2008-2009 Mlb offseason
- Thread starter cubsfan6506
- Start date
King of Town
Adventuring
Sammy Sosa got the only two hits off of johann santana when I saw him strike out 17. I hated him for that because had he been playing for the cubs he'd be swinging at that outside slider over and over again. I hate that he played for the cubs.
El Justo
Deity
i find it ironic that those who cry for salary caps are the ones who are most often jilted 
get over it!
get over it!
El Justo
Deity
oh, it's definitely cheesy. but it's the way of the world, i'm afraid. plus, the yankess haven't won squat in, what, 8 years? so i wouldn't be worried. they still have boston and tampa to worry about.
i find it ironic that those who cry for salary caps are the ones who are most often jilted
The jilted ones are the Red Sox fans who really don't have an ideological leg to stand on. They're almost as bad as the Yankees. I don't give a crap about any Philly, New York or Boston baseball team. I'm an Indians fan, and we weren't even in contention for any of these guys.
But "thats the way it is" isn't really much of a compelling arguement. It completely removes the financial side of GMing that football and basketball have to deal with. Overpay roll players (AJ Burnett?) in the NBA, and you get the NY Knicks....a team who has to suck for 5 years. Do it in MLB, if you're the Yankees....and....just buy another guy.
And for all that not winning "squat", the Yankees were in the playoffs every year of those 8 years. If the Rays can't afford to hike up their payroll, they're going to have to blow up parts of that team in a few years. Small Market teams have a pretty small window
El Justo
Deity
oh? you want an argument?
i spent many-a-year watching my team nickel and dime the fanbase, cry poor; and i prayed to the Good Lord Almighty that one day the owners of my favorite baseball club would have it in them to actually spend for quality players - or more aptly, to spend to retain homegrown talent.
there ought not be a cap in baseball b/c it's restrictive, penalizes the teams that have a dedication to winning, and quite fankly, it's anti-american. why should a team like the yankees or boston be saddled w/ a spending limit when all they are trying to do is to win? i mean, think about that for a minute...fans cry when their team's owners don't pony up. they pocket all the revenues from new stadiums, all of the merchandise, concessions, etc. however, when it comes time to reinvest, they divest. so to whine about a cap is often hypocritical imo. don't even tell me that if your beloved indians threw $180M at sabathia last summer that you'd be complaining...you'd be here on the boards talking about how he was going to win multiple cy youngs and carry the tribe into october
as for the red sox not having any ideological leg to stand on...if it's texiera you're referring to, big deal! the sox will be just fine w/out texiera! they're solid already. sure he'd have juiced up the middle of that lineup and maybe would have given papi some extra protection. but that kid they got from the pirates did pretty good imo. so if i were a red sox fan, i wouldn't worry. there's enough of a nucleus in place already.
re small market teams - sure, they're at a disadvantage in terms of payroll. but that is just a different tact. teams like that often focus on developing their minor leagues and spending what money they have on scouting, etc. as we've seen over the last decade or so, this strategy often works. paying the players once they become eligible for free agency is another matter. but the shrewd gm's often spin these guys off for some pretty nice packages at the trade deadlines. there are also the teams that have both the cash to spend on FAs and to dump into their minor league development (ie boston). this, imho, is the pinnacle of a successful franchise (championships notwithstanding).
sure, they yankees have made the playoffs all those years. but were they ever poised to win it all outside of maybe '04 before the collapse (and '01 but the d-backs were an anomoly that year)? all we've heard over the last few years has been a-rod's oct choking; and the tide has turned against them w/ the red sox. they pretty much have had the yankees' number ever since that epic collapse. add the rays into the mix and it there's even more obstacles for the yankees.
btw, burnett is not a roll player. he led the al in Ks last year and when healthy, he has an electric arm. on paper, he is quite a boost to the yankees rotation.
i spent many-a-year watching my team nickel and dime the fanbase, cry poor; and i prayed to the Good Lord Almighty that one day the owners of my favorite baseball club would have it in them to actually spend for quality players - or more aptly, to spend to retain homegrown talent.
there ought not be a cap in baseball b/c it's restrictive, penalizes the teams that have a dedication to winning, and quite fankly, it's anti-american. why should a team like the yankees or boston be saddled w/ a spending limit when all they are trying to do is to win? i mean, think about that for a minute...fans cry when their team's owners don't pony up. they pocket all the revenues from new stadiums, all of the merchandise, concessions, etc. however, when it comes time to reinvest, they divest. so to whine about a cap is often hypocritical imo. don't even tell me that if your beloved indians threw $180M at sabathia last summer that you'd be complaining...you'd be here on the boards talking about how he was going to win multiple cy youngs and carry the tribe into october
as for the red sox not having any ideological leg to stand on...if it's texiera you're referring to, big deal! the sox will be just fine w/out texiera! they're solid already. sure he'd have juiced up the middle of that lineup and maybe would have given papi some extra protection. but that kid they got from the pirates did pretty good imo. so if i were a red sox fan, i wouldn't worry. there's enough of a nucleus in place already.
re small market teams - sure, they're at a disadvantage in terms of payroll. but that is just a different tact. teams like that often focus on developing their minor leagues and spending what money they have on scouting, etc. as we've seen over the last decade or so, this strategy often works. paying the players once they become eligible for free agency is another matter. but the shrewd gm's often spin these guys off for some pretty nice packages at the trade deadlines. there are also the teams that have both the cash to spend on FAs and to dump into their minor league development (ie boston). this, imho, is the pinnacle of a successful franchise (championships notwithstanding).
sure, they yankees have made the playoffs all those years. but were they ever poised to win it all outside of maybe '04 before the collapse (and '01 but the d-backs were an anomoly that year)? all we've heard over the last few years has been a-rod's oct choking; and the tide has turned against them w/ the red sox. they pretty much have had the yankees' number ever since that epic collapse. add the rays into the mix and it there's even more obstacles for the yankees.
btw, burnett is not a roll player. he led the al in Ks last year and when healthy, he has an electric arm. on paper, he is quite a boost to the yankees rotation.
The Yankees are just stupid in the front office with Hal and George, but the Red Sox develop talent AND throw alot of cash. The two are not mutually exclusive. It is an unfair advantage.
I have little personal stake in this. The Astros suck at getting free agents AND have a trash minor league system!
I have little personal stake in this. The Astros suck at getting free agents AND have a trash minor league system!
El Justo
Deity
surely it's an unfair advantage that any true baseball fan would want for his or her team!!
Although I have never really pulled for the Yankees (except in the day of T.Munson) I do admire the way they go and get what they want and continue to make piles of money. But as far as owners go you probably would want a front office like the A's or Marlins- dump salary AND get good
ballplayers in return... then compete (some years better than others) then trade off the next group of really talented guys for some more packages. The
Phillies have been in the middle ground for quite awhile... spend wads of money on guys that are not really superstars, have them fold up or be injured
the entire season while not developing their farm system. I have watched the
Indians (their singleA farm team is 20 minutes from my house) and for a good time a few years ago, as the major league team struggled, their farm teams (all of them) stocked up on good young talent and now that talent has made it to the majors... they should be tough for a couple of more years. The Twins are another minor league powerhouse with all of their farm teams playing very well. It is up to the front office and owners what route they want to take... home of the free and all that.
ballplayers in return... then compete (some years better than others) then trade off the next group of really talented guys for some more packages. The
Phillies have been in the middle ground for quite awhile... spend wads of money on guys that are not really superstars, have them fold up or be injured
the entire season while not developing their farm system. I have watched the
Indians (their singleA farm team is 20 minutes from my house) and for a good time a few years ago, as the major league team struggled, their farm teams (all of them) stocked up on good young talent and now that talent has made it to the majors... they should be tough for a couple of more years. The Twins are another minor league powerhouse with all of their farm teams playing very well. It is up to the front office and owners what route they want to take... home of the free and all that.
Son_Of_Dido
Prince
- Joined
- May 31, 2005
- Messages
- 315
The problem with what the Yankees spend in the offseason isn't "they can buy a championship."
It's that $2500 per game ticket price for the premium seats -- for every game, even Get Away Wednesday Noon Game against the Kansas City Royals -- and all the way down the line. To cover the cost of their attempt to "buy a championship."
Ticket prices go up, beer goes up, parking goes up, food goes up. For the Yankees fans and for the fans of all the teams trying their best to keep up with them. Even those Royals, whose season is basically over after Opening Day. Pro sports are getting more and more like the symphony -- ticket prices are so exorbinantly high as to keep the riffraff away so the corporate elite can enjoy their expensive spectacle uninterrupted.
And Mark Texiera -- the very definition of solid, "Hall of Very Good" -- is going to get 180 million dollars? In this economy?
Forget the Salary Cap; Baseball needs Collusion.
Or we need the guts to stay home in droves like we did after the strike. Shouldn't be too hard; most of us can't afford to go anyway.
It's that $2500 per game ticket price for the premium seats -- for every game, even Get Away Wednesday Noon Game against the Kansas City Royals -- and all the way down the line. To cover the cost of their attempt to "buy a championship."
Ticket prices go up, beer goes up, parking goes up, food goes up. For the Yankees fans and for the fans of all the teams trying their best to keep up with them. Even those Royals, whose season is basically over after Opening Day. Pro sports are getting more and more like the symphony -- ticket prices are so exorbinantly high as to keep the riffraff away so the corporate elite can enjoy their expensive spectacle uninterrupted.
And Mark Texiera -- the very definition of solid, "Hall of Very Good" -- is going to get 180 million dollars? In this economy?
Forget the Salary Cap; Baseball needs Collusion.
Or we need the guts to stay home in droves like we did after the strike. Shouldn't be too hard; most of us can't afford to go anyway.
King of Town
Adventuring
I think what would help instead of a salary cap would be if the league contracted a couple teams. There would be basically the same amount of talent but fewer places to put it, and then other teams are in the market for people like texiera because the yankees would already have some one good there that they were paying. Before this year I might have just said take the florida teams and let the rest of the teams draft the players off of those two teams. That right there would have changed the fortunes of a couple teams.
I think baseball is still viable enough a sport in this country that we don't need to contract. The number at current is perfect IMO.
The Marlins being contracted with 2 World Series titles to their names would just feel unfair. The Rays were pathetic for a while, but you can blame part of that on their talent out of the box and inability to pursue any kind of free agent talent. Those are really the only teams that would've contracted.
The Marlins being contracted with 2 World Series titles to their names would just feel unfair. The Rays were pathetic for a while, but you can blame part of that on their talent out of the box and inability to pursue any kind of free agent talent. Those are really the only teams that would've contracted.
El Justo
Deity
heh - that's pretty funny how we go from salary caps to contraction 
nice!
i'll toss a different spin on the contraction issue (although i'm opposed to it): i would like to see less teams solely b/c of the talent pool. now, this is like King's idea in terms of teams being able to bid etc. but what i would like to see would be less of the rag-armed no. 5 starters for teams like, say, the pirates or royals. i know it seems idealistic but my point is that offensive records produced nowadays (performance enhancers notwithstanding!) pale in comparison to those put up back in the day when there were only 16 teams. i mean, there were no rag-arms at the end of rotations...they were all in the back ends of BPs (if at all). my point is that the overall quality of pitching -- on the whole -- is a fraction of what it was in the 50's and before b/c of all of the extra teams and the 5 man rotations. iow, it is a dilluted player pool nowadays compared to back in the day. and maris' 61 homers are "worth more" or were harder to hit than, say, bonds', mcgwire's, or sosa's. and i ain't even goin' near the performance enhancing aspect of it...just the raw talent that's trotted out there every day on MLB pitching mounds
so there's my rant on contraction and how it'd benefit
nice!i'll toss a different spin on the contraction issue (although i'm opposed to it): i would like to see less teams solely b/c of the talent pool. now, this is like King's idea in terms of teams being able to bid etc. but what i would like to see would be less of the rag-armed no. 5 starters for teams like, say, the pirates or royals. i know it seems idealistic but my point is that offensive records produced nowadays (performance enhancers notwithstanding!) pale in comparison to those put up back in the day when there were only 16 teams. i mean, there were no rag-arms at the end of rotations...they were all in the back ends of BPs (if at all). my point is that the overall quality of pitching -- on the whole -- is a fraction of what it was in the 50's and before b/c of all of the extra teams and the 5 man rotations. iow, it is a dilluted player pool nowadays compared to back in the day. and maris' 61 homers are "worth more" or were harder to hit than, say, bonds', mcgwire's, or sosa's. and i ain't even goin' near the performance enhancing aspect of it...just the raw talent that's trotted out there every day on MLB pitching mounds
so there's my rant on contraction and how it'd benefit Roger Maris can be the HR king in your mind, just like Deacon Jones is the single season sack king in mine 
I don't disagree with your sentiment, I just think that contraction won't really help that in the long run. It's better to keep major league teams as nationwide as they are to keep another generation rooting for their team and wanting to be in the sport. I know a sport can be out of sight and out of mind if there is no major league team there (see: the NFL in LA)
I don't disagree with your sentiment, I just think that contraction won't really help that in the long run. It's better to keep major league teams as nationwide as they are to keep another generation rooting for their team and wanting to be in the sport. I know a sport can be out of sight and out of mind if there is no major league team there (see: the NFL in LA)
King of Town
Adventuring
I agree with El J fully. There are too many guys that should be in triple a out there getting rocked. I mean how are you a starter with a 5+ era? Thats an automatic L almost every appearance.
They could have knocked the expo's out before they moved. They let go of everyone good and basicaly stocked the rest of the teams with people like Larry Walker, Andreas Galleraga, and randy johnson. So what is the point of not having them be triple a. As much as I would hate to see them go as a storied franchise, the Pirates are basically in that spot now, and probably the royals too.
they did win a couple of titles, but the marlins bring out 8,000 fans a game. i'm not sure they can get any more out of mind really
They could have knocked the expo's out before they moved. They let go of everyone good and basicaly stocked the rest of the teams with people like Larry Walker, Andreas Galleraga, and randy johnson. So what is the point of not having them be triple a. As much as I would hate to see them go as a storied franchise, the Pirates are basically in that spot now, and probably the royals too.
they did win a couple of titles, but the marlins bring out 8,000 fans a game. i'm not sure they can get any more out of mind really
Mauer
Pompous Noble
RE: contraction - Take the Rangers first please
