Boston......

Off Topic
41

[quote]BONEZ217 wrote:
I think youre still lost. How many championships did the yakees buy, according you? In this post you say that the yankees won the WS in the 1990s because of their farm system. Which is not completely the case because by 1999 they accquired a few critical free agents but anyway.

You claim that the yankees got out of hand with free agent buying in the 2000’s. Fine. How many World Series did they win? 2000 and 2009. 2000 was still comprised of the group of guys that won the first 3 in the 90’s. 2009 is one year after many failed years.
[/quote]

I believe it is you who is lost. This is also a weak argument that I’ve heard being used time and again. Well the Yankees don’t win it every year so thus it “proves” they don’t buy championships. Really? How many times are they in contention for one year after year after year? 2 championships in a decade is something most teams would dream of. Ah, the psyche of a Yankee fan. The more money you spend, the more and better free agents you get, the higher the chances you can compete for one thus increasing the likelihood of winning one from year to year. It’s just like the sales funnel. Put more leads in at the top and you’re chance of closing deals at the bottom increase.

Of course you don’t care if the Yankees bought a championship. You’re a die hard “put on the blinders and ignore that there’s a problem” Yankees fan. I’m not surprised. Will they always have the highest payroll? Probably. What you are conveniently ignoring time and again is the gap between their payroll and the next highest spending team payroll which is a huge grand canyon gap.

The funny thing is, I’ve spoken to other Yankee fans who actually acknowledge there is a problem now. My girlfriend is a DIE-HARD Yankees fan and have been watching them religiously for 30 + years and went to every world series except for the last one since lives out here now. She even admitted that this last year’s championship didn’t feel right and she could only celebrate so much. It felt hollow to her. It felt like even to her you guys bought a championship. It sounds like either a) you’re denying there’s a problem or b) there’s no solution to the problem or c) you don’t care and it’s your God given right to win every year and rely on the unfair financial advantage or d) all of the above. Even your own columnists acknowledge the problem. Mike Lupica for example: http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/yankees/2010/01/29/2010-01-29_new_york_yankees_gm_brian_cashman_conjures_up_budget_woes_to_demonize_johnny_dam.html

or here (not a NY columnist) but also acknowledges the problem and does suggest a salary cap:

You have to do better than this to debate me on this point. If it’s not going to work, why wouldn’t it work.? I’m not sold on my own idea I just don’t know how I feel about a hard salary cap. But something has to be done so don’t tell me a) there’s not a problem or b) there’s no solution. Of course there is a problem and of course there’s a solution.

Actually after doing some research, MLB is comprised of revenue sharing and a luxury tax and I believe a) is too complicated and b) somewhat ineffective. The details are here: http://www.bizofbaseball.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4298:dosh-mlbs-revenue-sharing-and-the-luxury-tax-are-not-one-in-the-same&catid=29:articles-a-opinion&Itemid=41

That being said, I like my idea. The luxury tax should increase even further and maybe it’s even progressive like the tax code is. Over $160 mil and under $170 mil: a dollar for a dollar; over $170 mil and under $180; 1.5 dollar to dollar; over 4180 mil $2 dollar for every dollar.

Don’t tell me the Yankees will just continue to spend. If the luxury tax is severe enough at the upper ranges the Yankees organization is not just going to continue to spend until they’re operating at $100 million in the red year after year. There is an upper limit. The goal is to put in a system that will curb the spending a bit and keep it in line with other top teams.

That’s why Europe has less millionaires than the U.S. The top tax rates are so high on the high end.

[quote]
It also wouldnt work because all other teams are TRYING to get more money. If the luxury tax indcreased and the yankees were inclined to spend less other teams would receive less. So theres a ideological reason and a business reason that your plan wouldnt work. [/quote]

Also another weak argument. Yes, you can use an example like the Marlins that have pocketed money since implementing the luxury tax. But you can point to other teams that have benefited and have increased their team payrolls since implementing the luxury tax. Think Tampa Bay Devil Rays. Actually it’s the revenue sharing system that have helped them the most.

This plan is not that radical. Think of our free enterprise system. Sometimes companies become to successful and the competitive balance gets out of whack and the federal government has to step in and re-balance the competition. That’s what needs to be done in MLB. Call in the Yankees effect.

And lastly, don’t give me that crap about how in 2009 it was your veterans as the main reason you won it. By getting Texeira and having him hit in front of A-Rod, A-Rod’s numbers went through the roof. It freed him like no other move. You guys outbid everyone else for Texeira. Would you have won the championship if you didn’t buy Texeira or had to worry about luxury tax more and maybe lost him to another team cuz you couldn’t afford him and Burnett and Sabathia. And what about Sabathia? How can you underestimate his effect on your championship last season? Give me a break with your weak arguments. When was the last time you can remember that you were bummed cuz you couldn’t afford a player or were outbid by another team. You’re going to have to come up with better arguments than this.

For a great analysis on the payroll discrepancy problem, go here: MoneyWatch: Financial news, world finance and market news, your money, product recalls updated daily - CBS News

42

[quote]SteelyD wrote:
I thought this thread was supposed to be about dissing Beantown?[/quote]

It’s much more fun to bash everything NY sports ;0

43

[quote]randman wrote:

[quote]BONEZ217 wrote:
I think youre still lost. How many championships did the yakees buy, according you? In this post you say that the yankees won the WS in the 1990s because of their farm system. Which is not completely the case because by 1999 they accquired a few critical free agents but anyway.

You claim that the yankees got out of hand with free agent buying in the 2000’s. Fine. How many World Series did they win? 2000 and 2009. 2000 was still comprised of the group of guys that won the first 3 in the 90’s. 2009 is one year after many failed years.
[/quote]

I believe it is you who is lost. This is also a weak argument that I’ve heard being used time and again. Well the Yankees don’t win it every year so thus it “proves” they don’t buy championships. Really? How many times are they in contention for one year after year after year? 2 championships in a decade is something most teams would dream of. Ah, the psyche of a Yankee fan. The more money you spend, the more and better free agents you get, the higher the chances you can compete for one thus increasing the likelihood of winning one from year to year. It’s just like the sales funnel. Put more leads in at the top and you’re chance of closing deals at the bottom increase.

Of course you don’t care if the Yankees bought a championship. You’re a die hard “put on the blinders and ignore that there’s a problem” Yankees fan. I’m not surprised. Will they always have the highest payroll? Probably. What you are conveniently ignoring time and again is the gap between their payroll and the next highest spending team payroll which is a huge grand canyon gap.

The funny thing is, I’ve spoken to other Yankee fans who actually acknowledge there is a problem now. My girlfriend is a DIE-HARD Yankees fan and have been watching them religiously for 30 + years and went to every world series except for the last one since lives out here now. She even admitted that this last year’s championship didn’t feel right and she could only celebrate so much. It felt hollow to her. It felt like even to her you guys bought a championship. It sounds like either a) you’re denying there’s a problem or b) there’s no solution to the problem or c) you don’t care and it’s your God given right to win every year and rely on the unfair financial advantage or d) all of the above. Even your own columnists acknowledge the problem. Mike Lupica for example: http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/yankees/2010/01/29/2010-01-29_new_york_yankees_gm_brian_cashman_conjures_up_budget_woes_to_demonize_johnny_dam.html

or here (not a NY columnist) but also acknowledges the problem and does suggest a salary cap:

You have to do better than this to debate me on this point. If it’s not going to work, why wouldn’t it work.? I’m not sold on my own idea I just don’t know how I feel about a hard salary cap. But something has to be done so don’t tell me a) there’s not a problem or b) there’s no solution. Of course there is a problem and of course there’s a solution.

Actually after doing some research, MLB is comprised of revenue sharing and a luxury tax and I believe a) is too complicated and b) somewhat ineffective. The details are here: http://www.bizofbaseball.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4298:dosh-mlbs-revenue-sharing-and-the-luxury-tax-are-not-one-in-the-same&catid=29:articles-a-opinion&Itemid=41

That being said, I like my idea. The luxury tax should increase even further and maybe it’s even progressive like the tax code is. Over $160 mil and under $170 mil: a dollar for a dollar; over $170 mil and under $180; 1.5 dollar to dollar; over 4180 mil $2 dollar for every dollar.

Don’t tell me the Yankees will just continue to spend. If the luxury tax is severe enough at the upper ranges the Yankees organization is not just going to continue to spend until they’re operating at $100 million in the red year after year. There is an upper limit. The goal is to put in a system that will curb the spending a bit and keep it in line with other top teams.

That’s why Europe has less millionaires than the U.S. The top tax rates are so high on the high end.

[quote]
It also wouldnt work because all other teams are TRYING to get more money. If the luxury tax indcreased and the yankees were inclined to spend less other teams would receive less. So theres a ideological reason and a business reason that your plan wouldnt work. [/quote]

Also another weak argument. Yes, you can use an example like the Marlins that have pocketed money since implementing the luxury tax. But you can point to other teams that have benefited and have increased their team payrolls since implementing the luxury tax. Think Tampa Bay Devil Rays. Actually it’s the revenue sharing system that have helped them the most.

This plan is not that radical. Think of our free enterprise system. Sometimes companies become to successful and the competitive balance gets out of whack and the federal government has to step in and re-balance the competition. That’s what needs to be done in MLB. Call in the Yankees effect.

And lastly, don’t give me that crap about how in 2009 it was your veterans as the main reason you won it. By getting Texeira and having him hit in front of A-Rod, A-Rod’s numbers went through the roof. It freed him like no other move. You guys outbid everyone else for Texeira. Would you have won the championship if you didn’t buy Texeira or had to worry about luxury tax more and maybe lost him to another team cuz you couldn’t afford him and Burnett and Sabathia. And what about Sabathia? How can you underestimate his effect on your championship last season? Give me a break with your weak arguments. When was the last time you can remember that you were bummed cuz you couldn’t afford a player or were outbid by another team. You’re going to have to come up with better arguments than this.

For a great analysis on the payroll discrepancy problem, go here: http://www.bnet.com/2403-13502_23-210897.html [/quote]

I cant sit here and debate each point back and forth. It’ll never end. Would I mind if the salary gap was cut? Not at all. It’d be great. I have no desire to see the yankees outspend everyone. I just want to see the team win. ANd I dont really care how it happens as long as it’s done by the rules. And I do think when a certain standard is set, such as making the playoffs every year, it would be a bad thing to regress. So yes, I fully support the yankees doing everyting in their power to put together a team capable of making the playoffs.

I think ‘hollow’ is a good word to describe it. But one thing. Ask your girlfriend if she’d rather see a winning team or a losing team with a bunch of young unprovens. It’s that simple to me. The yankees will never be a cinderella team. Thats just the way it is. The sort of thing that happened in Tampa cant happen in NY. Not in my lifetime at least.

I dont know what youre saying about Arods numbers. He’s had quite a few seasons with just as much production. If you extrapolate his stats for the month he missed his numbers would have been above his career averages in certain categories and below in others. And with a full season an MVP would have been possible. But he’s done that with and without teixeira, even with the both of them in texas. There’s certainly nothing “through the roof” when looking at 30 hr 100rbi 286 avg and 78 runs scored. For some guys that may be throught the roof in 125 games. But not for Arod. He SHOULD be putting up those numbers. Teixeira was much more valuable for his defense. Jeters errors dropping in half partly had to do with him at 1b. Youre picking and choosing (questionable) stats to “prove” a point. If you mean that Arod benefited mentally in the postseason because of Tex, eh, maybe. Arod had a few awful post seasons with the yankees but he also had a few great ones in seattle. So I dont really see anything definitive. I think his steroids admission was more important for his head than Tex was.

And about buying mark teixeira. He wanted to play for the red sox. The red sox disrespected him. He was going to take the contract they offered him until whatever shit went down with their front office. That is the reason the yankees were able to get him. Yes the yankees red sox and orioles were the only teams willing to give him the money he wanted but its not like the yanks offered a contract and got him instantly. I actually remember being in a bar when it flashed across the tv screen that the red sox were finalizing their deal with him.

And obviously sabathia is the most important free agent the yanks got in 10 years. And it looks like they made the right move not signing Santana the year before. So good for the yankees knowing who to spend their money on after 10 years of fuckups like kevin brown

44

I did some research
MLB owners and their net worth

John Henry - Red Sox - 1.1 billion
John Fisher - Athletics - 1.2 billion
Carl Lindner - Reds - 1.4 billion
Tom Hicks - Rangers - 1 billion
Sam Zell - Cubs - 3 billion
George Steinbrenner - Yankees - 1.3 billion
Michael Illitch - Tigers - 1.4 billion
Drayton McClane - Astros - 1.4 billion
John Malone - Braves - 1.5 billion
Theodore Lerner - Nationals - 3.2 billion

click the guys face for the list.

And then theres this.

This is showing how much PROFIT these teams are making. It’s from 2007 but it’s still relevant I think. The yankees would currently have a smaller deficit, if at all, because of all the contracts theyve shed in 3 years.

So there is obviously plenty of money to go around. How the owners are spending it is pretty clear at this point. I still believe that George Steinbrenner wants to win more than everyone else.

45

I think we’re in agreement more in disagreement. That’s what I’ve gathered from you’re responses. I ain’t saying kill the Yankees and make them a team of losers and unprovens. That’s not gonna happen. This is not a debate of absolutes. But to deny that this is a correlation between spending and winning is ridiculous. And the fact stands that you guys have the resources to spend that far outpace everyone else. I already showed you last years numbers of the top 5 teams and you are pulling the same link. If you look at it closely no team (even the top ones) can compete and spend as much as the Yankees are bringing in.

And you can defend spending half a billion dollars all you want last offseason to get the top 3 prospects and try and defend how much or how little impact they had but if this was a more progressive tax system, the Yankees wouldn’t be able to necessarily buy anyone and everyone they want without more competition. If that more stringent system was in place, would you have gotten all three prospects last year? What if you take one of them out of the equation? Would you have still won a championship. No one can answer these questions but there is a correlation that it does increase your chances the more you can buy.

And if that more stringent system was in place and the Spanks continue to spend hog wild, they would continue to lose more and more money. They would eventually have to adjust and pull back somewhat. And I don’t care about an owner’s net worth. That has very a very indirect impact on how much an owner spends on a team. Even a billionaire is not gonna operate a sports franchise at a major operating loss year after year after.

It’s much more about how much is the team worth, what revenue they’re bringing in, how much market power can they flex and spend to get all the resources they want. There are a lot of high net worth owners. That has nothing to do with team revenues.

If it looks like a pig, smells like a pig, and oinks like a pig. It’s probably a pig. And last year, more than any other year, the Yankees have given the casual baseball fan the perception that they went out and “bought” a championship because of their vast resources that no one else can compete with. Yay Yankees! You guys are so awesome! Pretty hollow stuff.

46

OMG that New Hampshire shit is awesome. Well done, bravo.

47

I dont understand why other teams dont spend more money. Many of them can.

The yanks are estimated to be worth 4 billion as a franchise. That’s not Steinbrenners worth. Other owners have just as much money as he does. He is willing to spend as much as necessary to put together what he feels is a winning product. The second link in my post shows how much profit the teams are bringing in. SPEND IT. SPend the money on players to make the team better.

I know money helps a team win. Why aren;t more teams spending more money?

48

It’s a complicated topic but it has to do with many factors. One is having a concentrated populous area where people want to spend money on their team. That already explains the difference between NY, Boston, LA and the rest. It also has to do with when a few of these teams in major cities created their own networks. The revenue from these are enormous. When you take these factors as well as others, it puts even the Yankees with a market power in a geographical location that can’t be touched anywhere else. The Mets are up there too but they’re management sucks. So you do have to a good team owner and good management as well.

If you look at the other top teams, they are spending money. It’s not like they’re rolling in the operating profits. It’s just the Yankees total market power is even much greater than the number 2 and number 3 teams. Much more so than any other sport. Take the Lakers. They have the top team payroll this year. But they only outspend the number 2 team by 8% in total team payroll. The Yankees are consistently 50% or greater than the number 2 team. This is a problem.

That’s why I think if you either a) lower the luxury tax threshold point and b) implement higher and higher luxury taxes the more you spend over this point this will…

a) continue to further spread the wealth down to lower and mid-market teams. You can’t make them spend but many already have been since the luxury tax and revenue sharing models have been implemented. I’m just suggesting you tweak it a little more.

and

b) bring the Yankees team payroll in line with the other top 9 or 10 top market teams and discourage them from outspending everyone by 50% or more year after year after year.

The thing is, I think this is going to get worse before something is finally done. I doubt Selig will do anything because he is an idiot. But since you guys moved into your new stadium, your revenues are through the roof now. I think the spending gap is only going to get worse as time goes on.

49

[quote]randman wrote:
It’s a complicated topic but it has to do with many factors. One is having a concentrated populous area where people want to spend money on their team. That already explains the difference between NY, Boston, LA and the rest. It also has to do with when a few of these teams in major cities created their own networks. The revenue from these are enormous. When you take these factors as well as others, it puts even the Yankees with a market power in a geographical location that can’t be touched anywhere else. The Mets are up there too but they’re management sucks. So you do have to a good team owner and good management as well.

If you look at the other top teams, they are spending money. It’s not like they’re rolling in the operating profits. It’s just the Yankees total market power is even much greater than the number 2 and number 3 teams. Much more so than any other sport. Take the Lakers. They have the top team payroll this year. But they only outspend the number 2 team by 8% in total team payroll. The Yankees are consistently 50% or greater than the number 2 team. This is a problem.

That’s why I think if you either a) lower the luxury tax threshold point and b) implement higher and higher luxury taxes the more you spend over this point this will…

a) continue to further spread the wealth down to lower and mid-market teams. You can’t make them spend but many already have been since the luxury tax and revenue sharing models have been implemented. I’m just suggesting you tweak it a little more.

and

b) bring the Yankees team payroll in line with the other top 9 or 10 top market teams and discourage them from outspending everyone by 50% or more year after year after year.

The thing is, I think this is going to get worse before something is finally done. I doubt Selig will do anything because he is an idiot. But since you guys moved into your new stadium, your revenues are through the roof now. I think the spending gap is only going to get worse as time goes on.[/quote]

You have two options for a) and b). So I win.

No honestly I think closing the spending gap is a good plan. Nothing bad would come of it. Im just not so sure that certain owners will change their mindset to make it work.

And im not sure Selig has any say. He owns the Brewers afterall. It would have to be brought up by the owners as a group, I think.

50

[quote]Vegita wrote:

[quote]Kanada wrote:

Still one of my favorite rap beats. BUT… whats the point of posting it here? OH I get it, a bunch of losers from Boston paying money to see cool people from other parts of the country do cool things. Oh now I get it.

V[/quote]
Right, because a bunch of losers from NY have never spent money to watch people from other parts of the country perform…

51

[quote]BONEZ217 wrote:
You have two options for a) and b). So I win.

No honestly I think closing the spending gap is a good plan. Nothing bad would come of it. Im just not so sure that certain owners will change their mindset to make it work.

And im not sure Selig has any say. He owns the Brewers afterall. It would have to be brought up by the owners as a group, I think. [/quote]

I’m glad to see you say this. Fancy that. A Yankee fan and a Sox fan can agree on something. Dude, if you’re going to beat our ass; it’ll be much easier to take if we feel like you can’t outspend everyone all the time. And you’re right on another point for sure. The Red Sox spent mad money this year and look how much we suck right now :frowning: Spending money doesn’t guarantee success but it sure opens up more possibilities for it.

Although it is only May so who knows but those damn Devil Rays are also playing lights out and are looking pretty good. I don’t know if we can even make the post season this year if we don’t turn it around in a big way and soon.

52

[quote]randman wrote:

[quote]BONEZ217 wrote:
You have two options for a) and b). So I win.

No honestly I think closing the spending gap is a good plan. Nothing bad would come of it. Im just not so sure that certain owners will change their mindset to make it work.

And im not sure Selig has any say. He owns the Brewers afterall. It would have to be brought up by the owners as a group, I think. [/quote]

I’m glad to see you say this. Fancy that. A Yankee fan and a Sox fan can agree on something. Dude, if you’re going to beat our ass; it’ll be much easier to take if we feel like you can’t outspend everyone all the time. And you’re right on another point for sure. The Red Sox spent mad money this year and look how much we suck right now :frowning: Spending money doesn’t guarantee success but it sure opens up more possibilities for it.

Although it is only May so who knows but those damn Devil Rays are also playing lights out and are looking pretty good. I don’t know if we can even make the post season this year if we don’t turn it around in a big way and soon.[/quote]

The red sox this year look like the yankees of the last 5 years prior to 09. Aging single dimensional position players + injuries + underachieving rotation.