Money doesn't talk, it swears.
Dear Mick:
On behalf of all right-thinking members of Bauxite Nation - BITE ME!!!!!
Sincerely,
The rest of the Batter's Box Roster. The offseason from hell begins!
Yankees Win….. Thhhhhhhhhhhhhheeeeeeeee Yankees Win!!!!!!!!
Congratulations to the Steinbrenner family. I’m so thankful for their style of ownership. What are the A-Rod bashers going to do now? He’s already one of the best players in baseball history and now he has his ring. What a great night!!!!
I can summarize my feelings on this subject in one word: Pfui. This title was purchased.
I try not to think of what would have happened to the 2009 Jays if they had been able to add two starting pitchers and one Big Scary Bat, instead of going into the season minus one starting pitcher.
It will be interesting to see whether the Yankees attempt to sign two or three more free agents. If they really start throwing their financial weight around, they won't really be a baseball team as we have historically known it: they'll be the Cincinnati Red Stockings of the 21st century. Call them The House Of Steinbrenner's Travelling Legends Of Baseball. Coming soon to your town!
I try not to think of what would have happened to the 2009 Jays if they had been able to add two starting pitchers and one Big Scary Bat, instead of going into the season minus one starting pitcher.
It will be interesting to see whether the Yankees attempt to sign two or three more free agents. If they really start throwing their financial weight around, they won't really be a baseball team as we have historically known it: they'll be the Cincinnati Red Stockings of the 21st century. Call them The House Of Steinbrenner's Travelling Legends Of Baseball. Coming soon to your town!
They were by far the best team in baseball, but they can have it. Its like going out and buying the best looking escort you can find to bring to a party, and then braging about how you have the best looking girl there. The Yankees always will have the rescourses to feild a competitive team, but I'll always be rooting for the little guy who put in the work to pick up his girl!
Whether your escort costs $200M, 130M, or 90M, she's still an escort. Everyone is playing the same game. The rules supporting greater parity could be improved, but you can't ignore the fact that some teams are also willing to spend more than others (or have simply built a more successful franchise).
Just to throw some fuel on the fire, has there ever been a World Series winner whose entire Series rotation was signed out of free agency before that particular season?
I have to think that would be a new milestone. Granted it was only a 3-man rotation, but has any team acquired as many as 3 starters out of free agency?
Dollar, dollar bills, y'all. Keep the hot talent coming.
I have to think that would be a new milestone. Granted it was only a 3-man rotation, but has any team acquired as many as 3 starters out of free agency?
Dollar, dollar bills, y'all. Keep the hot talent coming.
But the good news is that Anthopoulos has almost finished putting together the Team Philosophy. Won't that be great? Then maybe after that he can compile the Team Mixtape, to express how the Jays really feel about baseball.
It'd have to be the Love Mixtape rather than the Money Mixtape. Hence,
A crazy little thing called love
Love and affection
Can't buy me love
Love will tear us apart
You can't hurry love
A crazy little thing called love
Love and affection
Can't buy me love
Love will tear us apart
You can't hurry love
I won't be commenting on this thread.
I hate the Yankees and will only embarrass myself by using way too many four letter words that the "cabal" will then delete. So I shant comment , I just couldn't bear to - period.
As to the Phillies, I remember they used to have a closer named - let me think - oh yea - "The Wild Thing" - NOW - that's a more pleasant memory.
I hate the Yankees and will only embarrass myself by using way too many four letter words that the "cabal" will then delete. So I shant comment , I just couldn't bear to - period.
As to the Phillies, I remember they used to have a closer named - let me think - oh yea - "The Wild Thing" - NOW - that's a more pleasant memory.
Mylegacy ... um, you just did. So in that same spirit, I won't reply!
Yankees win is a dull result for MLB. However, it does keep the many NYY fans happy and buying stuff which equals more revenue for everyone (merchandise is shared revenue). Maybe they won't go nuts and blow even more this winter now. Or maybe they really go nuts to build another 2-5 WS in a row dynasty. :P
Cheering for the Yankees is like cheering for Microsoft.
Marginally off-topic- SI on their home page - on the left middle of the page - have a section called SI Vault, right there on that page - right in front of my astonished eyes is a GREAT article on Joe Carter and him meeting god, the devil and the deep blue sea all in ONE swing of the bat in the ninth.
History - sigh.
History - sigh.
I heard no Blue Jays fans complaining in 1992-93 when the team was signing Jack Morris, Dave Winfield, Paul Molitor, Dave Stewart, and had the highest payroll in baseball. Yes, the Yankees are relatively higher now than Toronto was then vis-a-vis the rest, but that's a difference in degree, not kind. Or is there some level of payroll where it's ok to be the highest, as long as it's not too high?
If they really start throwing their financial weight around
Signing 3 free agents (2 of them were the best available) to 423.5 million isn’t enough? Almost every starting position player and starting pitcher on the Yankees makes over 6 million a season. The Yankees by far have the highest payroll in baseball. They’re also aggressive in going after international rookies/free agents and have no problem going over slot in the draft. The Yankees have a built in advantage by playing in New York and they clearly throw their financial weight around.
Signing 3 free agents (2 of them were the best available) to 423.5 million isn’t enough? Almost every starting position player and starting pitcher on the Yankees makes over 6 million a season. The Yankees by far have the highest payroll in baseball. They’re also aggressive in going after international rookies/free agents and have no problem going over slot in the draft. The Yankees have a built in advantage by playing in New York and they clearly throw their financial weight around.
Well, actually, a friend of mine said at the time that he much preferred watching the club build up the right way in the 80s than the rent-a-player deals of the early 90s.
Anyways, it's probably better to look at longer term payrolls than 2 years. Over the 1992-95 period, the Jays were 2nd in MLB in total payroll behind the Yankees, of course, and if you look at the decade of the Jays' excellence from 85-94, they were probably not in the top 5. For fun, here are the 85 Jays salaries.
Anyways, it's probably better to look at longer term payrolls than 2 years. Over the 1992-95 period, the Jays were 2nd in MLB in total payroll behind the Yankees, of course, and if you look at the decade of the Jays' excellence from 85-94, they were probably not in the top 5. For fun, here are the 85 Jays salaries.
Cheering for the Yankees is like cheering for Microsoft.
Back in the day, they used to say it was like cheering for U.S. Steel..
Back in the day, they used to say it was like cheering for U.S. Steel..
Oh, they have spent a lot but according to some they could spend $300 million (a 50% increase). Imagine a team where the average salary is over $10 million. It could happen.
I love the escort analogy. It doesn't matter if it's a room full of escorts, it's the fact that you're taking (and getting) credit for having the best looking escort, simply b/c you paid the most for it.
To extend the analogy, it would be more meaningful if the girl you brought was your high-school sweetheart, AND the best looking girl in the room.
And of course we (jays fans) never complained about salary disparities in 92-93 - we won! By adding some key FA's and via trades, as well as the farm system. Just like nobody expects Yankee fans to complain about disparities now - what's your point? ;)
If we can't expect changes to the cap structure in MLB to become more like the other major sports, then I'd be in favour of expanding the wild-card teams to at least 1 more. Thus it would actually be possible for the Yanks, Red Sox AND jays/rays/orioles + other AL teams to get the wild-card occasionally. Yes, the Rays won the AL last year but that took 10 years of losing, the stars and moon aligning, and at least 3 of their players selling their souls to the devil to make that happen.
This discussion should get more interesting as the Yanks sign J Bay, swing a deal for Halladay (and extend his contract by 100M), and probably another stud OF. And add 3 bench players that will get paid more than starters on other teams. And maybe convert 2 closers to set-up men.
To extend the analogy, it would be more meaningful if the girl you brought was your high-school sweetheart, AND the best looking girl in the room.
And of course we (jays fans) never complained about salary disparities in 92-93 - we won! By adding some key FA's and via trades, as well as the farm system. Just like nobody expects Yankee fans to complain about disparities now - what's your point? ;)
If we can't expect changes to the cap structure in MLB to become more like the other major sports, then I'd be in favour of expanding the wild-card teams to at least 1 more. Thus it would actually be possible for the Yanks, Red Sox AND jays/rays/orioles + other AL teams to get the wild-card occasionally. Yes, the Rays won the AL last year but that took 10 years of losing, the stars and moon aligning, and at least 3 of their players selling their souls to the devil to make that happen.
This discussion should get more interesting as the Yanks sign J Bay, swing a deal for Halladay (and extend his contract by 100M), and probably another stud OF. And add 3 bench players that will get paid more than starters on other teams. And maybe convert 2 closers to set-up men.
Cheering for the Yankees is like cheering for Microsoft.
Hank and the Yankee brass would be happy to take that. Even though Mac is a better computer, has brilliant advertising, provides better service and is generally a better product in every way imagineable, Microsoft continues to beat the living hell out of Apple in the personal computer marketplace. (Yes, I get the ironiy that I am writing this from a PC and not a Mac.) Everyone can talk up the Mac model all they want -- I just did, three lines back -- but no company actually wants to BE Apple, even metaphorically. Silver medalists don't win rings!
Thus endeth today's arcane metaphor-mixing.
The Yanks have every right to do what they did. If the Jays had the ability to do what the Yankees do I would probably be all for it. But they dont, and im a Jays fan, so you can call me a hypocrite but I'm going to root for the teams that have to put in the extra work scouting and developing players to compete.
On a related note I seriously see a window in the AL East in the next 4 or 5 years, Jeter, Posada, Rodruiguez (to a lesser extent), Damon, Matsui, Pettite, Rivera are all on the downswing of their careers even with all the money they have its going to be tough to replace all of those players. (Wishful thinking?) But if the Jays can grab up a few key young players to go with ones they have it could happen. It will be a small window but I think there will be one. Thats also if Baltimore and Tampa Bay arnt really good by then either.
I heard no Blue Jays fans complaining in 1992-93 when the team was signing Jack Morris, Dave Winfield, Paul Molitor, Dave Stewart, and had the highest payroll in baseball. Yes, the Yankees are relatively higher now than Toronto was then vis-a-vis the rest, but that's a difference in degree, not kind. Or is there some level of payroll where it's ok to be the highest, as long as it's not too high?
No, it is a difference in kind. The Jays were spending more than everybody else, but there was no notion that other teams couldn't afford to compete with Toronto. The Jays were spending a little more than everyone else. Look, somebody's always going to be spending the most, and, in the early '90s, it made sense for that to be the Jays, because of the long and sustained run of success they had had up to that point. They should have been spending that much, because the players who had delivered so many consecutive winning seasons had earned it.
The problem with the Yankees is not that they are the top spending team in baseball. As I said, somebody has to be, and also they've had the recent success to necessitate some high salaries.
The problem with the Yankees is that they can spend more than anybody else by a lot and still not approach their limit. They can blow the rest of the major leagues out of the water; they can use money like a blunt instrument. They can not only buy their way out of their own mistakes; they can capitalize on other teams' mistakes in a way that nobody else can. Remember the Abreu trade? Philly gave Abreu to the Yankees for nothing, because they were the only ones who could afford him. Was Toronto getting free players like that in the early '90s? No.
It's not the same thing at all.
Everyone is playing the same game.
Actually nobody is plaything the same game as the Yankees. A lot of markets could attempt the same thing and never approach those revenues because they don't play in the biggest media center in the world.
I enjoy baseball and I'll always watch the Jays but parity is what works best for sports and people will lose interest in the same 5 or 6 teams standing at the end of each season.
Actually nobody is plaything the same game as the Yankees. A lot of markets could attempt the same thing and never approach those revenues because they don't play in the biggest media center in the world.
I enjoy baseball and I'll always watch the Jays but parity is what works best for sports and people will lose interest in the same 5 or 6 teams standing at the end of each season.
I think you answered your question but I'd offer a story: Let's say you're going shopping. Dinner, diamonds,shoes, doesn't matter. You have one merchant you trust, you know to offer a good quality product. That merchant develops a good reputation and of course he has the sense to charge more money than other merchants do. People demand a better product from him and he wants to always offer a better product. So you ask yourself, at what point is it acceptable to be paying more to this merchant for his goods than it is to buy goods from other merchants? How much more does he have to offer than his competitors, really? Does he deserve to be charging 20% more, 75% more, 100% more? How can he get away with it? He knows how to make the economics work, of course. He can ask for much more money of his customers because he knows he can put out a much better product than his competitors. His product might not be 100% better than his competitors but people will pay him because they are glad to know and trust they are getting the best. It's a premium for peace of mind, let's say.
Is there a difference between the guy who used to have the highest prices in town by a margin of 10% over his nearest competitor and the guy who now has the highest prices in town by a margin of 100%? Yes, there is a difference. It is a difference in degree, and a significant one. The merchant who charges the highest prices won't necessarily have the best product year after year. But he will spend more for the finest diamonds, or the finest foods, or whatever other ingredients to his product because he has set himself up to do so. And that will give him a very fine product. He has made it much more difficult for other merchants to compete with him, or to compete with each other, by gobbling up resources and even pushing up prices of resources. The guy who charged 10% more didn't outstrip everyone else that he bothered them much; he didn't dominate the marketplace with such influence that he became a hegemonic force. He did manage to outspend and perhaps outsmart his competitors to get to the top, but the thing about his place at the top was that the market was certain to evolve. Someone else would come along and take their chance at spending the most because they saw an opportunity in the market to have the best product and charge the highest rate. Sometimes the product would fail, and nobody would buy it. Sometimes the product would be poor and folks would buy it anyway in hopes that it would improve. But someone new may always try to buy the best resources to make it to the top in a market that was fluid enough where everyone had the chance to buy the best resources.
So what? Well, you know all the folks who can't bring themselves to reason why to spend so much more on this one product when there are so many other fine, attractive products on the market? They decide they can't afford that piece of mind about having a dinner, or necklace that is certain to be among, if not possibly be, the very best. Can't. Won't. Refuse to buy into it. The might go for the cheapest option or whatever else may seem to be the same product with out the premium price. The folks who used to spend 10% more than me for the very best dinner, jewelry, etc? Yeah, that could have irked me a little. The folks who spend 100% more than me? Screw them. $500 dinners? $20000 dollar shoes? $100000 watches? Far too rich for my blood.
And that's my long, winding story to tell you why the Blue Jays were a different story at the top. It's more than difference in degree; it's a difference in class. When you are perched up so far above the rest of us, it's very inviting to throw stones at you. So it's also a story of why folks whine about the Yankees so much and so fervently. So arguments about how there isn't much difference between the Jays and Yankees?
Eye-rolling.
Is there a difference between the guy who used to have the highest prices in town by a margin of 10% over his nearest competitor and the guy who now has the highest prices in town by a margin of 100%? Yes, there is a difference. It is a difference in degree, and a significant one. The merchant who charges the highest prices won't necessarily have the best product year after year. But he will spend more for the finest diamonds, or the finest foods, or whatever other ingredients to his product because he has set himself up to do so. And that will give him a very fine product. He has made it much more difficult for other merchants to compete with him, or to compete with each other, by gobbling up resources and even pushing up prices of resources. The guy who charged 10% more didn't outstrip everyone else that he bothered them much; he didn't dominate the marketplace with such influence that he became a hegemonic force. He did manage to outspend and perhaps outsmart his competitors to get to the top, but the thing about his place at the top was that the market was certain to evolve. Someone else would come along and take their chance at spending the most because they saw an opportunity in the market to have the best product and charge the highest rate. Sometimes the product would fail, and nobody would buy it. Sometimes the product would be poor and folks would buy it anyway in hopes that it would improve. But someone new may always try to buy the best resources to make it to the top in a market that was fluid enough where everyone had the chance to buy the best resources.
So what? Well, you know all the folks who can't bring themselves to reason why to spend so much more on this one product when there are so many other fine, attractive products on the market? They decide they can't afford that piece of mind about having a dinner, or necklace that is certain to be among, if not possibly be, the very best. Can't. Won't. Refuse to buy into it. The might go for the cheapest option or whatever else may seem to be the same product with out the premium price. The folks who used to spend 10% more than me for the very best dinner, jewelry, etc? Yeah, that could have irked me a little. The folks who spend 100% more than me? Screw them. $500 dinners? $20000 dollar shoes? $100000 watches? Far too rich for my blood.
And that's my long, winding story to tell you why the Blue Jays were a different story at the top. It's more than difference in degree; it's a difference in class. When you are perched up so far above the rest of us, it's very inviting to throw stones at you. So it's also a story of why folks whine about the Yankees so much and so fervently. So arguments about how there isn't much difference between the Jays and Yankees?
Eye-rolling.
I expect the Yankees to sign all of the top FA again this year. Why wouldn't they? Holliday, Lackey, Soriano and Bay or Damon. They have the money, the momentum and nothing to lose.
To further illustrate how things are different, it was the Royals who signed David Cone away from the Jays after the 2002 season. The Royals simply don't sign top tier FA's anymore (and no, Gil Meche doesn't count).
To further illustrate how things are different, it was the Royals who signed David Cone away from the Jays after the 2002 season
Of course you mean 1992. And don't forget about Jose Guillen.
Of course you mean 1992. And don't forget about Jose Guillen.
Lets look at the Yankees and try to picture where they'll try to improve.
Only Melky Cabrera was under 120 for OPS+ (97) among their regulars. The only other player to get 200+ PA's was Brett Garder (25 yr old CF 91 OPS+). Backup CA was a Molina with just a 49 OPS+ over 155 PA's so expect that to be upgraded. Ramiro Pena was the utility infielder at 83 OPS+ over 121 PA's at the age of 23. Francisco Cervelli was the other guy with 100+ PA's as a catcher with an OPS+ of 79 age 23. If that batch of 3 kids are any good this could get uglier in the east.
They had 4 starting pitchers with 30+ starts. Ick. Room for improvement though with just one guy over 110 ERA+.
Only Melky Cabrera was under 120 for OPS+ (97) among their regulars. The only other player to get 200+ PA's was Brett Garder (25 yr old CF 91 OPS+). Backup CA was a Molina with just a 49 OPS+ over 155 PA's so expect that to be upgraded. Ramiro Pena was the utility infielder at 83 OPS+ over 121 PA's at the age of 23. Francisco Cervelli was the other guy with 100+ PA's as a catcher with an OPS+ of 79 age 23. If that batch of 3 kids are any good this could get uglier in the east.
They had 4 starting pitchers with 30+ starts. Ick. Room for improvement though with just one guy over 110 ERA+.
Or is there some level of payroll where it's ok to be the highest, as long as it's not too high?
Absolutely there is.
A measure of relationship to other payrolls in the league, measured as a percentage, would give a much more fair picture.
Just, as a for instance, if the highest salary is 50% higher than the average salary the previous year, it's quite different than being 300% higher
or, being 10% higher than your closest competitor is considerably different than being 80% higher.
Absolutely there is.
A measure of relationship to other payrolls in the league, measured as a percentage, would give a much more fair picture.
Just, as a for instance, if the highest salary is 50% higher than the average salary the previous year, it's quite different than being 300% higher
or, being 10% higher than your closest competitor is considerably different than being 80% higher.
The escort analogy is a good one, but my 1998 Ford Escort is a real lady and only cost me three grand this spring; bought it from my buddy Steve at Rent-a-Wreck. On behalf of all Escort owners...
Yankees are the zombie bailout team. Zombie Bank of America got a bailout so the new stadium got financed, and Goldman got bailout bonus billions so the execs can buy season's tickets.. What a formula for success.
I heard no Blue Jays fans complaining in 1992-93 when the team was signing Jack Morris, Dave Winfield, Paul Molitor, Dave Stewart, and had the highest payroll in baseball.
Well, that's just stupid.
In 1992, the Blue Jays payroll was 43.7 million. The Red Sox were next, at 42.2. The Blue Jays payroll represented 103% that of Boston. It's the same as the difference between being six foot two and being six foot four.
This year the Yankees payroll is listed at $201 million, with Boston next $121 million. The Yankees payroll is 166% of Boston's. That's the difference between being six foot two and ten foot three.
In 1992, an extra 1.5 million in payroll didn't cover a single star's salary. But an extra $90 million in 2009 will get you four or five of them. It's not a difference in degree, it's a difference in kind. In 1992 we had a couple of velocipraptors and one of them was a couple of inches taller. The Yankees have evolved into tyrannosaurus rex,.and they're the only one around.
The great Joe Posnanski's heart is heavy.
The trouble is that, inevitably, that one team will make good choices. They will put together a team of All-Stars. They will sign a dominant left-handed starter and slugging switch-hitting Gold Glove first baseman and a right-handed starter who throws curveballs that bend like wiffle balls. That team will be a remarkable collection of stars, and they will play often beautiful baseball, and they will win more games than any other team during the season. That team will roll through the playoffs without facing an elimination game or anything resembling real drama — though there will be constant efforts to make it SEEM like there’s drama.
And then: That team that spent $50 million more than any other team, that team with three sure Hall of Famers and as many as four others, that team that bought Milwaukee’s best pitcher and Anaheim’s best hitter and Toronto’s No. 2 starter and Boston’s favorite Idiot and the most expensive player in the history of baseball and so on, that team will win the World Series, and spray champagne on each other, and they will tell you that they won because they came together as a group and kept pulling themselves off the ground and didn’t listen to the doubters.
And then, if you are a not a Yankees fan, you will want to throw up.
Well, that's just stupid.
In 1992, the Blue Jays payroll was 43.7 million. The Red Sox were next, at 42.2. The Blue Jays payroll represented 103% that of Boston. It's the same as the difference between being six foot two and being six foot four.
This year the Yankees payroll is listed at $201 million, with Boston next $121 million. The Yankees payroll is 166% of Boston's. That's the difference between being six foot two and ten foot three.
In 1992, an extra 1.5 million in payroll didn't cover a single star's salary. But an extra $90 million in 2009 will get you four or five of them. It's not a difference in degree, it's a difference in kind. In 1992 we had a couple of velocipraptors and one of them was a couple of inches taller. The Yankees have evolved into tyrannosaurus rex,.and they're the only one around.
The great Joe Posnanski's heart is heavy.
The trouble is that, inevitably, that one team will make good choices. They will put together a team of All-Stars. They will sign a dominant left-handed starter and slugging switch-hitting Gold Glove first baseman and a right-handed starter who throws curveballs that bend like wiffle balls. That team will be a remarkable collection of stars, and they will play often beautiful baseball, and they will win more games than any other team during the season. That team will roll through the playoffs without facing an elimination game or anything resembling real drama — though there will be constant efforts to make it SEEM like there’s drama.
And then: That team that spent $50 million more than any other team, that team with three sure Hall of Famers and as many as four others, that team that bought Milwaukee’s best pitcher and Anaheim’s best hitter and Toronto’s No. 2 starter and Boston’s favorite Idiot and the most expensive player in the history of baseball and so on, that team will win the World Series, and spray champagne on each other, and they will tell you that they won because they came together as a group and kept pulling themselves off the ground and didn’t listen to the doubters.
And then, if you are a not a Yankees fan, you will want to throw up.
three sure Hall of Famers and as many as four others
Interesting ... hmmm, that first part must be Jeter, A-Rod and Rivera. The second .... um, well, Teixeira ... Matsui? Sabathia? Pettitte? Posada? Nobody seems like a sure thing. Cano? Too early to tell and probably not ... Seven would surprise me enormously. I think three is a slam dunk and four is dicey.
I think there are 8 potential HOF players.
RIvera/Jeter/ARod should all be first ballot.
Damon is going to get to 3000 hits.
Posada belongs in.
Andy is going to have a case. We'll find out just how much the voters weigh postseason performance in the post-Wild Card era when he gets to the ballot.
C.C. is on his way to a huge win total and is certainly on pace.
Tex is the 8th potential player but easily the one furthest away.
RIvera/Jeter/ARod should all be first ballot.
Damon is going to get to 3000 hits.
Posada belongs in.
Andy is going to have a case. We'll find out just how much the voters weigh postseason performance in the post-Wild Card era when he gets to the ballot.
C.C. is on his way to a huge win total and is certainly on pace.
Tex is the 8th potential player but easily the one furthest away.