive each and every year without exception. They don't have to rebuild, they just reload. The only reason they aren't at or near the top every year is because of terrible decision making and too many mistakes with bad contracts, and then you have the Yankees who can overcome even that by drastically outspending everyone. They spent over 30% more than even the Red Sox.Those mistakes and bad contracts can tie up a smaller market franchise for years, but the bigger market teams just spend more to make up for it.

And you have the rest of the league that will fight to be the handful of teams that have to hope that everything clicks for a couple years just to compete to be the underdog that makes a run against them so that the bigger markets can point to them and say, "See, it can be done." They can't maintain it because players get too expensive, so another team steps in to take their place while the big spenders keep spending.

Is that competitive balance? No, it's not. It's ridiculous.

In the NFL, the top teams are the top teams because they are well-run franchise that make good decisions. In baseball, that's not the case with the teams that make it just by outspending everyone else to cover up poor decisions.

I understand that is the perception. It's wrong and not based on any reasonable facts and review of the postseason histories of the 4 major sports. Does the NFL have more parity? Yes, but only slightly, and MLB is better then the NHL or NBA, and when you factor in that MLB has less teams making the playoffs and adjust for that, again, MLB has just as much parity as the other sports.

The NBA in particular should not be involved in a parity conversation among the major leagues. The influence of one dominant individual is so much greater in basketball then it is in the NFL or MLB that parity comparison between those leagues have little meaning. We all know this, if you have Tim Duncan, Michael Jordan, or Shaquille O'Neal, you have a great chance to contend for a title and if you have two great players, you are almost assured a strong shot. In baseball, you can have the ARod and Pujols on your team at their very best and easily only be a 500 team.

The problem most have is the conception that in the NFL a team needs to make a series of good to great decisions to contend in one particular season. In the NBA, you needed to draft that one or two superstar athletes and build a team of role players around them. In the MLB, you have to draft and develop talent or acquire talent by shrewd trading in order to build a 25 man roster that can contend. That is if you are the Rays, Twins, Pirates, Reds, Brewers, A's, etc... But if you are the Angels, Cubs, Dodgers, Mets, or Red Sox, you can cover up numerous mistakes in drafting, developing, and transactions by buying players. Of course, the Yankees basically have to make every wrong baseball decision possible not to contend since they can always buy the players developed by the Rays, Twins, Pirates, Reds, Brewers, A's etc....

In short,

The Patriots have contended for a NFL title for almost a decade now because of Bill Belichick's coaching and gameplanning and Scott Pioli's ability to draft players with upside in Belicheck's system.

The Spurs have contended for a NBA title for about a decade now because they have Tim Duncan and make good decisions surrounding him with the right players.

The Yankees have contended for a MLB title for over a decade because they have a lot more money than anyone else.

All that said,

In the last 10 years of post season play, the NBA has had 17 different teams reach the conference finals while both the NFL and MLB have had 21 different teams reach the conference finals. The MLB have a bit more dominance at the top than the NFL with the Red Sox, Yankees, and Cardinals accounting for 15 out of the 40 spots. The Partriots, Eagles, and Steelers have accounted for 12 of the 40 spots. MLB does have 12 teams that have made one appearance in the conference finals while the NFL has 8 one appearance teams.

By the way, the Cardinals have reached the NL Championship game as many times in the last 10 years as the Yankees have reached the AL Championship game.

That's the point. Yes the economic model allows the Yankees the ability to spend more, thereby theoretically getting the better player on the team, but it hasn't created a lack of parity at all. And not for nothing, but when the Yankess actually won the titles everyone says they bought, they didn't do it with Jason Giambi, Alex Rodriguez and that ilk. They did it with Scott Brocious, Paul O'Neill and those guys. Most of us (Yankee fans) want those type of players on the team and not the highest price guy on the market just because he's the highest priced guy on the market. But the ownership has the ability to get the "best" player on the team and they will do it and continue to reinvest into the team. Isn't that what we want the owners of our teams to do? How many people attack the Bengals for not spending money - even with a cap to help out?

 

[boubucarow]

and the lack of competitive balance in baseball.

There is just as much parity in baseball as there is in the other sports.

In baseball, you have several teams that have the resources to be competitive each and every year without exception. They don't have to rebuild, they just reload. The only reason they aren't at or near the top every year is because of terrible decision making and too many mistakes with bad contracts, and then you have the Yankees who can overcome even that by drastically outspending everyone. They spent over 30% more than even the Red Sox.Those mistakes and bad contracts can tie up a smaller market franchise for years, but the bigger market teams just spend more to make up for it.

And you have the rest of the league that will fight to be the handful of teams that have to hope that everything clicks for a couple years just to compete to be the underdog that makes a run against them so that the bigger markets can point to them and say, "See, it can be done." They can't maintain it because players get too expensive, so another team steps in to take their place while the big spenders keep spending.

Is that competitive balance? No, it's not. It's ridiculous.

In the NFL, the top teams are the top teams because they are well-run franchise that make good decisions. In baseball, that's not the case with the teams that make it just by outspending everyone else to cover up poor decisions.

I understand that is the perception. It's wrong and not based on any reasonable facts and review of the postseason histories of the 4 major sports. Does the NFL have more parity? Yes, but only slightly, and MLB is better then the NHL or NBA, and when you factor in that MLB has less teams making the playoffs and adjust for that, again, MLB has just as much parity as the other sports.

The NBA in particular should not be involved in a parity conversation among the major leagues. The influence of one dominant individual is so much greater in basketball then it is in the NFL or MLB that parity comparison between those leagues have little meaning. We all know this, if you have Tim Duncan, Michael Jordan, or Shaquille O'Neal, you have a great chance to contend for a title and if you have two great players, you are almost assured a strong shot. In baseball, you can have the ARod and Pujols on your team at their very best and easily only be a 500 team.

The problem most have is the conception that in the NFL a team needs to make a series of good to great decisions to contend in one particular season. In the NBA, you needed to draft that one or two superstar athletes and build a team of role players around them. In the MLB, you have to draft and develop talent or acquire talent by shrewd trading in order to build a 25 man roster that can contend. That is if you are the Rays, Twins, Pirates, Reds, Brewers, A's, etc... But if you are the Angels, Cubs, Dodgers, Mets, or Red Sox, you can cover up numerous mistakes in drafting, developing, and transactions by buying players. Of course, the Yankees basically have to make every wrong baseball decision possible not to contend since they can always buy the players developed by the Rays, Twins, Pirates, Reds, Brewers, A's etc....

In short,

The Patriots have contended for a NFL title for almost a decade now because of Bill Belichick's coaching and gameplanning and Scott Pioli's ability to draft players with upside in Belicheck's system.

The Spurs have contended for a NBA title for about a decade now because they have Tim Duncan and make good decisions surrounding him with the right players.

The Yankees have contended for a MLB title for over a decade because they have a lot more money than anyone else.

All that said,

In the last 10 years of post season play, the NBA has had 17 different teams reach the conference finals while both the NFL and MLB have had 21 different teams reach the conference finals. The MLB have a bit more dominance at the top than the NFL with the Red Sox, Yankees, and Cardinals accounting for 15 out of the 40 spots. The Partriots, Eagles, and Steelers have accounted for 12 of the 40 spots. MLB does have 12 teams that have made one appearance in the conference finals while the NFL has 8 one appearance teams.

By the way, the Cardinals have reached the NL Championship game as many times in the last 10 years as the Yankees have reached the AL Championship game.

That's the point. Yes the economic model allows the Yankees the ability to spend more, thereby theoretically getting the better player on the team, but it hasn't created a lack of parity at all. And not for nothing, but when the Yankess actually won the titles everyone says they bought, they didn't do it with Jason Giambi, Alex Rodriguez and that ilk. They did it with Scott Brocious, Paul O'Neill and those guys. Most of us (Yankee fans) want those type of players on the team and not the highest price guy on the market just because he's the highest priced guy on the market. But the ownership has the ability to get the "best" player on the team and they will do it and continue to reinvest into the team. Isn't that what we want the owners of our teams to do? How many people attack the Bengals for not spending money - even with a cap to help out?

That is the problem for both Yankee fans and Yankee haters. They have not won a title when they did not have a significant presence of developed talent from their farm system. Yankee fans know that and the last few years have not been good for them because they lack that developed talent and while still making the playoffs, the other teams with such talent are winning the titles. Yankee haters hate the last few years because the Yankees still are in the playoffs despite not developing much talent at all and if almost any other team were as bad at developing talent in the last 5-10 years as the Yankees, they wouldn't sniff the playoffs.As a Cubs fans, I fear we are turning into the junior Yankees with a lot less money and probably a worse farm system.

 

[INRIhab]

and the lack of competitive balance in baseball.

There is just as much parity in baseball as there is in the other sports.

In baseball, you have several teams that have the resources to be competitive each and every year without exception. They don't have to rebuild, they just reload. The only reason they aren't at or near the top every year is because of terrible decision making and too many mistakes with bad contracts, and then you have the Yankees who can overcome even that by drastically outspending everyone. They spent over 30% more than even the Red Sox.Those mistakes and bad contracts can tie up a smaller market franchise for years, but the bigger market teams just spend more to make up for it.

And you have the rest of the league that will fight to be the handful of teams that have to hope that everything clicks for a couple years just to compete to be the underdog that makes a run against them so that the bigger markets can point to them and say, "See, it can be done." They can't maintain it because players get too expensive, so another team steps in to take their place while the big spenders keep spending.

Is that competitive balance? No, it's not. It's ridiculous.

In the NFL, the top teams are the top teams because they are well-run franchise that make good decisions. In baseball, that's not the case with the teams that make it just by outspending everyone else to cover up poor decisions.

I understand that is the perception. It's wrong and not based on any reasonable facts and review of the postseason histories of the 4 major sports. Does the NFL have more parity? Yes, but only slightly, and MLB is better then the NHL or NBA, and when you factor in that MLB has less teams making the playoffs and adjust for that, again, MLB has just as much parity as the other sports.

No, the perception isn't wrong. Teams like the Yankees, Mets, Red Sox, Angels... they'll always be able to be a contender as long as they make good use of their resources. Yes, there are teams all the time that make 1 and 2 year runs with a few home-grown pieces that all come together at the same time, but it's not right that a handful of teams will never have to rebuild because they'll never lack the resources to fill in holes no matter how poor their decision making has been.I don't expect a Yankees fan to agree with it, in this case, perception is reality. The big market teams will do well every year if they spend their money wisely. The small market teams have to hope everything comes together for a few years and then start over.

FULL revenue sharing + a salary floor + a salary cap is the only answer.

I'm not sure why you believe full revenue sharing is the answer. That would place a huge disincentive on teams to grow local revenues. I don't think the potential benefits outweigh the great moral hazard it would create.

 

[Reaper]

I just don't understand why Yankee fans don't want the league to be more competitive as a whole?

I've stated over and over that I did.. Many Many Yankee fans do....We're past that though - It's not up to us - So, after you get past that point you get to the point where fans of other teams pretend Yankee fans can't enjoy the sport. I've stated a few times in this thread alone - MLB is what it is.. A flawed system...

ALL SPORTS SHOULD HAVE SALARY CAPS!!!

I've bled Yankee Blue for 35years or so - I'm not going to stop - I look at the rosters, look at their chances and live and die with a season.... I enjoy it.

No matter what spin people want to put on it, at the end of the year I'm happier when the Yankees win over not winning - I guess that's up to the haters to use their time and efforts to try to quantify just how happy or sad I should be and what percentage less or more that should be compared to a Sox or Mets fan (who seem to care the most), and let me know.

 

[INRIhab]

and the lack of competitive balance in baseball.

There is just as much parity in baseball as there is in the other sports.

In baseball, you have several teams that have the resources to be competitive each and every year without exception. They don't have to rebuild, they just reload. The only reason they aren't at or near the top every year is because of terrible decision making and too many mistakes with bad contracts, and then you have the Yankees who can overcome even that by drastically outspending everyone. They spent over 30% more than even the Red Sox.Those mistakes and bad contracts can tie up a smaller market franchise for years, but the bigger market teams just spend more to make up for it.

And you have the rest of the league that will fight to be the handful of teams that have to hope that everything clicks for a couple years just to compete to be the underdog that makes a run against them so that the bigger markets can point to them and say, "See, it can be done." They can't maintain it because players get too expensive, so another team steps in to take their place while the big spenders keep spending.

Is that competitive balance? No, it's not. It's ridiculous.

In the NFL, the top teams are the top teams because they are well-run franchise that make good decisions. In baseball, that's not the case with the teams that make it just by outspending everyone else to cover up poor decisions.

I understand that is the perception. It's wrong and not based on any reasonable facts and review of the postseason histories of the 4 major sports. Does the NFL have more parity? Yes, but only slightly, and MLB is better then the NHL or NBA, and when you factor in that MLB has less teams making the playoffs and adjust for that, again, MLB has just as much parity as the other sports.

No, the perception isn't wrong. Teams like the Yankees, Mets, Red Sox, Angels... they'll always be able to be a contender as long as they make good use of their resources. Yes, there are teams all the time that make 1 and 2 year runs with a few home-grown pieces that all come together at the same time, but it's not right that a handful of teams will never have to rebuild because they'll never lack the resources to fill in holes no matter how poor their decision making has been.I don't expect a Yankees fan to agree with it, in this case, perception is reality. The big market teams will do well every year if they spend their money wisely. The small market teams have to hope everything comes together for a few years and then start over.

FULL revenue sharing + a salary floor + a salary cap is the only answer.

The Red Sox have been a powerhouse for 5 years. The Angels were talked about in the contraction debates before they won the World Series. The Mets have been to 1 World Series in 20 years. The Yankees didn't make the playoffs last year.Again. Facts. Not feelings blinded by big numbers. Facts.

With all due respect: REALLY!?

 

[Thunderlips]

and the lack of competitive balance in baseball.

There is just as much parity in baseball as there is in the other sports.

In baseball, you have several teams that have the resources to be competitive each and every year without exception. They don't have to rebuild, they just reload. The only reason they aren't at or near the top every year is because of terrible decision making and too many mistakes with bad contracts, and then you have the Yankees who can overcome even that by drastically outspending everyone. They spent over 30% more than even the Red Sox.Those mistakes and bad contracts can tie up a smaller market franchise for years, but the bigger market teams just spend more to make up for it.And you have the rest of the league that will fight to be the handful of teams that have to hope that everything clicks for a couple years just to compete to be the underdog that makes a run against them so that the bigger markets can point to them and say, "See, it can be done." They can't maintain it because players get too expensive, so another team steps in to take their place while the big spenders keep spending.Is that competitive balance? No, it's not. It's ridiculous.In the NFL, the top teams are the top teams because they are well-run franchise that make good decisions. In baseball, that's not the case with the teams that make it just by outspending everyone else to cover up poor decisions.

I understand that is the perception. It's wrong and not based on any reasonable facts and review of the postseason histories of the 4 major sports. Does the NFL have more parity? Yes, but only slightly, and MLB is better then the NHL or NBA, and when you factor in that MLB has less teams making the playoffs and adjust for that, again, MLB has just as much parity as the other sports.

No, the perception isn't wrong. Teams like the Yankees, Mets, Red Sox, Angels... they'll always be able to be a contender as long as they make good use of their resources. Yes, there are teams all the time that make 1 and 2 year runs with a few home-grown pieces that all come together at the same time, but it's not right that a handful of teams will never have to rebuild because they'll never lack the resources to fill in holes no matter how poor their decision making has been.I don't expect a Yankees fan to agree with it, in this case, perception is reality. The big market teams will do well every year if they spend their money wisely. The small market teams have to hope everything comes together for a few years and then start over. FULL revenue sharing + a salary floor + a salary cap is the only answer.

The Red Sox have been a powerhouse for 5 years. The Angels were talked about in the contraction debates before they won the World Series. The Mets have been to 1 World Series in 20 years. The Yankees didn't make the playoffs last year.Again. Facts. Not feelings blinded by big numbers. Facts.

Throw in the Cubs and Dodgers into the equation as two big market teams who have done very little in the postseason. In fact, you could make an argument that smaller market teams like the Marlins, A's and Twins have had more success.

 

[DropKick]

and the lack of competitive balance in baseball.

There is just as much parity in baseball as there is in the other sports.

In baseball, you have several teams that have the resources to be competitive each and every year without exception. They don't have to rebuild, they just reload. The only reason they aren't at or near the top every year is because of terrible decision making and too many mistakes with bad contracts, and then you have the Yankees who can overcome even that by drastically outspending everyone. They spent over 30% more than even the Red Sox.Those mistakes and bad contracts can tie up a smaller market franchise for years, but the bigger market teams just spend more to make up for it.And you have the rest of the league that will fight to be the handful of teams that have to hope that everything clicks for a couple years just to compete to be the underdog that makes a run against them so that the bigger markets can point to them and say, "See, it can be done." They can't maintain it because players get too expensive, so another team steps in to take their place while the big spenders keep spending.Is that competitive balance? No, it's not. It's ridiculous.In the NFL, the top teams are the top teams because they are well-run franchise that make good decisions. In baseball, that's not the case with the teams that make it just by outspending everyone else to cover up poor decisions.

I understand that is the perception. It's wrong and not based on any reasonable facts and review of the postseason histories of the 4 major sports. Does the NFL have more parity? Yes, but only slightly, and MLB is better then the NHL or NBA, and when you factor in that MLB has less teams making the playoffs and adjust for that, again, MLB has just as much parity as the other sports.

No, the perception isn't wrong. Teams like the Yankees, Mets, Red Sox, Angels... they'll always be able to be a contender as long as they make good use of their resources. Yes, there are teams all the time that make 1 and 2 year runs with a few home-grown pieces that all come together at the same time, but it's not right that a handful of teams will never have to rebuild because they'll never lack the resources to fill in holes no matter how poor their decision making has been.I don't expect a Yankees fan to agree with it, in this case, perception is reality. The big market teams will do well every year if they spend their money wisely. The small market teams have to hope everything comes together for a few years and then start over. FULL revenue sharing + a salary floor + a salary cap is the only answer.

The Red Sox have been a powerhouse for 5 years. The Angels were talked about in the contraction debates before they won the World Series. The Mets have been to 1 World Series in 20 years. The Yankees didn't make the playoffs last year.Again. Facts. Not feelings blinded by big numbers. Facts.

Throw in the Cubs and Dodgers into the equation as two big market teams who have done very little in the postseason. In fact, you could make an argument that smaller market teams like the Marlins, A's and Twins have had more success.

Off the top of my head, I would list the A's and Twins as being the best of doing "more with less". And based on the Marlins post season success, they belong in the conversation too.The 08 Mets had another monumental swoon. The Yankees... a down year with a record payroll and the "modern day murderers row". The Rays had a season for the ages by overcoming two very successful, big market clubs. Aside from a string of stunning come-from-behind wins and the rock solid managerial ability of Joe Madden, we would of had NY/Boston in the AL East. Considering we had two Chicago clubs and two L.A. clubs on top of their respective divisions, 08 was very close to a big market roll of MLB.I do agree that revenue sharing (so much more difficult in baseball than football) and a floor/cap would be the answer (or at least the right direction) to a very complex problem.The NFL has more parity (or at least opportunity) than MLB. I know opinions differ, especially if you only focus simply on league champion. However, it seems that every year teams turn it around ala Miami, Baltimore, Tennessee, Carolina, Minnesota, Atlanta and Arizona this year. It's a different game; shorter season, injuries, etc. But the existence of a cap makes for a more wide-open and competitive season.

 

[Koya]

Y23... you are a smart guy who puts out an arguement quite well - but you can't win this one. You want a medal because the Yanks are so inept that even with a HUGE HUGE advantage they havent won since the turn of the millenium? Come on, don't let the meathead nation blind your rationale. It's an awful system that hurts the game. Is the game doing well? Sure. Would it do better if say, the Oriole s fan felt they had a chance in hell to compete over the long haul? Damn straight. To say otherwise is rather meatheaded... then again, you are a Yanks fan.

 

[dparker713]

Y23... you are a smart guy who puts out an arguement quite well - but you can't win this one. You want a medal because the Yanks are so inept that even with a HUGE HUGE advantage they havent won since the turn of the millenium? Come on, don't let the meathead nation blind your rationale. It's an awful system that hurts the game. Is the game doing well? Sure. Would it do better if say, the Oriole s fan felt they had a chance in hell to compete over the long haul? Damn straight. To say otherwise is rather meatheaded... then again, you are a Yanks fan.

The only teams it really cripples though are in the AL East. The Orioles, Blue Jays and Rays are in the worst position in sports. And its not because they need to directly compete with the Yankees, its because they need to compete with the Yankees AND the Red Sox. So if either of the two highest payroll teams has an off year, you still have to go up against another goliath. Yes, I know the Rays won the division this year, but lets see how they do this upcoming year before proclaiming them geniuses as opposed to fortunate. Frankly, given the nature of the game and how short playoff series are and the number of rounds you need to play, I'd never wager on any team to win the WS - get to the playoffs, sure. The playoff system and the wildcard combine to shrink the huge advantages those two clubs have in the regular season to be fairly inconsequential in the post season. The problem for the other AL East clubs is they have the hardest time reaching the post season.

 

[Koya]

Y23... you are a smart guy who puts out an arguement quite well - but you can't win this one. You want a medal because the Yanks are so inept that even with a HUGE HUGE advantage they havent won since the turn of the millenium? Come on, don't let the meathead nation blind your rationale. It's an awful system that hurts the game. Is the game doing well? Sure. Would it do better if say, the Oriole s fan felt they had a chance in hell to compete over the long haul? Damn straight. To say otherwise is rather meatheaded... then again, you are a Yanks fan.

The only teams it really cripples though are in the AL East. The Orioles, Blue Jays and Rays are in the worst position in sports. And its not because they need to directly compete with the Yankees, its because they need to compete with the Yankees AND the Red Sox. So if either of the two highest payroll teams has an off year, you still have to go up against another goliath. Yes, I know the Rays won the division this year, but lets see how they do this upcoming year before proclaiming them geniuses as opposed to fortunate. Frankly, given the nature of the game and how short playoff series are and the number of rounds you need to play, I'd never wager on any team to win the WS - get to the playoffs, sure. The playoff system and the wildcard combine to shrink the huge advantages those two clubs have in the regular season to be fairly inconsequential in the post season. The problem for the other AL East clubs is they have the hardest time reaching the post season.

When you cripple the chances of 3 out of 5 teams in a division (and cripple doesnt mean they can never win, thankfully baseball does have a lot of chance involved, money alone cant buy a championship, although it certainly helps... and thankfully the Yanks have really done quite poorly of late considering their ridiculous advantage... with a salary cap they would likely look like the knicks, without the sexual harrassment) thats way, way, way too much.And while other teams are not crippled, its not even CLOSE to a fair playing field. Now, the yanks are not doing anything "wrong" but for their fans to pound their chests saying how money is not the reason they are good year after year, and how they can actually claim that the Yanks dont have that much of an advantage and that a world series truly would be as sweet knowing that a WS win is really just par for the course for a team with that advantage is kinda ridiculous.And FWIW, the Mets are an embarassment for NOT taking more advantage of the stupid, awful system... but that is another thread altogether.

 

[The Ghost of Common]

Y23... you are a smart guy who puts out an arguement quite well - but you can't win this one. You want a medal because the Yanks are so inept that even with a HUGE HUGE advantage they havent won since the turn of the millenium? Come on, don't let the meathead nation blind your rationale. It's an awful system that hurts the game. Is the game doing well? Sure. Would it do better if say, the Oriole s fan felt they had a chance in hell to compete over the long haul? Damn straight. To say otherwise is rather meatheaded... then again, you are a Yanks fan.

The only teams it really cripples though are in the AL East. The Orioles, Blue Jays and Rays are in the worst position in sports. And its not because they need to directly compete with the Yankees, its because they need to compete with the Yankees AND the Red Sox. So if either of the two highest payroll teams has an off year, you still have to go up against another goliath. Yes, I know the Rays won the division this year, but lets see how they do this upcoming year before proclaiming them geniuses as opposed to fortunate. Frankly, given the nature of the game and how short playoff series are and the number of rounds you need to play, I'd never wager on any team to win the WS - get to the playoffs, sure. The playoff system and the wildcard combine to shrink the huge advantages those two clubs have in the regular season to be fairly inconsequential in the post season. The problem for the other AL East clubs is they have the hardest time reaching the post season.

When you cripple the chances of 3 out of 5 teams in a division (and cripple doesnt mean they can never win, thankfully baseball does have a lot of chance involved, money alone cant buy a championship, although it certainly helps... and thankfully the Yanks have really done quite poorly of late considering their ridiculous advantage... with a salary cap they would likely look like the knicks, without the sexual harrassment) thats way, way, way too much.And while other teams are not crippled, its not even CLOSE to a fair playing field. Now, the yanks are not doing anything "wrong" but for their fans to pound their chests saying how money is not the reason they are good year after year, and how they can actually claim that the Yanks dont have that much of an advantage and that a world series truly would be as sweet knowing that a WS win is really just par for the course for a team with that advantage is kinda ridiculous.And FWIW, the Mets are an embarassment for NOT taking more advantage of the stupid, awful system... but that is another thread altogether.

This is a good post.The Yankees have a nice advantage over every team in baseball. It's their own fault they aren't capable of using that advantage on the field and in the coaches seat.Give a bank account like the Yankees to a top notch GM and coach and they'd win every season.

 

[Reaper]

Y23... you are a smart guy who puts out an arguement quite well - but you can't win this one. You want a medal because the Yanks are so inept that even with a HUGE HUGE advantage they havent won since the turn of the millenium? Come on, don't let the meathead nation blind your rationale. It's an awful system that hurts the game. Is the game doing well? Sure. Would it do better if say, the Oriole s fan felt they had a chance in hell to compete over the long haul? Damn straight. To say otherwise is rather meatheaded... then again, you are a Yanks fan.

The only teams it really cripples though are in the AL East. The Orioles, Blue Jays and Rays are in the worst position in sports. And its not because they need to directly compete with the Yankees, its because they need to compete with the Yankees AND the Red Sox. So if either of the two highest payroll teams has an off year, you still have to go up against another goliath. Yes, I know the Rays won the division this year, but lets see how they do this upcoming year before proclaiming them geniuses as opposed to fortunate. Frankly, given the nature of the game and how short playoff series are and the number of rounds you need to play, I'd never wager on any team to win the WS - get to the playoffs, sure. The playoff system and the wildcard combine to shrink the huge advantages those two clubs have in the regular season to be fairly inconsequential in the post season. The problem for the other AL East clubs is they have the hardest time reaching the post season.

When you cripple the chances of 3 out of 5 teams in a division (and cripple doesnt mean they can never win, thankfully baseball does have a lot of chance involved, money alone cant buy a championship, although it certainly helps... and thankfully the Yanks have really done quite poorly of late considering their ridiculous advantage... with a salary cap they would likely look like the knicks, without the sexual harrassment) thats way, way, way too much.And while other teams are not crippled, its not even CLOSE to a fair playing field. Now, the yanks are not doing anything "wrong" but for their fans to pound their chests saying how money is not the reason they are good year after year, and how they can actually claim that the Yanks dont have that much of an advantage and that a world series truly would be as sweet knowing that a WS win is really just par for the course for a team with that advantage is kinda ridiculous.

And FWIW, the Mets are an embarassment for NOT taking more advantage of the stupid, awful system... but that is another thread altogether.

LOL.

The Mets assembled possibly the best talent in the NL and, if I'm correct have the highest NL salary over the next team by over 20% and more over the Phillies plus add in some National leagues teams barely afloat that the Mets regularly get to pound.

The embarassment has been CHOKING big time!!! While, if we look at the NL alone, they should be dominating based on money... And the Mets salary isn't bogged down with older guys like the Yankees have still from the dynasty years probably making money based on past performance over future.

I say, if the Mets ever do win the NL, they'll be barely getting to par at this point. If they win it this year it would be 1 of 4 years in which they have been outspending the rest.

After the past 3 years, I'm not really sure how Happy compared to some of the upstart clubs and fans, a Mets fan should really be....

But, I know better, believe me, when/if the Mets are battling for the National league and it's Santana Vs whoever from some team spending half as much that happened to have a great year, Koya won't give a #### about money anymore - Funny thing is he'll be damn happy to spend more than any National leagues team AND take the title.

Really, the Mets should walk their way right into the playoffs - This year last year and the year before.... Yankees aside, that is the embarrassment and if it helps you to point to the Yankees and if it lessens the pain of your own team CHOKING while OUTSPENDING the NL, then I say go for it. ENJOY!!!

 

[Koya]

Y23... you are a smart guy who puts out an arguement quite well - but you can't win this one. You want a medal because the Yanks are so inept that even with a HUGE HUGE advantage they havent won since the turn of the millenium? Come on, don't let the meathead nation blind your rationale. It's an awful system that hurts the game. Is the game doing well? Sure. Would it do better if say, the Oriole s fan felt they had a chance in hell to compete over the long haul? Damn straight. To say otherwise is rather meatheaded... then again, you are a Yanks fan.

The only teams it really cripples though are in the AL East. The Orioles, Blue Jays and Rays are in the worst position in sports. And its not because they need to directly compete with the Yankees, its because they need to compete with the Yankees AND the Red Sox. So if either of the two highest payroll teams has an off year, you still have to go up against another goliath. Yes, I know the Rays won the division this year, but lets see how they do this upcoming year before proclaiming them geniuses as opposed to fortunate. Frankly, given the nature of the game and how short playoff series are and the number of rounds you need to play, I'd never wager on any team to win the WS - get to the playoffs, sure. The playoff system and the wildcard combine to shrink the huge advantages those two clubs have in the regular season to be fairly inconsequential in the post season. The problem for the other AL East clubs is they have the hardest time reaching the post season.

When you cripple the chances of 3 out of 5 teams in a division (and cripple doesnt mean they can never win, thankfully baseball does have a lot of chance involved, money alone cant buy a championship, although it certainly helps... and thankfully the Yanks have really done quite poorly of late considering their ridiculous advantage... with a salary cap they would likely look like the knicks, without the sexual harrassment) thats way, way, way too much.And while other teams are not crippled, its not even CLOSE to a fair playing field. Now, the yanks are not doing anything "wrong" but for their fans to pound their chests saying how money is not the reason they are good year after year, and how they can actually claim that the Yanks dont have that much of an advantage and that a world series truly would be as sweet knowing that a WS win is really just par for the course for a team with that advantage is kinda ridiculous.

And FWIW, the Mets are an embarassment for NOT taking more advantage of the stupid, awful system... but that is another thread altogether.

LOL.

The Mets assembled possibly the best talent in the NL and, if I'm correct have the highest NL salary over the next team by over 20% and more over the Phillies plus add in some National leagues teams barely afloat that the Mets regularly get to pound.

The embarassment has been CHOKING big time!!! While, if we look at the NL alone, they should be dominating based on money... And the Mets salary isn't bogged down with older guys like the Yankees have still from the dynasty years probably making money based on past performance over future.

I say, if the Mets ever do win the NL, they'll be barely getting to par at this point. If they win it this year it would be 1 of 4 years in which they have been outspending the rest.

After the past 3 years, I'm not really sure how Happy compared to some of the upstart clubs and fans, a Mets fan should really be....

But, I know better, believe me, when/if the Mets are battling for the National league and it's Santana Vs whoever from some team spending half as much that happened to have a great year, Koya won't give a #### about money anymore - Funny thing is he'll be damn happy to spend more than any National leagues team AND take the title.

Really, the Mets should walk their way right into the playoffs - This year last year and the year before.... Yankees aside, that is the embarrassment and if it helps you to point to the Yankees and if it lessens the pain of your own team CHOKING while OUTSPENDING the NL, then I say go for it. ENJOY!!!

Arent the yanks fans getting all up in arms. Must be a touchy subject here. I fully stated that the Mets should spend more and I have on numerous occasions called them out for the choking no hearts they are. Of course, that doesnt mean what you stated was correct (i.e. - if the Mets had the most talent, they wouldnt have had huge holes such as the bullpen and their reliance on a 56 year old OF just to name two. That is why Minaya is overated. Yeah, he gets the big fish, but doesnt round a team at all).

That said, the Tex signing does not have to do with the Mets... it has to do with a team that had a four WS string that was absolutely earned, with great teams top to bottom - teams, not a group of mercenaries. However, when they win another WS (and like I said, the Yanks damn well should, because as bad as the Mets are for choking, its kinda a disgrace to outspend the league by tens of millions and not even win one. So great, our City has two pathetic teams, each in its own way), don't tell me - well, you will, but no one will believe it - that it feels as good as those Yanks teams that were built like baseball teams, worthy of pride and tradition. It's a bought championship that only leaves room for downside when somehow they don't win one every 4-5 years at the very least.

So go ahead, point out that my Mets are choking sad sacks. You are right. But that doesnt change the fact that the system is terrible, the Yanks are the ones that are the example since they outspend by so much, and I guess that baseball is at least fortunate that NY has two embarrassments in terms of managing a team or the Yanks would be there nearly every year and sometimes they would meet the Mets.

 

[DropKick]

Y23... you are a smart guy who puts out an arguement quite well - but you can't win this one. You want a medal because the Yanks are so inept that even with a HUGE HUGE advantage they havent won since the turn of the millenium? Come on, don't let the meathead nation blind your rationale. It's an awful system that hurts the game. Is the game doing well? Sure. Would it do better if say, the Oriole s fan felt they had a chance in hell to compete over the long haul? Damn straight. To say otherwise is rather meatheaded... then again, you are a Yanks fan.

The only teams it really cripples though are in the AL East. The Orioles, Blue Jays and Rays are in the worst position in sports. And its not because they need to directly compete with the Yankees, its because they need to compete with the Yankees AND the Red Sox. So if either of the two highest payroll teams has an off year, you still have to go up against another goliath. Yes, I know the Rays won the division this year, but lets see how they do this upcoming year before proclaiming them geniuses as opposed to fortunate. Frankly, given the nature of the game and how short playoff series are and the number of rounds you need to play, I'd never wager on any team to win the WS - get to the playoffs, sure. The playoff system and the wildcard combine to shrink the huge advantages those two clubs have in the regular season to be fairly inconsequential in the post season. The problem for the other AL East clubs is they have the hardest time reaching the post season.

Yes, the O's, Jays & Rays are directly in the toughest position. However, every mid/smaller market team is challenged to keep their stars once they develop.Amazing how things haven't changed much in 30 odd years... Although, hard to imagine a commissioner getting this actively involved:Jun 18, 1976 - Commissioner Kuhn voids the A's sales‚ totaling $3.5 million‚ of Joe Rudi and Rollie Fingers to the Red Sox‚ and Vida Blue to the Yankees‚ saying they are "not in the best interest of baseball."

 

[dparker713]

Y23... you are a smart guy who puts out an arguement quite well - but you can't win this one. You want a medal because the Yanks are so inept that even with a HUGE HUGE advantage they havent won since the turn of the millenium? Come on, don't let the meathead nation blind your rationale. It's an awful system that hurts the game. Is the game doing well? Sure. Would it do better if say, the Oriole s fan felt they had a chance in hell to compete over the long haul? Damn straight. To say otherwise is rather meatheaded... then again, you are a Yanks fan.

The only teams it really cripples though are in the AL East. The Orioles, Blue Jays and Rays are in the worst position in sports. And its not because they need to directly compete with the Yankees, its because they need to compete with the Yankees AND the Red Sox. So if either of the two highest payroll teams has an off year, you still have to go up against another goliath. Yes, I know the Rays won the division this year, but lets see how they do this upcoming year before proclaiming them geniuses as opposed to fortunate. Frankly, given the nature of the game and how short playoff series are and the number of rounds you need to play, I'd never wager on any team to win the WS - get to the playoffs, sure. The playoff system and the wildcard combine to shrink the huge advantages those two clubs have in the regular season to be fairly inconsequential in the post season. The problem for the other AL East clubs is they have the hardest time reaching the post season.

When you cripple the chances of 3 out of 5 teams in a division (and cripple doesnt mean they can never win, thankfully baseball does have a lot of chance involved, money alone cant buy a championship, although it certainly helps... and thankfully the Yanks have really done quite poorly of late considering their ridiculous advantage... with a salary cap they would likely look like the knicks, without the sexual harrassment) thats way, way, way too much.And while other teams are not crippled, its not even CLOSE to a fair playing field. Now, the yanks are not doing anything "wrong" but for their fans to pound their chests saying how money is not the reason they are good year after year, and how they can actually claim that the Yanks dont have that much of an advantage and that a world series truly would be as sweet knowing that a WS win is really just par for the course for a team with that advantage is kinda ridiculous.And FWIW, the Mets are an embarassment for NOT taking more advantage of the stupid, awful system... but that is another thread altogether.

I guess growing up a NY fan with the Yankees, Mets and Rangers all at various points doing their best to buy championships, I dont think how your team gets the players winds up mattering when your team wins a championship. As a fan, the most special championships I've rooted for are the Rangers in 94 and the Giants last season. 54 years, a bunch of overtimes including against the hated Devils, and a myriad of other reasons meant I didnt care that maybe a fifth of the team was homegrown and a fifth of the team had been acquired at the trade deadline. It was still unbelieveable. And last season with the Giants, it was their opponent and the game itself, not so much the players on the Giants, that made it so special.At the end of the day, as a fan I just want to see my teams win. And knowing that spending a boatload of money helps my teams win doesnt diminish my cheering interest, especially since I know that they cant buy a championship even in baseball - you'll still need to earn it come playoff time.PS - As a Met fan I can completely agree, they are an embarassment, but atleast they seem to be doing a bit better this offseason.

 

[Michael Brown]

Y23... you are a smart guy who puts out an arguement quite well - but you can't win this one. You want a medal because the Yanks are so inept that even with a HUGE HUGE advantage they havent won since the turn of the millenium? Come on, don't let the meathead nation blind your rationale. It's an awful system that hurts the game. Is the game doing well? Sure. Would it do better if say, the Oriole s fan felt they had a chance in hell to compete over the long haul? Damn straight. To say otherwise is rather meatheaded... then again, you are a Yanks fan.

The only teams it really cripples though are in the AL East. The Orioles, Blue Jays and Rays are in the worst position in sports. And its not because they need to directly compete with the Yankees, its because they need to compete with the Yankees AND the Red Sox. So if either of the two highest payroll teams has an off year, you still have to go up against another goliath. Yes, I know the Rays won the division this year, but lets see how they do this upcoming year before proclaiming them geniuses as opposed to fortunate. Frankly, given the nature of the game and how short playoff series are and the number of rounds you need to play, I'd never wager on any team to win the WS - get to the playoffs, sure. The playoff system and the wildcard combine to shrink the huge advantages those two clubs have in the regular season to be fairly inconsequential in the post season. The problem for the other AL East clubs is they have the hardest time reaching the post season.

When you cripple the chances of 3 out of 5 teams in a division (and cripple doesnt mean they can never win, thankfully baseball does have a lot of chance involved, money alone cant buy a championship, although it certainly helps... and thankfully the Yanks have really done quite poorly of late considering their ridiculous advantage... with a salary cap they would likely look like the knicks, without the sexual harrassment) thats way, way, way too much.And while other teams are not crippled, its not even CLOSE to a fair playing field. Now, the yanks are not doing anything "wrong" but for their fans to pound their chests saying how money is not the reason they are good year after year, and how they can actually claim that the Yanks dont have that much of an advantage and that a world series truly would be as sweet knowing that a WS win is really just par for the course for a team with that advantage is kinda ridiculous.

And FWIW, the Mets are an embarassment for NOT taking more advantage of the stupid, awful system... but that is another thread altogether.

LOL.

The Mets assembled possibly the best talent in the NL and, if I'm correct have the highest NL salary over the next team by over 20% and more over the Phillies plus add in some National leagues teams barely afloat that the Mets regularly get to pound.

The embarassment has been CHOKING big time!!! While, if we look at the NL alone, they should be dominating based on money... And the Mets salary isn't bogged down with older guys like the Yankees have still from the dynasty years probably making money based on past performance over future.

I say, if the Mets ever do win the NL, they'll be barely getting to par at this point. If they win it this year it would be 1 of 4 years in which they have been outspending the rest.

After the past 3 years, I'm not really sure how Happy compared to some of the upstart clubs and fans, a Mets fan should really be....

But, I know better, believe me, when/if the Mets are battling for the National league and it's Santana Vs whoever from some team spending half as much that happened to have a great year, Koya won't give a #### about money anymore - Funny thing is he'll be damn happy to spend more than any National leagues team AND take the title.

Really, the Mets should walk their way right into the playoffs - This year last year and the year before.... Yankees aside, that is the embarrassment and if it helps you to point to the Yankees and if it lessens the pain of your own team CHOKING while OUTSPENDING the NL, then I say go for it. ENJOY!!!

Arent the yanks fans getting all up in arms. Must be a touchy subject here. I fully stated that the Mets should spend more and I have on numerous occasions called them out for the choking no hearts they are. Of course, that doesnt mean what you stated was correct (i.e. - if the Mets had the most talent, they wouldnt have had huge holes such as the bullpen and their reliance on a 56 year old OF just to name two. That is why Minaya is overated. Yeah, he gets the big fish, but doesnt round a team at all).

That said, the Tex signing does not have to do with the Mets... it has to do with a team that had a four WS string that was absolutely earned, with great teams top to bottom - teams, not a group of mercenaries. However, when they win another WS (and like I said, the Yanks damn well should, because as bad as the Mets are for choking, its kinda a disgrace to outspend the league by tens of millions and not even win one. So great, our City has two pathetic teams, each in its own way), don't tell me - well, you will, but no one will believe it - that it feels as good as those Yanks teams that were built like baseball teams, worthy of pride and tradition. It's a bought championship that only leaves room for downside when somehow they don't win one every 4-5 years at the very least.

So go ahead, point out that my Mets are choking sad sacks. You are right. But that doesnt change the fact that the system is terrible, the Yanks are the ones that are the example since they outspend by so much, and I guess that baseball is at least fortunate that NY has two embarrassments in terms of managing a team or the Yanks would be there nearly every year and sometimes they would meet the Mets.

Koya, I'm not saying that you're wrong about the entire argument. I just think it's a misplaced argument.If you want to call Yankee fans out for beating their chests for making the playoffs just about every year, I'm with you. Our fanbase should never boast about the team's ability to get into the postseason because that is where the money is spent. That's why you go and get A-Rod, Tex, CC, etc. But that merely gets you IN. Once you're IN the playoffs, the best team in the field doesn't usually win. The team that gets the most breaks in its favor typically wins.

Like I said in another thread, the Yankees got a TON of breaks go their way during the WS runs. And they've had a TON of things go against them since 2000. There aren't many 1998 Yankees or 1984 Tigers getting in the playoffs these days -- teams that simply dominate the regular season and then pretty much lap the field come playoff time...teams that go into the postseason KNOWING they are going to win it all, and the series is simply a formality. Even the best teams typically have to earn it by playing exceptional baseball in October, so to suggest that it's not as fully earned just because of a high payroll is faulty logic in my opinion. The payroll gets you in, and I'm not going to argue that one bit. The Yankees have a huge advantage in that they get to the postseason more than anyone else because they can spend $200 million. And, over the course of 162 games, the breaks tend to even out and the teams with more talent survive. But over a 5 or a 7 game series, the talent level rarely comes into play. It's why in football and basketball, guys like Michael Jordan, Shaq, and Tom Brady dominate the postseason and lead their teams to victory while in baseball we get guys like Scott Brosius winning the World Series MVP.

I don't think I'm going to convince you of anything, but I do believe you would have a far stronger and more convincing argument if you stuck to calling the Yankee fans out who brag about the team winning 95-100 games every year. In my opinion, they SHOULD win that many games with the payroll they have. But once the playoffs begin, we've seen time and again that it's truly anybody's game at that point. Celebrating a win there is very justified.

 

[Reaper]

Y23... you are a smart guy who puts out an arguement quite well - but you can't win this one. You want a medal because the Yanks are so inept that even with a HUGE HUGE advantage they havent won since the turn of the millenium? Come on, don't let the meathead nation blind your rationale. It's an awful system that hurts the game. Is the game doing well? Sure. Would it do better if say, the Oriole s fan felt they had a chance in hell to compete over the long haul? Damn straight. To say otherwise is rather meatheaded... then again, you are a Yanks fan.

The only teams it really cripples though are in the AL East. The Orioles, Blue Jays and Rays are in the worst position in sports. And its not because they need to directly compete with the Yankees, its because they need to compete with the Yankees AND the Red Sox. So if either of the two highest payroll teams has an off year, you still have to go up against another goliath. Yes, I know the Rays won the division this year, but lets see how they do this upcoming year before proclaiming them geniuses as opposed to fortunate. Frankly, given the nature of the game and how short playoff series are and the number of rounds you need to play, I'd never wager on any team to win the WS - get to the playoffs, sure. The playoff system and the wildcard combine to shrink the huge advantages those two clubs have in the regular season to be fairly inconsequential in the post season. The problem for the other AL East clubs is they have the hardest time reaching the post season.

When you cripple the chances of 3 out of 5 teams in a division (and cripple doesnt mean they can never win, thankfully baseball does have a lot of chance involved, money alone cant buy a championship, although it certainly helps... and thankfully the Yanks have really done quite poorly of late considering their ridiculous advantage... with a salary cap they would likely look like the knicks, without the sexual harrassment) thats way, way, way too much.And while other teams are not crippled, its not even CLOSE to a fair playing field. Now, the yanks are not doing anything "wrong" but for their fans to pound their chests saying how money is not the reason they are good year after year, and how they can actually claim that the Yanks dont have that much of an advantage and that a world series truly would be as sweet knowing that a WS win is really just par for the course for a team with that advantage is kinda ridiculous.

And FWIW, the Mets are an embarassment for NOT taking more advantage of the stupid, awful system... but that is another thread altogether.

LOL.

The Mets assembled possibly the best talent in the NL and, if I'm correct have the highest NL salary over the next team by over 20% and more over the Phillies plus add in some National leagues teams barely afloat that the Mets regularly get to pound.

The embarassment has been CHOKING big time!!! While, if we look at the NL alone, they should be dominating based on money... And the Mets salary isn't bogged down with older guys like the Yankees have still from the dynasty years probably making money based on past performance over future.

I say, if the Mets ever do win the NL, they'll be barely getting to par at this point. If they win it this year it would be 1 of 4 years in which they have been outspending the rest.

After the past 3 years, I'm not really sure how Happy compared to some of the upstart clubs and fans, a Mets fan should really be....

But, I know better, believe me, when/if the Mets are battling for the National league and it's Santana Vs whoever from some team spending half as much that happened to have a great year, Koya won't give a #### about money anymore - Funny thing is he'll be damn happy to spend more than any National leagues team AND take the title.

Really, the Mets should walk their way right into the playoffs - This year last year and the year before.... Yankees aside, that is the embarrassment and if it helps you to point to the Yankees and if it lessens the pain of your own team CHOKING while OUTSPENDING the NL, then I say go for it. ENJOY!!!

Arent the yanks fans getting all up in arms. Must be a touchy subject here.

Not really.

A Thread about Mark Teixiera went on a tangent about the Yankees and a few posters posted their opinions about how a Yankee's fan should feel - A few Yankee fans simply replied what they ACTUALLY feel....

Pretty simple..... Sounds to me like the subject is more touchy for You. The person in a thread about a player not on your team telling fans of another team how they should feel.

Every time, I start by saying MLB is a screwed up system.

It's not that touchy at all.. If we want to have a strike and a ralley against MLB to change the system, You and I can hold hands and march down to the MLB offices (my wife works in the building) with signs and yell all we want - Maybe get a few beers along the way... I'm all for it. BOOOOH BASEBALL!!!!!

If we want to have a discussion about how a real Yankee fan feels when his team wins, I'll simply tell ya.

And I also said No Yankees win will ever top 1996 for me.... Like no win will top 04' for many Sox fans... That 1st one in a long while is always special no matter what the circumstances...

We seem to agree on most of the facts - It's only when people try to quantify the level of where other fans emotions should be, when I start to question things and tell you what an actual Real fan feels.... I just dont see these fans who "pound their chest and say money has nothing to do with it." But, yeah, if I met a Yankee fan who actually said that, again, I'd be right with you and I'd explain exactly how the money helps and how MLB has a messed up system. One which we have no control over....

 

[Yankee23Fan]

Y23... you are a smart guy who puts out an arguement quite well - but you can't win this one. You want a medal because the Yanks are so inept that even with a HUGE HUGE advantage they havent won since the turn of the millenium? Come on, don't let the meathead nation blind your rationale. It's an awful system that hurts the game. Is the game doing well? Sure. Would it do better if say, the Oriole s fan felt they had a chance in hell to compete over the long haul? Damn straight. To say otherwise is rather meatheaded... then again, you are a Yanks fan.

I don't want a medal, and you are wrong. I have won this one. The facts don't back up the woe is me the Yankees spend too much and the sport has no parity arguement at all. I agree I can't change perception based on ignorance.

 

[Koya]

Y23... you are a smart guy who puts out an arguement quite well - but you can't win this one. You want a medal because the Yanks are so inept that even with a HUGE HUGE advantage they havent won since the turn of the millenium? Come on, don't let the meathead nation blind your rationale. It's an awful system that hurts the game. Is the game doing well? Sure. Would it do better if say, the Oriole s fan felt they had a chance in hell to compete over the long haul? Damn straight. To say otherwise is rather meatheaded... then again, you are a Yanks fan.

I don't want a medal, and you are wrong. I have won this one. The facts don't back up the woe is me the Yankees spend too much and the sport has no parity arguement at all. I agree I can't change perception based on ignorance.

The only reason their is parity is because the Yanks choke away dollars like the Mets do pennants. That is not a statement of how good the system is, but rather a statement on the Yanks who have an immense advantage going in - even if they have not taken care of it. Doesn't change the fact that they should win at least 1-2 of the next 5 WS just to tread water with the advantage they have.I can't change willful ignorance based upon interpreted perception, either.

 

[Giantseasonticketholder]

LET'S GO YANKEES!!!

 

[Michael Brown]

Y23... you are a smart guy who puts out an arguement quite well - but you can't win this one. You want a medal because the Yanks are so inept that even with a HUGE HUGE advantage they havent won since the turn of the millenium? Come on, don't let the meathead nation blind your rationale. It's an awful system that hurts the game. Is the game doing well? Sure. Would it do better if say, the Oriole s fan felt they had a chance in hell to compete over the long haul? Damn straight. To say otherwise is rather meatheaded... then again, you are a Yanks fan.

I don't want a medal, and you are wrong. I have won this one. The facts don't back up the woe is me the Yankees spend too much and the sport has no parity arguement at all. I agree I can't change perception based on ignorance.

The only reason their is parity is because the Yanks choke away dollars like the Mets do pennants. That is not a statement of how good the system is, but rather a statement on the Yanks who have an immense advantage going in - even if they have not taken care of it. Doesn't change the fact that they should win at least 1-2 of the next 5 WS just to tread water with the advantage they have.I can't change willful ignorance based upon interpreted perception, either.

Koya I don't know you or anything so this isn't a personal insult against you, but anyone who thinks a team *should* win two out of five World Series titles definitely doesn't understand anything about baseball. I don't think you truly believe what you are saying here; you're just trying to stir up Yankee fans, and it's mostly working. But it's still nonsense.

 

[Steelers4Life]

Y23... you are a smart guy who puts out an arguement quite well - but you can't win this one. You want a medal because the Yanks are so inept that even with a HUGE HUGE advantage they havent won since the turn of the millenium? Come on, don't let the meathead nation blind your rationale. It's an awful system that hurts the game. Is the game doing well? Sure. Would it do better if say, the Oriole s fan felt they had a chance in hell to compete over the long haul? Damn straight. To say otherwise is rather meatheaded... then again, you are a Yanks fan.

I don't want a medal, and you are wrong. I have won this one. The facts don't back up the woe is me the Yankees spend too much and the sport has no parity arguement at all. I agree I can't change perception based on ignorance.

The sport has parity. But the issue is that NO team should be in a position to simply reload every year while a majority of the teams have to rebuild from time to time. Pointing to other teams that make 1 to 3 year runs and claiming that the system is OK because the Yankees ACTUALLY MISSED THE PLAYOFFS once doesn't support any notion that the system is OK. If anything, it points out the flaw.The Yankees SHOULDN'T be in a position where not making the playoffs is such a huge disappointment. Every team should have the same crack at the playoffs and the Wold Series.The parity is with the small market teams competing every year to take a crack at the big market teams. When the Mets, Angels, or Dodgers struggle, it's because they made huge mistakes in the front office, but the system is set up for them to compete and/or win every single year.The teams with the advantages financially SHOULD make the playoffs every year, and they would if they could take advantage of a system heavily weighted in their favor. The Yankees have been one of the worst run organizations in all of sports since they haven't won the world series despite having such a huge competitive advantage.That's not ignorance. And it's not perception. Those are facts.

 

[Michael Brown]

Y23... you are a smart guy who puts out an arguement quite well - but you can't win this one. You want a medal because the Yanks are so inept that even with a HUGE HUGE advantage they havent won since the turn of the millenium? Come on, don't let the meathead nation blind your rationale. It's an awful system that hurts the game. Is the game doing well? Sure. Would it do better if say, the Oriole s fan felt they had a chance in hell to compete over the long haul? Damn straight. To say otherwise is rather meatheaded... then again, you are a Yanks fan.

I don't want a medal, and you are wrong. I have won this one. The facts don't back up the woe is me the Yankees spend too much and the sport has no parity arguement at all. I agree I can't change perception based on ignorance.

The sport has parity. But the issue is that NO team should be in a position to simply reload every year while a majority of the teams have to rebuild from time to time. Pointing to other teams that make 1 to 3 year runs and claiming that the system is OK because the Yankees ACTUALLY MISSED THE PLAYOFFS once doesn't support any notion that the system is OK. If anything, it points out the flaw.The Yankees SHOULDN'T be in a position where not making the playoffs is such a huge disappointment. Every team should have the same crack at the playoffs and the Wold Series.

The parity is with the small market teams competing every year to take a crack at the big market teams. When the Mets, Angels, or Dodgers struggle, it's because they made huge mistakes in the front office, but the system is set up for them to compete and/or win every single year.

The teams with the advantages financially SHOULD make the playoffs every year, and they would if they could take advantage of a system heavily weighted in their favor. The Yankees have been one of the worst run organizations in all of sports since they haven't won the world series despite having such a huge competitive advantage.

That's not ignorance. And it's not perception. Those are facts.

You were making a flawless post until the bolded part. Again, baseball is not like the other sports. If the Yankees had built their team perfectly and went out and obtained Josh Beckett, Johan Santana, Jake Peavy, and the ghost of Christy Matthewson, they still would lose a best of 5 series if two of those guys are a bit off on any given day. Or if they ran into the unhittable postseason versions Kenny Rogers or Jeff Suppan. It happens. The argument that should be made is that there is no excuse to finish in 3rd with a $200 million payroll. But there are plenty of excuses/reasons for not winning the WS once you're there. The payroll gets you in, but baseball is so reliant on luck and outliers in the postseason that it's hardly a good argument to suggest a team is poorly run simply because they win 98 regular season games but then lose 3 games in a 5-game stretch.Long story short, the 2001-2007 Yankees didn't miss winning the WS because they were poorly run. They missed the WS because they lost in the playoffs. In 2008, they were poorly run because they had a giant advantage to get IN the playoffs and still ended up blowing it.

 

[Koya]

Y23... you are a smart guy who puts out an arguement quite well - but you can't win this one. You want a medal because the Yanks are so inept that even with a HUGE HUGE advantage they havent won since the turn of the millenium? Come on, don't let the meathead nation blind your rationale. It's an awful system that hurts the game. Is the game doing well? Sure. Would it do better if say, the Oriole s fan felt they had a chance in hell to compete over the long haul? Damn straight. To say otherwise is rather meatheaded... then again, you are a Yanks fan.

I don't want a medal, and you are wrong. I have won this one. The facts don't back up the woe is me the Yankees spend too much and the sport has no parity arguement at all. I agree I can't change perception based on ignorance.

The only reason their is parity is because the Yanks choke away dollars like the Mets do pennants. That is not a statement of how good the system is, but rather a statement on the Yanks who have an immense advantage going in - even if they have not taken care of it. Doesn't change the fact that they should win at least 1-2 of the next 5 WS just to tread water with the advantage they have.I can't change willful ignorance based upon interpreted perception, either.

Koya I don't know you or anything so this isn't a personal insult against you, but anyone who thinks a team *should* win two out of five World Series titles definitely doesn't understand anything about baseball. I don't think you truly believe what you are saying here; you're just trying to stir up Yankee fans, and it's mostly working. But it's still nonsense.

Of COURSE it's working. Because while I am going a bit tongue in cheek here, and certainly well over the top, even going way over the top touches a signficant nerve with yanks fans... well, many of them.Why? Because there is a LOT of truth to it, and there is both embarassment of having all these riches yet still failing (and my comment was 1-2 WS rings, if you dont win one in the next five years, even understanding the chance involved in baseball, its an utter failure. Or should I say, another utter failure after the past 5+ years without a ring), and a guilt that not only are the Yanks not actually winning with perhaps the biggest advantage in pro sports, they are also ruining the sport for many fans, and many cities.

Its the worst of all worlds. Spend more than anyone. Anything less than a series or two won every 5 or so years is failure. No upside, only a double whopper of downside. (1) Hurting the sport (and no joking, it is hurting the sport - if I were a kid growing up in Maryland, why attach myself to a sport that deems my City and many like it unworthy of competing on even close to the same playing field) and (2) no true joy in winning, just the fear of not living up to the teams expectations, created by their decision to use the system to its absolute fullest, yet come up short.

So in short, its fun to stir up yanks fans. It is also very easy. Why? Because there is far more truth in the fishing, than there is fishing for fishing's sake. And yanks fans know it. Hence, their reactions here.

Plus, I am a Mets fan. What am I supposed to do with myself while we get ALMOST a great team, but Minaya then disappears after getting two key signings, only to get a nice 7 game lead in late summer so I can then watch them choke like Yanks fans cry in this thread.

Also, if it werent for a lifetime knowing that 1/2 the "yanks fans" I know today had Mets hads until the mid 90's makes the effort all the more worth it. I mean, today you have four types of yanks fans.

(1) The old timer. A yanks fan since they had a huge advantage over everyone else in the 40s-60's and won a ton, only to find the playing field even up enough, combined with AWFUL ownership to have some real lean years until the late '70's. These guys, by and large, are true fans, true baseball fans - and embarassed at what is going on today. There is, however, a component of these guys, maybe on the younger side of this generation, that think the Yanks DESERVE a ring and can/should do anything to get it, regardless of the effect on other teams. Because the other teams don't matter. Who cares that without the Royals and the Mariners there is no Yankees... this is entitlement dammit! (I hear these guys call WFAN way too often)

(2) "My" generation - grew up in the 70's. May or may not have been old enough to remember the late '70's run. Loved Mattingly - the guy was / is baseball player personified. These are the guys I refer to when I say "they knew the shortstop before Jeter... and the one before that" (Hell, I dont know, I was watching Rafeal Santana tear it up). They suffered as the Mets became New Yorks team when Mattingly's back gave out, but they never gave up that hat. Some of them say spend spend even if it hurts the sport - because the late 80's hurt, watching the Mets, albeit for a short time, become the City's team hurt.

(3) The newbie - they havent ever known baseball without the yanks having such a huge advantage, that even after numerous mistakes, they still made the playoffs every year. They saw a team built the RIGHT way, a team worthy of respect, and it brought them the same sense of entitlement as that second portion of the old timer. SS before Jeter? Who cares... well, actually, who knows.

The above, are by and large are real fans (well, the first two, the third has never had their mettle tested, they could fall just as easily, and half of them will, below).

(4) The bandwagon. The Yanks bandwagon is a BIG one. For many reasons. Obviously, winning helps. A tradition as the greatest sports franchise in US history helps. When you are in a City this large, a lot of people arent baseball fans, they just like a winner, and since the mid 90's thats been a nice bandwagon to jump on. Many bandwagoners forget that they arent even real fans. They talk smack and take that sense of entitlement from more real fans... and when #### hits the fan, they will jump off... but with such a huge payroll, unles the Mets get their act together (and that aint likely) the bandwagon will remain. Yanks will make dumb signings that would torpedo other franchises, and just keep buying until they are at least good (and right now, they should be great, no excuses). You add to the bandwagon all the out of towners and neo-new yorkers, and you have a huge contingent of the fan base.

But the worst part of the bandwagon are all those folks who, as Ive mentioned many times before, wore their Mets hats, and somewhere in the mid 90's it changed. So while people can pump their chest about how great the franchise is, and how they do no wrong and the system is fine, I also know that half those people arent actually yanks fans to begin with. Why? Cause Ive seen the transition. And if ever the system is changed to be a fair playing field, I know damn well they will jump right off.

PS - it is fun to rile them, and it is way to easy. That guilt, shame and embarassment of not winning is just too much. It's like they have not come to grips with the realty of baseball nor their team. At least most of us Mets fans have come to grips with our choking patheticness. Come on yanks fans, embrace your own.

 

[Koya]

Y23... you are a smart guy who puts out an arguement quite well - but you can't win this one. You want a medal because the Yanks are so inept that even with a HUGE HUGE advantage they havent won since the turn of the millenium? Come on, don't let the meathead nation blind your rationale. It's an awful system that hurts the game. Is the game doing well? Sure. Would it do better if say, the Oriole s fan felt they had a chance in hell to compete over the long haul? Damn straight. To say otherwise is rather meatheaded... then again, you are a Yanks fan.

I don't want a medal, and you are wrong. I have won this one. The facts don't back up the woe is me the Yankees spend too much and the sport has no parity arguement at all. I agree I can't change perception based on ignorance.

The sport has parity. But the issue is that NO team should be in a position to simply reload every year while a majority of the teams have to rebuild from time to time. Pointing to other teams that make 1 to 3 year runs and claiming that the system is OK because the Yankees ACTUALLY MISSED THE PLAYOFFS once doesn't support any notion that the system is OK. If anything, it points out the flaw.The Yankees SHOULDN'T be in a position where not making the playoffs is such a huge disappointment. Every team should have the same crack at the playoffs and the Wold Series.

The parity is with the small market teams competing every year to take a crack at the big market teams. When the Mets, Angels, or Dodgers struggle, it's because they made huge mistakes in the front office, but the system is set up for them to compete and/or win every single year.

The teams with the advantages financially SHOULD make the playoffs every year, and they would if they could take advantage of a system heavily weighted in their favor. The Yankees have been one of the worst run organizations in all of sports since they haven't won the world series despite having such a huge competitive advantage.

That's not ignorance. And it's not perception. Those are facts.

You were making a flawless post until the bolded part. Again, baseball is not like the other sports. If the Yankees had built their team perfectly and went out and obtained Josh Beckett, Johan Santana, Jake Peavy, and the ghost of Christy Matthewson, they still would lose a best of 5 series if two of those guys are a bit off on any given day. Or if they ran into the unhittable postseason versions Kenny Rogers or Jeff Suppan. It happens. The argument that should be made is that there is no excuse to finish in 3rd with a $200 million payroll. But there are plenty of excuses/reasons for not winning the WS once you're there. The payroll gets you in, but baseball is so reliant on luck and outliers in the postseason that it's hardly a good argument to suggest a team is poorly run simply because they win 98 regular season games but then lose 3 games in a 5-game stretch.Long story short, the 2001-2007 Yankees didn't miss winning the WS because they were poorly run. They missed the WS because they lost in the playoffs. In 2008, they were poorly run because they had a giant advantage to get IN the playoffs and still ended up blowing it.

The bolded part is 100% legit. Some more denial here as I see it if you don't see the failures of this orgnaization. Are they the WORST run franchise? I wouldnt say that - and outside of their baseball decisions, they are very, very, very well run - perhaps the best run organization in sports or close to it.But in terms of team management, you are talking Giambi. Pavano. Hundreds of millions wasted on terrible options - but the resources to hide those abject, utter, pathetic failures. Don't let the "we can just get another 50 million dollar - ot 160 million dollar - pitcher" mentality fool you. That doesnt make them good. It makes them very bad - just very, very fortunate.

And I should add, their non-baseball related success has enabled the embarassment of underperforming soiled riches, so its an intersting case study in great management and awful management ... all under one roof.

I mean, how did they handle the Torre situation and where did that get them? They finally found one situation they couldnt buy themselves out of.

Oh, until now since they have the four biggest contracts in the sport. Real genius, there.

 

[Giantseasonticketholder]

Thank God I'm part of Koya's "My" generation!

 

[Thunderlips]

Y23... you are a smart guy who puts out an arguement quite well - but you can't win this one. You want a medal because the Yanks are so inept that even with a HUGE HUGE advantage they havent won since the turn of the millenium? Come on, don't let the meathead nation blind your rationale. It's an awful system that hurts the game. Is the game doing well? Sure. Would it do better if say, the Oriole s fan felt they had a chance in hell to compete over the long haul? Damn straight. To say otherwise is rather meatheaded... then again, you are a Yanks fan.

I don't want a medal, and you are wrong. I have won this one. The facts don't back up the woe is me the Yankees spend too much and the sport has no parity arguement at all. I agree I can't change perception based on ignorance.

The sport has parity. But the issue is that NO team should be in a position to simply reload every year while a majority of the teams have to rebuild from time to time. Pointing to other teams that make 1 to 3 year runs and claiming that the system is OK because the Yankees ACTUALLY MISSED THE PLAYOFFS once doesn't support any notion that the system is OK. If anything, it points out the flaw.The Yankees SHOULDN'T be in a position where not making the playoffs is such a huge disappointment. Every team should have the same crack at the playoffs and the Wold Series.

The parity is with the small market teams competing every year to take a crack at the big market teams. When the Mets, Angels, or Dodgers struggle, it's because they made huge mistakes in the front office, but the system is set up for them to compete and/or win every single year.

The teams with the advantages financially SHOULD make the playoffs every year, and they would if they could take advantage of a system heavily weighted in their favor. The Yankees have been one of the worst run organizations in all of sports since they haven't won the world series despite having such a huge competitive advantage.

That's not ignorance. And it's not perception. Those are facts.

You were making a flawless post until the bolded part. Again, baseball is not like the other sports. If the Yankees had built their team perfectly and went out and obtained Josh Beckett, Johan Santana, Jake Peavy, and the ghost of Christy Matthewson, they still would lose a best of 5 series if two of those guys are a bit off on any given day. Or if they ran into the unhittable postseason versions Kenny Rogers or Jeff Suppan. It happens. The argument that should be made is that there is no excuse to finish in 3rd with a $200 million payroll. But there are plenty of excuses/reasons for not winning the WS once you're there. The payroll gets you in, but baseball is so reliant on luck and outliers in the postseason that it's hardly a good argument to suggest a team is poorly run simply because they win 98 regular season games but then lose 3 games in a 5-game stretch.Long story short, the 2001-2007 Yankees didn't miss winning the WS because they were poorly run. They missed the WS because they lost in the playoffs. In 2008, they were poorly run because they had a giant advantage to get IN the playoffs and still ended up blowing it.

The bolded part is 100% legit. Some more denial here as I see it if you don't see the failures of this orgnaization. Are they the WORST run franchise? I wouldnt say that - and outside of their baseball decisions, they are very, very, very well run - perhaps the best run organization in sports or close to it.But in terms of team management, you are talking Giambi. Pavano. Hundreds of millions wasted on terrible options - but the resources to hide those abject, utter, pathetic failures. Don't let the "we can just get another 50 million dollar - ot 160 million dollar - pitcher" mentality fool you. That doesnt make them good. It makes them very bad - just very, very fortunate.

And I should add, their non-baseball related success has enabled the embarassment of underperforming soiled riches, so its an intersting case study in great management and awful management ... all under one roof.

I mean, how did they handle the Torre situation and where did that get them? They finally found one situation they couldnt buy themselves out of.

Oh, until now since they have the four biggest contracts in the sport. Real genius, there.

Pavano and Giambi were two of the hottest FA's on the market at that time. It's not like they overpaid to get them. They (along with the rest of MLB ) didn't know that Giambi was on the juice. As far as Pavano goes, it wasn't like they were the only bidder there either. That's not to say they haven't made some bad moves.....but these two were moves that any MLB team would have made at the time.