GOM's Plan to Fix the Yankees: 2009 Edition

[Gom]

Time for an update. Shall we take a look?

 

I've done some analyzing, and have come up with a revised plan for the 2009 Offseason. Without further ado, here you go. The moves that have been changed have had an asterisk assigned to them.

1. Convince CC to come to NY. I'm not so sure that he's so in love with the West Coast as the media makes him out to be. I think it's part of the gamesmanship to maximize the biggest payday for a pitcher in baseball history. Sadly, it works. He's going to top what Johan made, and he isn't worth it, but that's the price you pay for mismanagement. My call: 7 years, 140 million. [+20 million]

Not bad...I was off by 20 million, but I had the years dead on.

*2. Blow out the competition immediately for AJ Burnett [i had previously advocated Ben Sheets]. The truth is, the Yankees really need two starting pitchers. My change of heart is due to the fact that pitchers who switch leagues to the AL East tend to bottom out, and vice-versa. Look at Beckett his first year, and how well Pedro did when he went to the Mets, and Derek Lowe when he went to the Dodgers. Let someone else take a shot at Sheets and Lowe. Give me AJ, and pass on Sheets. Brian Bruney met with AJ, they went to dinner during the last series. Rest assured, he let AJ know what management wants.[+16 million].

Really missed on this one. I was half a million off.

3a. Kick the tires on Teixeira. What's not to like about a young, switch-hitting Gold Glove firstbaseman who hits for power and average? Nothing. However, I can't see the Angels letting him go. I'd offer him 17 million a year for 6 years, but my guess is he'll stay in Anaheim. Of course if he takes it, I'd have to revamp some of the thinking. I'm assuming he stays out in the sun in Cali. If you can't, and you probably won't be able to sign Texeira, then that leads to 3B.[break even with Giambi's 2008 salary]

http://www.fannation.com/si_blogs/hot_stove/posts/31261-yankees-back-in-teixeira-sweepstakes

 

Would you call this one dead on? Nah...

*3b. Bring back Giambi. On second thought, we would be better off bringing back the Big Sexy. Looking at his final numbers, and realizing that what's out there would cost a lot more than what we could bring back, Giambi as the full time 1B is the best option. One year deal, mutual option at 10 million is a good call. Factoring in the $5 million payout, it's a net of [- 3 million].

Even I, who works in banking, underestimated the effect of the economic woes on baseball. This is still open, and my guess is that Giambi is going to get less than 10 million. Would it be a good idea? I think so. The Big Sexy at 6-8 million would be a great deal.

*4. The shocker of the off-season. Get ready for this. Sign Manny Ramirez. 4 years $70 million. The market is really reduced to three teams. Dodgers, Yankees, Mets. That's it. The Mets have bullpen and rotation issues. The Dodgers are forced to make a run at him. Manny should be Bronx-bound. Don't buy this "Manny will be Manny" crap. He was a happy and productive player in Cleveland. In recent years, you have had a slew of "bad" people leave the Red Sox and join the Yankees. Boggs, Clemens, Damon. Don't lose sight of the fact that Manny is from Jackson Heights, and nothing would make him happier than to beat the pants off of Boston. Signing one of the best hitters in the game that's got a personal vendetta against your hated rivals would be a coup we haven't seen since Ruth joined the Yankees. If you give 4 years, you get three productive ones from Manny. This move alone will give the Yankees one ring in the next three years. Maybe more. Just ask the Red Sox if he was worth the money. They are still without a championship since 1918 if not for this guy. [+18 million]

How funny could this be? I may be off on the money, but there is growing sentiment that this may happen.

5. Resign Abreu for 2 years, 11 million a season, club option in second year. He claims to want to come back. Let's see if he does. Abreu is one of those players whose value is greater than the first look. He can run, he takes pitches, and can succeed in the pressure cooker of New York. Plus, the Yankees, being an older team, will have injuries. They need to rotate their players to keep them fresh. This will be one of Cashman's big mistakes this off-season. Letting Abreu go. I say keep him. [+11 million, net -6 million]

I still think is the biggest blunder of the off-season. However, his monetary demands may drop. I still advocate bringing him back. Only three other outfielders have 100 RBIs the last three seasons. Carlos Lee, Magglio Ordonez, and Carlos Beltran. That's a good group to be included with.

6. Trade Nady. There is no place for him. With Giambi at 1B, Manny at DH, and re-signing Abreu, you have one too many OFs. Which Yankee OF has the greatest trade value? Nady, who ironically, is their worst hitting starting OF. Nady came back to earth with the Yankees. He's a career .794 OPS hitter. For the Yankees, he had a .793 OPS. Expect a full-season of about .280 BA and .330 OBP and a .450 SLG. Not what you'd really want, but as far as value goes, he gives a lot of bang for your buck. Trading Nady for some prospects will offset one set of prospects lost in signing CC or Manny [and Tex if they can lure him]. -3.3 million

Doesn't make sense if they don't bring back Abreu.

7. Bring back Moose. He also is used to New York, and likes it here. A good guy to have around, and a nice change of pace in the rotation. 2 year contract at 11 million, with the second being a club or mutual option, is the way to go. [Wash].

Sadly, he decided to retire. Can't blame anyone on this one.

8. Do not trade Cano. If anything, Cano's struggles this year will probably be a bit of a wakeup call. Will he get back to the .330 BA he once had? Doubtful. However, look for him to generate more power next year as he has closed up his stance a bit. Giving up on him at this point is a mistake. This will be Cashman's biggest mistake this off-season if he get's rid of him.

Still hasn't been done. So far, I'm good on this one.

9. Trade or release Marte. $6 million for a wild lefty reliever in the pen? I'll take my chances with Coke. Better mechanics, better speed. A bullpen of Mariano, Bruney, Coke, Veras, and Robertson should be sufficient. I see the Yankees cutting costs here and going with their youth in the pen, which is actually starting to look like a strength in the Cashman Era. [-5.75 million]

I don't care for the deal, but it's a minor one either way.

10. Say goodbye to Pettitte [-16 million], Ivan Rodriguez [-using Farnswoth's salary of 6 million], Pavano [-9 mill [11 million-2mil buy out]. If Pettitte wants to come back, that would be fine to bring him back at no more than 8 million a season. I don't see him taking a 50% paycut, so it may be fitting that he started the last game at the old stadium. Total saving from this trio: [35 million]

Well...I still think Pettitte is being offered too much money. However, 10 million or 8 million...not much to swallow for one year.

 

So what do you think? Was I way off, or pretty much dead on point so far? :thumbsup:

[Cocos Disciples]

Fairly impressive. You're no jack-o, though!

[Gom]

Fairly impressive. You're no jack-o' date=' though![/quote']

That's the worst insult anyone has spewed at me since I've been here. How can you be so cruel?

 

You're not my friend anymore. I'm going to take my ball and go home now.

[Cocos Disciples]

Aww fiddlesticks, I take it back.

[ORS]

So what do you think? Was I way off' date=' or pretty much dead on point so far? :thumbsup:[/quote']

Gee, go back and read the OP, then let me know if you were predicting or suggesting? Looks like suggesting to me.

 

What's interesting is that their moves have essentially killed your ability to criticize Cashman. His moves have been your moves. If it fails and you call him a moron, then look in the mirror while you say it.

[BSN07]

Time for an update. Shall we take a look?

 

 

Not bad...I was off by 20 million, but I had the years dead on.

 

Really missed on this one. I was half a million off.

 

http://www.fannation.com/si_blogs/hot_stove/posts/31261-yankees-back-in-teixeira-sweepstakes

 

Would you call this one dead on? Nah...

 

Even I, who works in banking, underestimated the effect of the economic woes on baseball. This is still open, and my guess is that Giambi is going to get less than 10 million. Would it be a good idea? I think so. The Big Sexy at 6-8 million would be a great deal.

 

How funny could this be? I may be off on the money, but there is growing sentiment that this may happen.

 

I still think is the biggest blunder of the off-season. However, his monetary demands may drop. I still advocate bringing him back. Only three other outfielders have 100 RBIs the last three seasons. Carlos Lee, Magglio Ordonez, and Carlos Beltran. That's a good group to be included with.

 

Doesn't make sense if they don't bring back Abreu.

 

Sadly, he decided to retire. Can't blame anyone on this one.

 

Still hasn't been done. So far, I'm good on this one.

 

I don't care for the deal, but it's a minor one either way.

 

Well...I still think Pettitte is being offered too much money. However, 10 million or 8 million...not much to swallow for one year.

 

So what do you think? Was I way off, or pretty much dead on point so far? :thumbsup:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If I was a Yankees fan, and saw how much of Gom's plan had come to fruition, I wouldn't see it as a positive thing, but that's just me:dunno:

[Dipre]

If the Yankees fail (and they might), you better shut your mouth about how bad a GM Cashman is, because his offseason has basically been following the blueprint you posted right here in this board, almost as if he plagiarized your work, so you better cross your fingers for the Yankees to kick ass next season, or prepare to be ridiculed in epic proportions.

[TheKilo]

Gee, go back and read the OP, then let me know if you were predicting or suggesting? Looks like suggesting to me.

 

What's interesting is that their moves have essentially killed your ability to criticize Cashman. His moves have been your moves. If it fails and you call him a moron, then look in the mirror while you say it.

 

LOL!

[Cocos Disciples]

Oh no, Gom's in quite the pickle.

[CrespoBlows]

Gee, go back and read the OP, then let me know if you were predicting or suggesting? Looks like suggesting to me.

 

What's interesting is that their moves have essentially killed your ability to criticize Cashman. His moves have been your moves. If it fails and you call him a moron, then look in the mirror while you say it.

 

[Gom]

If I was a Yankees fan' date=' and saw how much of Gom's plan had come to fruition, I wouldn't see it as a positive thing, but that's just me:dunno:[/quote']

 

Other than the fact that I would have traded for Santana, and you guys might have been complaining about 3rd place instead of us.

 

The truth is...the Yankee lineup is weak compared to days past, and especially to the Sox. Regardless with the small moves, Tex or Manny is a must. It would be just like Cashman to go 90% of the way and not finish the job. One more bat, and the post-season is pretty much a lock at the onset of spring training.

[Gom]

Gee, go back and read the OP, then let me know if you were predicting or suggesting? Looks like suggesting to me.

 

What's interesting is that their moves have essentially killed your ability to criticize Cashman. His moves have been your moves. If it fails and you call him a moron, then look in the mirror while you say it.

 

I was suggesting. He didn't follow what I laid out in 2008, and it lead to 3rd place. So far...he's followed MY blueprint...so you are right. If he signs Manny, he's basically done what I would have done. My ability to criticize his major league moves basically disappears.

 

The thing with Cashman is this. He's got three years to develop players. That's when CC can opt out. That's when Mariano, Jeter, and Posada are either done, or close to being done. If we haven't come close to replacing them, then he's failed at player development.

[jacksonianmarch]

The thing with Cashman is this. He's got three years to develop players. That's when CC can opt out. That's when Mariano' date=' Jeter, and Posada are either done, or close to being done. [b']If we haven't come close to replacing them, then he's failed at player development[/b].

 

We agree on something! Until then, your Cashman bashing days are over

[Gom]

We agree on something! Until then' date=' your Cashman bashing days are over[/quote']

He needs to sign a big hitter to protect Arod. Other than that, I have no issues with him on the major league level this off-season. Knowing him, he won't, only because that means that he would have to go all-in, which is something this guy rarely does. If you're going to sign AJ and CC, might as well get that big bat...in for a penny, in for a pound, if you know what I mean.

 

However, I don't buy the premise that he can't build from within. The Yankees lose their picks from one year, and one year only this season. Considering he gets compensation picks for his inability to sign his picks last year, I consider it a wash.

 

So if three years later we still don't have a single starting player, he's failed in what he's tried to do.

 

Tell you what Jacko...I'll stop bashing him for three years if you stop touting every prospect as a potential All-Star and commenting on every move he makes as the missing piece to the championship puzzle.

[jacksonianmarch]

I dont think we need another marquee middle of the order hitter. We just need to fill that CF hole with a guy like Cameron who will put up a .800 or so OPS and we'll have a lineup with all 9 players at .800+ OPS if healthy. That is a good lineup.

[BudLight]

The problem with Cameron is the K's. With the lack of base stealing ability on the Yanks, Cameron sets you up for a lot of strike/throw out double plays. The Yanks showed last year their run producing numbers are down and the loss of Abreu impacts that even more. Swisher will not make up those numbers. The smartest thing Cashman can do right now IMO is to sign Abreu to a two year deal. He's a proven run producer. You can platoon Melky and Gardner in center until Jackson is ready next year. At least they won't be giving up Abreu's 100 RBI and 100 Runs scored. Damon and Matsui can platoon at DH. Throughout all of the moves this off-season the one thing I commend Cashman for is sticking to his plan not to sell the farm to get roster ready talent. Spending the $80+ Million is the way to go for now and keep developing the minor league players

[Gom]

I dont think we need another marquee middle of the order hitter. We just need to fill that CF hole with a guy like Cameron who will put up a .800 or so OPS and we'll have a lineup with all 9 players at .800+ OPS if healthy. That is a good lineup.

 

First of all...I respectfully disagree. The difference between Cabrera/Gardner and Cameron is not that great offensively or defensively. If we put Damon there, there is a huge advantage for us offensively, and a huge downgrade defensively. Overall, the difference does not warrant 10 million.

 

However, the difference between our current DH and Manny would be immense. As of now, who protects Arod? Matsui? Cano? Posada?

 

Arod will be lucky to see a single fastball all season.

[jacksonianmarch]

First of all...I respectfully disagree. The difference between Cabrera/Gardner and Cameron is not that great offensively or defensively. If we put Damon there, there is a huge advantage for us offensively, and a huge downgrade defensively. Overall, the difference does not warrant 10 million.

 

However, the difference between our current DH and Manny would be immense. As of now, who protects Arod? Matsui? Cano? Posada?

 

Arod will be lucky to see a single fastball all season.

 

I dont think Damon can last a full season in CF. I am not even sure he can last a full season out in LF. Also, I am a Gardner believer, but one thing I learned last yr is that you cannot just give a position to a player. Giving the spot to Gardner to start the yr is a great way to set yourself up to fail. I think getting a guy like Cameron is a great way to phase a player in. He's older, but a great defender who can give the kids some tips on how to play the position. And Gardner needs that. If you read any of the SRs on him from PP, his routes are considered to be poor and he makes up for it with speed. Therefore, he isnt the best CFer you will find. Also, Cameron brings something that we hope Gardner will develop. The ability to work the pitcher. I think, one day, Gardner could be a .350+ OBP guy who will drive pitchers batty. And if he wins an in season comp and proves he can be that guy, then great. Until then, he needs to prove he can translate that eye to the bigs as well as prove he can make more contact.

 

And as for Melky, we have seen him go from potential AS CFer to a total regression to the worst OFer in yankee history. I'd take my chances with Cameron and Gardner in CF a whole lot more than I would Melky and Gardner. The LAST thing we want to do is give the job to Gardner, see both he and Melkman struggle and then have to rush AJax. Cause if they spoil his future, then it may be awhile before we get another impact position player from our farm

[Gom]

Jacko..the question isn't whether Cameron is a good move or not. As a one year stop-gap, he's fine. The question is...do we have a better chance to win the World Series with Manny/Hughes or with Cameron/Pettite. I don't even think there is a question about which gives us a better chance.

[jacksonianmarch]

I agree. In a playoff scenario where Pettitte wouldnt even pitch, having Manny vs Cameron is a no brainer. The question is, in a yr when there are 3 true blue contenders in the division, would you rather have one spot in the order filled with a .800OPS hitter and a 200IP pitcher or with a .900OPS hitter and a kid who has shown flashes of brilliance but also gets hurt a lot. The true question comes down to, is a 200IP pitcher worth 100 points in OPS?

[example1]

It's funny how the discussion of money or value never comes into your discussion about the differences between Cameron and Manny. In a world where money doesn't matter, I'd take Manny every time. What the hell, I'd take Manny AND Pettitte.

[Gom]

It's funny how the discussion of money or value never comes into your discussion about the differences between Cameron and Manny. In a world where money doesn't matter' date=' I'd take Manny every time. What the hell, I'd take Manny AND Pettitte.[/quote']

Example...Manny will take about 20 mil. Pettitte is 10 mil, and Cameron is 10 mil. So salaries are pretty much a wash.

 

Jacko:

 

2008 VORP:

 

Manny: 49.8

 

Cameron: 23.2

Pettitte: 20.5

 

So Manny is worth more, and each VORP point is not linear. In other words, a +2 is worth more than two +1s. Couple that with the following theoretical points:

 

A ) Manny's importance in potential post-season play

B ) Pettitte's lack of a spot in the playoff rotation

C ) Both Cameron and Pettitte have been busted for PEDs and saw a big decline

 

vs.

 

D) Manny being Manny for 3 seasons

 

It's a no-brainer Jacko.

 

Some Red Sox fans may disagree with the severity of "D". However, if Manny wasn't there, I have no doubt that the chant "1918" would be heard in the new stadium.

[example1]

Example...Manny will take about 20 mil. Pettitte is 10 mil, and Cameron is 10 mil. So salaries are pretty much a wash.

 

Cameron for one year, plus Pettitte for, say, 2 years, would be 30 million. Manny for 3 years would be 60 million. That's how the rest of us would look at it. I see your reasoning, but you have to admit that you don't really think about the finances of these things.

 

 

Some Red Sox fans may disagree with the severity of "D".

 

Most of them on this board won't. Everyone knows Manny is a baffoon in the OF, but his hitting and patience at the plate more than makes up for it. Couldn't he be a DH for the Yankees if they wanted him to be anyway?

[Gom]

Cameron for one year, plus Pettitte for, say, 2 years, would be 30 million. Manny for 3 years would be 60 million. That's how the rest of us would look at it. I see your reasoning, but you have to admit that you don't really think about the finances of these things.

 

 

 

 

Most of them on this board won't. Everyone knows Manny is a baffoon in the OF, but his hitting and patience at the plate more than makes up for it. Couldn't he be a DH for the Yankees if they wanted him to be anyway?

 

I look at as a year to year expenditure. See the payroll isn't one lump sum. It's doled out year per year.

 

One thing Cashman has going for him is that the payroll is loaded with absurd contracts that are slowly coming off the books. Next year, Matsui and Damon come off. That's 26 million. The year after that, Mo, Posada, and Jeter come off. Every player I'm listing will either be gone or take a paycut, including Jeter [maybe not Mo, the man defies anything we know about pitchers].

 

The payroll, even hypothetically assuming Manny signs for 20 mil per, is LESS than last year. Next year, it will be even less.

[example1]

They're spending less money this year because they couldn't possibly spend more money if they flushed it down the toilet in $100 increments.

 

I mean, seriously Gom, they are getting rid of horrible contracts. Contracts that no self-respecting team would ever re-up. They couldn't make up for the amount of s***** contracts if they wanted to, and it sure seems like they're trying to spend money as if they have to have a payroll over $200m.

 

I would really like to hear them say "we are trying to not spend as much money as we have in the past", but I haven't heard it yet. They merely happen to be spending less money this year, after signing the most expensive AAV pitcher in history, and the 6th highest AAV pitcher in history, and talking about signing another guy for 20m+.

 

It's just silly.

[Gom]

They're spending less money this year because they couldn't possibly spend more money if they flushed it down the toilet in $100 increments.

 

I mean, seriously Gom, they are getting rid of horrible contracts. Contracts that no self-respecting team would ever re-up. They couldn't make up for the amount of s***** contracts if they wanted to, and it sure seems like they're trying to spend money as if they have to have a payroll over $200m.

 

I would really like to hear them say "we are trying to not spend as much money as we have in the past", but I haven't heard it yet. They merely happen to be spending less money this year, after signing the most expensive AAV pitcher in history, and the 6th highest AAV pitcher in history, and talking about signing another guy for 20m+.

 

It's just silly.

 

Why? Why on earth would they do that? Are you really that naive to not realize this is a business? I'm going to quote Joel Sherman here:

"Look at it this way, say the Yanks had signed Sabathia for that $140 million and decided concurrently to spend an additional $21 million over seven years in advertising, no one would have said a word. Signing Sabathia before Christmas is pretty good advertising. Heck, no one is critical that while many front offices are in cut mode, the small-market Pirates are hiring a bunch of sales/promotion people to sell Paul Maholm and Nate McLouth. If you don't have a problem with that, why have a problem with the Yanks spending

 

$3 million more a year to boost their team-owned network while assuring better ticket/merchandise/etc sales?

 

As for the A.J. Burnett bidding, the Braves had been right there dollar for dollar with the Yankees. Like the Yankees, Atlanta had a sizeable chunk of salaries removed from their payroll and is looking to reinvest those dollars. Do you have a problem with the Braves? If not, why do you have it with the Yankees?

 

I know, because they can just outbid anybody. True. It also is true that in the era in which the Yanks have spent this way, baseball has become more - not less - popular.

 

It also is true that the Yanks are the mother lode to the industry: More than $105 million combined in revenue sharing/luxury tax is distributed from the Yanks to other clubs. And though the 30 teams share equally in items such as merchandise sales, MLB.com dollars, and rights fees for radio, TV and international media, does anyone believe there are as many Kansas City Royals jerseys sold as those of the Yankees?

 

In other words, much of the sport gladly takes the massive dollars generated by the star-driven Yankees with one hand, and then slaps the Yanks with the other hand when the Yanks purchase more stars."

 

You're whining about payroll, and you're primed to give Tex nearly $200 million. As long as revenue sharing is in place, I never want to hear about payroll. The Yankees get taxed 40 cents on the dollar for every dollar that goes over the cap.

 

What should worry other teams is if the Yankees, who seem to have the right idea under the current GM [although I still think he's the wrong man for the job], continue to throw money in the draft and in international scouting. These things don't fall under the salary cap. You want to see how money can f*** things over? Fine. If I was the Yankees, offer an absurd signing bonus to the top amateur player in baseball EVERY year. Then let Boras or whoever the agent is go to work. You'll kill the small teams fiscal ability if they get the first pick in the draft and have to shell millions just to sign the kid. That's how we got Brackman. No team wanted to touch his signing bonus when the Yankees got involved.

 

The Yankees are playing nice. There is no edict on baseball salaries. You pay what you can afford. It's the same in every business. These same people who complain about it are the same one's who dip into the shared pot of revenues. Can't have it both ways. If you take so much as a dime, then you can't complain.

 

Example1...or anyone else here who is a salary cap complainer. Give me one reason. ONE REASON. JUST ONE...as to WHY the Yankees should curtail their spending IF they have the resources to spend.

[example1]

Example1...or anyone else here who is a salary cap complainer. Give me one reason. ONE REASON. JUST ONE...as to WHY the Yankees should curtail their spending IF they have the resources to spend.

 

First of alll, this "the Yankees spend all this money and it's really charity!" s*** is just BS. It's a nice story that you can tell yourself, but would YOU run a business like that? Why not try to maxamize profits by spending as little as possible while also trying to maxamize your income?

 

Secondly, I can't speak for every other baseball fan. But personally I have a hard time respecting their franchise because I don't think what they do requires any skill or knowledge or study of the game. I respect players who play hard, and I like it when I see guys playing hard no matter how much money they get. The Yankees get those guys, just like other teams do. Who wouldn't respect a guy like Joba pumping his fist, or Jeter diving headlong into the stands?

 

As for their management though, there's no art to it, no real development involved. On a purely aesthetic level that's why I appreciated them not trading Hughes et al to get Santana last year. It seemed like they were trying to pull off the ally-oop instead of the easy layup, and sometimes that's a more magnificant thing.

 

I don't respect the teams they put together--especially since about 2000 on--because I don't think their approach requires any nuance or depth of knowledge about the game. This is the team that played in the house that Ruth built, with its great lore of amazing players. There was a mystique about the Yankees that had much more to do with finding that 'yankee type' of player, than it did with buying the hottest new thing only to have that thing break down in a few years.

 

You'll notice I'm not whining about payroll, and I say over and over again that the Red Sox spend a lot of money. I'm merely explaining why I don't get excited about any detailed explainations about signing CC Sabathia or AJ Burnett; the nuances of whether they should sign Manny or Cameron. It's not like they had to choose Sabathia from a number of options. If there weren't a limit on the number of roster spots I'm convinced they would sign Cameron and Manny and Pettitte, and they would sign Sheets and give Clemens a few million to pitch two games a year.

 

They simply take the most obvious good player and offer them more money than any other team would. It's like they play on the playstation without payroll restrictions. They will offer that money even if they have to pay an extra 40% on it (or whatever the luxary tax is). It just doesn't matter to them.

 

I don't complain about it as if it is unfair per-se. Why would I? The Yankees haven't won particularly more than their best competition, and baseball has its own way of evening itself out. I just complain about their approach to managing their business as boring, uninnovative, and pretty uninteresting overall.

 

In terms of the game and team management, I'm much more intregued by the intellectual work done by teams that do it without going well over the luxary tax threshold... teams that don't spend money on players because they see it as potentially a bad idea, teams that set a value on a guy based on what he will do on the baseball field.

 

I'm not poo-pooing your love for the Yankees. I understand that you genuinely like them, and I think that's great. I agree that the Yankees give lots of money to the s***** teams in baseball, and I'm a firm believer in a minimum payroll more than anything like a maximum payroll. Teams like KC and MN have absurdly wealthy owners, but don't spend their money. That sucks just as much.

 

So I personally have plenty of reasons that I think are good, to explain why I dont like what the Yankees do economically, and why I'm not impressed by their results. I don't feel jealousy toward their fans when they win, because, frankly, they should win. When they don't I think its kind of pathetic. If they could have the same results with a payroll of 150m, but they go over 200m, that's just being lazy IMHO.

 

Of course, I'm a Red Sox fan so I might be biased. :dunno: As I've come to love this game I've really come to love how it is analyzed and the work that teams do to choose who to sign, how long to sign them, and when not to go 'all in'.

[Gom]

First of alll' date=' this "the Yankees spend all this money and it's really [i']charity[/i]!" s*** is just BS.

Ok..let's take it away then if it's ********.

It's a nice story that you can tell yourself' date=' but would YOU run a business like that? Why not try to maxamize profits by spending as little as possible while also trying to maxamize your income? [/quote']

Of course. Is there a point to this statement? The Yankees, combined with YES, run the biggest profit in baseball.

Secondly, I can't speak for every other baseball fan. But personally I have a hard time respecting their franchise because I don't think what they do requires any skill or knowledge or study of the game. I respect players who play hard, and I like it when I see guys playing hard no matter how much money they get. The Yankees get those guys, just like other teams do. Who wouldn't respect a guy like Joba pumping his fist, or Jeter diving headlong into the stands?

So you respect the players, not the franchise. Fine.

As for their management though, there's no art to it, no real development involved. On a purely aesthetic level that's why I appreciated them not trading Hughes et al to get Santana last year. It seemed like they were trying to pull off the ally-oop instead of the easy layup, and sometimes that's a more magnificant thing.

Not making the move caused them to miss the playoffs for the first time in 12 years.

I don't respect the teams they put together--especially since about 2000 on--because I don't think their approach requires any nuance or depth of knowledge about the game. This is the team that played in the house that Ruth built, with its great lore of amazing players. There was a mystique about the Yankees that had much more to do with finding that 'yankee type' of player, than it did with buying the hottest new thing only to have that thing break down in a few years.

Are you kidding me? I can write a book on the inequalities the Yankees had in their HISTORY. Just take a look at the relationship the Yankees had with Kansas City. This is the cleanest fiscal era in baseball. If you don't believe me, look it up. A post of this stuff would be PAGES UPON PAGES long. Guess what? Your Red Sox were just as involved.

You'll notice I'm not whining about payroll, and I say over and over again that the Red Sox spend a lot of money. I'm merely explaining why I don't get excited about any detailed explainations about signing CC Sabathia or AJ Burnett; the nuances of whether they should sign Manny or Cameron. It's not like they had to choose Sabathia from a number of options. If there weren't a limit on the number of roster spots I'm convinced they would sign Cameron and Manny and Pettitte, and they would sign Sheets and give Clemens a few million to pitch two games a year.

So..the Yankees offer 2 million more over 5 years than the Braves, and all of a sudden they are throwing cash around? Face it. If CC opts out, that's 8 years combined between CC and AJ at 151 million. The bar for Teixeira is already above that, and you are the supposed favorites.

They simply take the most obvious good player and offer them more money than any other team would. It's like they play on the playstation without payroll restrictions. They will offer that money even if they have to pay an extra 40% on it (or whatever the luxary tax is). It just doesn't matter to them.

If they are making a product, and making money doing it, why should they stop. Still..all this hot air, and no answer as to WHY.

I don't complain about it as if it is unfair per-se. Why would I? The Yankees haven't won particularly more than their best competition, and baseball has its own way of evening itself out. I just complain about their approach to managing their business as boring, uninnovative, and pretty uninteresting overall.

Then so are the Red Sox...albeit slightly less so.

In terms of the game and team management, I'm much more intregued by the intellectual work done by teams that do it without going well over the luxary tax threshold... teams that don't spend money on players because they see it as potentially a bad idea, teams that set a value on a guy based on what he will do on the baseball field.

Here is the ultimate hypocrisy. It's like the speed LIMIT. It's the limit. Not the MINIMUM. You want to be impressed? Be impressed by the Devil Rays. The Twins. Any team that is way BELOW the threshold and wins. The Yankees? Mets? Red Sox? Dodgers? That impresses you? This is HOMERISM to a nauseating degree.

I'm not poo-pooing your love for the Yankees. I understand that you genuinely like them, and I think that's great. I agree that the Yankees give lots of money to the s***** teams in baseball, and I'm a firm believer in a minimum payroll more than anything like a maximum payroll. Teams like KC and MN have absurdly wealthy owners, but don't spend their money. That sucks just as much.

Of course I'm a fan. I love my team. However, I can differentiate between emotion and logic. I completely and utterly agree with minimum standards. You can't have a hard floor and a soft ceiling. Want to know how to fix it? The same way you have a luxury tax, you need to have a luxury floor. If you want to share in the luxury tax, your payroll has to be at a set minimum that adjusts yearly. Say..and I'm just spitting out numbers here...35 million. You want a payroll below that? Fine. You're not doing your team, your fans, or baseball any favors. Survive without the handout from the richer teams.

So I personally have plenty of reasons that I think are good, to explain why I dont like what the Yankees do economically, and why I'm not impressed by their results. I don't feel jealousy toward their fans when they win, because, frankly, they should win. When they don't I think its kind of pathetic. If they could have the same results with a payroll of 150m, but they go over 200m, that's just being lazy IMHO.

The bad thing from a business standpoint is not to go all the way. What's the point of CC without AJ? Of fixing pitching without hitting? If that extra 50 million gets you to the World Series, great. If not, you wasted $150 million.

Of course, I'm a Red Sox fan so I might be biased. :dunno: As I've come to love this game I've really come to love how it is analyzed and the work that teams do to choose who to sign, how long to sign them, and when not to go 'all in'.

Look, in general I respect your viewpoints. It's just that they are tainted by your fandom. My views aren't. The problem with the Yankees, if there is a problem, would be with the SYSTEM. The Yankees play within the rules of the system. That's like telling Walmart not to drop their prices to keep the local Mom & Pop in business. It's not the Yankees JOB or RESPONSIBILITY to do anything to level the field. Their responsibility is to themselves, their fans, and their city. That's it.

 

Your choice to respect or not respect anything about them is your choice to make. However, the Yankees play by the rules set in front of them. So...all of you...point your venom at baseball, at Selig, at the rule-makers. Point your fingers at the Yankees when they start breaking the rules, not when they follow them.

 

Example, I'm STILL waiting for one good reason why they shouldn't. You've told me what you don't like. Fine. Not why they shouldn't.

[jacksonianmarch]

Wow, I actually agree with Gom on this one. The Yankees will have an immense amount of money to spend in the new stadium. And more money flows in when the team is on top. Why not spend some of the money you have to potentially make more money in the future. I understand that there is a big picture argument, but at the same time it isnt the yankee's fault that they are such a successful franchise both on and off the field.

[Gom]

Wow' date=' I actually agree with Gom on this one. The Yankees will have an immense amount of money to spend in the new stadium. And more money flows in when the team is on top. Why not spend some of the money you have to potentially make more money in the future. I understand that there is a big picture argument, but at the same time it isnt the yankee's fault that they are such a successful franchise both on and off the field.[/quote']

You're learning. There's still hope for you.