2009 MLB Season Thread

[valo403]

Originally Posted by moon

Mets, Red Sox, Cubs maybe Tigers and Angels as well if they wanted to.

Jeter will finish in the top 5 in MVP voting this year, maybe even top 3 and consistently got on base all play-offs long. Riviera is talked about as a viable Cy Young candidate and was a monster in the play-offs. Petite won more games than CC in the World Series and shut the Phillies down last night. Posada is still one of the top hitting catchers in the league.

If that is slightly better than average then there better be a lot of teams out there looking for slightly better than average guys.

Interesting that the red Sox were OUTBID in an attempt to sign both Sabathia and Texeira by the Yankees, as were the rest of the teams in the league. You can pretend that there are other teams capable of throwing around Yankee money, but that would make you a moron.

As for the second point, read my post again. SOME above average players (Hughes, Chamberlain etc.) AND SOME aging stars (Jeter, Riviera, Posada etc.). Seriously Moon, can you not pick up such simple things?

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by moon

I agree but to me the Yankees really aren't competing against teams like Pittsburgh, KC etc. They certainly have an advantage over those teams but so do most teams in the league.

Hence why I think baseball is a joke. They make it sound like the Yankees are competing against 30 teams when they win the World Series, when they're actually competing against maybe 10. It cheapens the World Series and puts it on the same level as the Grey Cup, IMO.

[moon]

Originally Posted by valo403

Interesting that the red Sox were OUTBID in an attempt to sign both Sabathia and Texeira by the Yankees, as were the rest of the teams in the league. You can pretend that there are other teams capable of throwing around Yankee money, but that would make you a moron.

The Red Sox spent 50 million just to talk a guy. They have the money to spend if they want and could have afforded to sign all 3.

They choose not to because they didn't think it was worth it. They were not close to being as in need of those guys as the Yankees were and so didn't need to go crazy to sign them.

But they certainly had the money.

As for the second point, read my post again. SOME above average players (Hughes, Chamberlain etc.) AND SOME aging stars (Jeter, Riviera, Posada etc.). Seriously Moon, can you not pick up such simple things

I read your post again and it still says the same thing. Picked up on your point just fine thanks.

[moon]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Hence why I think baseball is a joke. They make it sound like the Yankees are competing against 30 teams when they win the World Series, when they're actually competing against maybe 10. It cheapens the World Series and puts it on the same level as the Grey Cup, IMO.

The number is a lot higher than ten and if it was just the Yankees getting this advantage then I agree, but teams have had no problem winning and being competitive year after year without spending crazy amounts of money.

The majority of teams aren't winning because they have bad management not because they have less money. Money is just an easy excuse to ignore the fact that their teams have little talent and poor management.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Hence why I think baseball is a joke. They make it sound like the Yankees are competing against 30 teams when they win the World Series, when they're actually competing against maybe 10. It cheapens the World Series and puts it on the same level as the Grey Cup, IMO.

Baseball needs a salary cap. Sure, you can point to exceptions like Tampa Bay breaking through, but by and large, the playoff spots are being dominated by big market teams. The last two years we saw teams from NY, LA, CHI, BOS and PHI grab most of the playoff spots.

It's become like EPL soccer. A handful of contenders, and a bunch of development teams.

The Jays have no chance in the current climate.

[moon]

Originally Posted by troutman

The Jays have no chance in the current climate.

How do the Jays have no chance?

They are one of the biggest markets in the league in terms of population in the city and in fan base (including Canada), they own their building, own their media rights and have a wealthy owner.

The Jays have everything to be a big spending club if they want to be and they have spent big money as well.

The reason the Jays haven't had a chance recently is poor management and a lack of talent.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by moon

I read your post again and it still says the same thing. Picked up on your point just fine thanks.

Apparently not as you've demonstrated a complete inability to do so.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by moon

The number is a lot higher than ten and if it was just the Yankees getting this advantage then I agree, but teams have had no problem winning and being competitive year after year without spending crazy amounts of money.

The majority of teams aren't winning because they have bad management not because they have less money. Money is just an easy excuse to ignore the fact that their teams have little talent and poor management.

It's a lot easier to manage a team when you have $200,000,000 to play with. You can certainly minimize a mistake when you can just spend more to cover it up. The Yankees outspent everyone this year. The next closet payrolls were the Mets and Cubs at $135,000,000. The Yanks outspent the second highest payrolls by $75,000,000 - which is the entire payroll of the Colorado Rockies, and only $5,000,000 less than the combined payrolls of San Diego and Florida.

Do you honestly think that baseball provides a level playing-field where every team has a chance? Money doesn't make a difference? The teams with the 10 highest payrolls this year had a combined record of 881-739, with 5 of them making the playoffs. The 10 teams with the lowest payrolls went a combined 745-875, with one team making the playoffs.

[flambers]

Originally Posted by moon

How do the Jays have no chance?

They are one of the biggest markets in the league in terms of population in the city and in fan base (including Canada), they own their building, own their media rights and have a wealthy owner.

The Jays have everything to be a big spending club if they want to be and they have spent big money as well.

The reason the Jays haven't had a chance recently is poor management and a lack of talent.

Yes, management is a element, however if you cut the Yankee's payroll in half good luck seeing this team make the playoffs.

Obviously Yankee's make a large portion of their revenue from their own TV Station.

Where the Jays don't have that luxary and lose a pile of money every year.

[Cowboy89]

Originally Posted by flambers

Yes, management is a element, however if you cut the Yankee's payroll in half good luck seeing this team make the playoffs.

Obviously Yankee's make a large portion of their revenue from their own TV Station.

Where the Jays don't have that luxary and lose a pile of money every year.

I always thought that 'Rogers' Sportsnet was pretty much the closest thing to owning your own TV station a baseball team could have.

[moon]

Originally Posted by flambers

Yes, management is a element, however if you cut the Yankee's payroll in half good luck seeing this team make the playoffs.

I think you would also see a different approach that the team would take. Right now they operate the team knowing that they have the luxury to spend the money that they do.

Originally Posted by rubecube

It's a lot easier to manage a team when you have $200,000,000 to play with. You can certainly minimize a mistake when you can just spend more to cover it up. The Yankees outspent everyone this year. The next closet payrolls were the Mets and Cubs at $135,000,000. The Yanks outspent the second highest payrolls by $75,000,000 - which is the entire payroll of the Colorado Rockies, and only $5,000,000 less than the combined payrolls of San Diego and Florida.

Do you honestly think that baseball provides a level playing-field where every team has a chance? Money doesn't make a difference? The teams with the 10 highest payrolls this year had a combined record of 881-739, with 5 of them making the playoffs. The 10 teams with the lowest payrolls went a combined 745-875, with one team making the playoffs.

Of course it is easier to manage a team with that payroll. I don't see where I ever said that it wasn't or that the Yankees don't have an advantage.

I am saying that I think the top 15-20 can compete just fine based on the fact that teams in that range consistently compete and win.

My point with the Yankees has always been that they don't win because they spend money they win because they spend money and have good management. It gets tiresome to listen to people whine about the money all time when management plays a key role as well.

As we have seen from the Yankees in the past and the Mets and Cubs this year, spending a ton of money is useless if you don't have good money to go with it.

[flambers]

Originally Posted by Cowboy89

I always thought that 'Rogers' Sportsnet was pretty much the closest thing to owning your own TV station a baseball team could have.

Nope, totally different thing.

[Pastiche]

The Yankees traded a home grown guy for A-Rod. They didn't sign him as a free agent.

[mykalberta]

Where are you getting your numbers, because they are wrong.

I guess though everyone should feel sorry for the Phillies spending the 7th most money and not once having to make a roster decision based on how much they could or couldn't spend.

ESPN - unless of course you have a link that is more legit.

I dont see why people bother cheering for their team, its almost impossible for a team with payroll close to 100mil to compete. And every chance I can I will remind people of that.

My biggest problem, is that no one who covers MLB mentions this. Its like they treat these teams like they are better organizations because they have a higher payroll - its a huge joke and makes the MLB the biggest professional sports league joke maybe in the world IMO.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/teams/salaries?team=nyy

[moon]

Originally Posted by flambers

Nope, totally different thing.

I would say totally different thing would be the majority of teams that have their games on stations not owned at all by the club.

The Jays fall somewhere between games on regional Fox Sportsnet and the benefits the Yankees and Sox get from their stations.

The Jays TV situation is much better than the average team in MLB.

[mykalberta]

Originally Posted by Cowboy89

I always thought that 'Rogers' Sportsnet was pretty much the closest thing to owning your own TV station a baseball team could have.

Other than actually owning a TV station with the Yankees and YES.

[moon]

Originally Posted by mykalberta

ESPN - unless of course you have a link that is more legit.

I got my numbers from CBS:

http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/salaries

and those numbers matched with what many other sites I saw had.

It had the Yankees at 201 million and the Phillies at 113 million.

I dont see why people bother cheering for their team, its almost impossible for a team with payroll close to 100mil to compete. And every chance I can I will remind people of that.

The Cardinals have won about as many division titles in the last 10 years as anyone. They won a World Series and went to another one. They are in the top 5 in terms of successful franchises for the past 10 years and yet they are rarely, if ever in the top 10 in terms of salaries.

The Twins routinely compete despite being in the bottom third of payroll every year.

The Marlins have competed despite being in the bottom 5 of payroll.

Seems like there are plenty of reasons to cheer for your team whether they spend or not. You just have to hope that your team makes smart decisions when it comes to how they spend that money.

My biggest problem, is that no one who covers MLB mentions this. Its like they treat these teams like they are better organizations because they have a higher payroll - its a huge joke and makes the MLB the biggest professional sports league maybe in the world IMO.

Really?

People who cover baseball talk about it all the time. You must not be listening to that much baseball talk because on ESPN and ESPN radio they talk about it a lot.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by moon

My point with the Yankees has always been that they don't win because they spend money they win because they spend money and have good management. It gets tiresome to listen to people whine about the money all time when management plays a key role as well.

As we have seen from the Yankees in the past and the Mets and Cubs this year, spending a ton of money is useless if you don't have good money to go with it.

And of course the Yankees are only paying the management minimum wage? And don't give me the the B.S. about the lower payroll teams being able to compete consistently. The lower-tier teams generally get one or two turns at the playoffs every decade, and then get trounced by one of the bigger payrolls. The Yankees and Red Sox have a shot nearly every year. The reason for this is because it usually takes them ten years to build up their teams, and then they only have a window of a year or two before their star players get scopped up in FA by the larger clubs.

[moon]

Originally Posted by rubecube

And of course the Yankees are only paying the management minimum wage? And don't give me the the B.S. about the lower payroll teams being able to compete consistently.

It isn't BS at all. As mentioned the Twins, Cardinals and Marlins are three teams that have done a good job of staying competitive without top 10 payrolls.

Yes teams are at a disadvantage but the only BS is that they can't compete because of that disadvantage as teams have shown that with good management you can.

[mykalberta]

Originally Posted by moon

Really?

People who cover baseball talk about it all the time. You must not be listening to that much baseball talk because on ESPN and ESPN radio they talk about it a lot.

By talk I dont mean the Mike and Mike BS where they ask and let ESPN paid baseball analysts give the BS MLB answer. They will never truly answer the question because they get paid to cover baseball and they need the access - its the same reason no one at ESPN brought up steroids in the Big Mac era.

I dont blame them, ESPN does the same thing with the NFL and TSN does the same thing with the NHL. Just dont roll out graphics about some dynasty sports team and expect me to swallow that crap as if they are somehow some fantastic sports team.

It is true, the Yankees have something that NHL teams didnt have - good owners. If the Maple Leafs or Rangers were outspending the Flames 2 to 1 and winning the Stanley Cup once every 4 years me thinks you might change your tune.

Or if in the NFL - if Jerry Jones outspent every team by 3X and won the superbowl - would anyone consider that a true team victory? The other thing that is advantageous for the Yankees is baseball isnt a true team sport. You can sign free agents and they dont have to work with other players, they just have to play their position.