The Best Team Money Could Buy

[yankees228]

"The best franchise in the history of organized sports"

 

The close-mindedness associated with this statement makes it much easier to dismiss everything else you say as incorrect.

 

Yeah, that's a pretty strong statement. I'm a huge Yankees fan, and they have had an incredibly rich history, but so many other sports franchises have enjoyed incredible success, and to just select one out of the group isn't fair.

[Paradisecity]

Yeah- what the Yankees have done and what they are now are both extremely impressive, but in the history of organized sports, they are more like the tallest midget, as are the Canadiens and Celtics compared to the other major world sports

[yankees228]

Yeah- what the Yankees have done and what they are now are both extremely impressive' date=' but in the history of organized sports, they are more like the tallest midget, as are the Canadiens and Celtics compared to the other major world sports[/quote']

 

Fair enough. I honestly don't know that much about other major world sports, so this is where I'll have to bow out of the discussion. Regardless, I do agree with your general point that you cannot put the Yankees above everyone else.

[jacksonianmarch]

I am talking about the successes of one franchise. Name me another franchise in the world of soccer, cricket, etc that has THAT kind of success

[26 to 6]

Time for a third team in New York. If there's that much revenue to go round, it should go round further.

 

Either that, or it's time to do what the NFL does, have the league claim the media rights for each team, and if the owners haven't lynched you yet, distribute that revenue more evenly.

I agree, and support the notion that there should be a third team in New York. Unfortunately Steinbrenner and Wilpon would do anything possible to prevent that from happening. Even if they put a team in Newark or upstate in Buffalo or something I think it could help even out the tremendous financial advantage.

 

The fact that he hasn't complained doesn't mean he doesn't think it's unfair.

 

It might be that he thinks he should shut up because the Sox also have a significant advantage.

You should follow his lead.

 

But what you have to understand is that 100+ win seasons and a world series title were expected of the Yankees because of how they spend their money. I'm not impressed by a team winning a world series that can spend half a billion dollars in one off-season.

 

If anything, the Yankees not winning the world series would have been a bigger failure than it was impressive that they won it, if at all.

Agreed. With the enormous financial advantages that the Yankees have come enormous expectations, which we as Yankee fans acknowledge and hold our team to. We won because we were SUPPOSED to win, unfortunately it doesn't always work out that way though. This year it did, and even though we were supposed to win it all doesn't mean we shouldn't celebrate the fact that we did. That would be like refusing to celebrate other accomplishments that you're supposed to achieve such as graduating High School for example. That might not be the best example, but you catch my drift.

 

Would you be impressed if the NFL assembled an All-Pro or HOF team, without any cap, that blew through the league to 19-0 and won the Superbowl? No, you would think it was pretty damned unfair.

You mean like the Patriots of recent history?

I'm not even a Giants fan; I'm a Jets fan, but I was so damn happy when the Giants pulled off that upset.

 

Now lets go back to the beginning of the season.

 

On this site 15 people offered up their predictions for what the MLB standings would look like at the end of the year. Only 4 of those people predicted the Yankees would win the division. 5 of those people predicted they wouldn't even make the playoffs.

 

BUT THEY JUST DID WHAT WE ALL EXPECTED!!!!!

 

Source: http://www.talksox.com/forum/general-baseball-forum/12083-predicting-standings.html

ohhh, he got you guys there lol

 

You can say it was bought.

 

But i think it was bought within the rules. It's the system's fault.

So why is everybody still bitching? Don't blame the Yankees, blame the system.

 

The tremendous amount of revenue the Yankees take in convinces me otherwise. Neither do their ticket prices. If they can charge THAT and still fill their taxpayer's boondoggle of a stadium, there's money and demand enough to go around.

I agree...now we just need to find a way to get the dodgers back to Brooklyn lol...that will really balance out the Yankees advantage. If the Dodgers still played in Brooklyn, or moved back, I think they would arguably be a bigger draw than the Yankees. Of course this is all hypothetical and the Dodgers aren't going anywhere ever. That's just a wishful dream of mine.

 

And while I'm not so sure that the city could support a third baseball team (not financially speaking of course, but in terms of space, public transportation, etc) without inconveniencing a major chunk of the population, the market certainly could. Whether it be Newark, Hartford, or upstate somewhere I think expansion into the greater NY-metropolitan market could be a good thing for baseball. Earlier in the thread somebody was advocating contraction, but I honestly think that's the worst thing for baseball. If anything, add more teams, don't eliminate them.

 

If you can't see the benefit for the MLBPA, then you haven't put any thought into it. In system where the cap/floor level is established as a percentage of total revenues, it would insulate the players from situations like what happened this past offseason. Only one team went gang-busters with salary. The rest of the league was very cautious given the economic situation. You would see a more balanced distribution of contracts instead of the insane money the 3 guys who went to NY got relative to their peers.

I respectfully disagree. While a cap would probably be the best (and most unlikely) thing for the game as a whole, I can NEVER see the players union favoring one. But now that Fehr and Orza are no longer running the show Weiner might feel differently, idk though. I still think baseball is a long way from implementing a salary cap.

 

It is getting hard to wade through the sea of personal attacks to get the actual points anymore.

Tell me about it

 

The Yankees did what they were supposed to do. Win within the rules. The problem isn't the Yankees, it is the system. Since my team benefits, personally, I do NOT want to see it change. Selfish? Yes. Fair play? Not really? Do I care? No.

 

At least I'm honest. However, what grates on any sensible Yankee fan's sensibilities is the majority of Red Sox Nation's blatant disregard of their own team doing the EXACT same thing, just to a lesser degree.

Well said.

 

I know what he's saying. I just don't think they would do that. They spent all that money on Sabathia because they felt like they needed an ace. If Santana was already a Yankee, I think they would feel like the ace role is filled, and I think they would be content to just go after Burnett and Teixeira.

 

I think one of the main reasons why they didn't trade for Santana is because they had their eye on Sabathia.

Absolutely true, and Cashman even acknowledged this.

 

Even now I find it rather difficult to hate Mariano Rivera, a man who in my opinion deserves to be called the best Yankee ever, nobody has done more for that franchise with the possible exception of Babe Ruth but if Im not mistaken Ruth won more titles in Boston than he did in NY.

Well actually you are mistaken. Ruth played on 7 World Series winners. 1915, 1916, and 1918 with the Red Sox, and 1923, 1927, 1928, and 1932 with the Yankees.

 

And crunchy, you are wrong. Babe Ruth won 7 world series titles.

 

1915, 1916, and 1918 with Boston

1923, 1927, 1928, and 1932 with the Yankees

woops, beat me to it.

 

What i don't get is the whole they didn't trade for Santana waiting for CC.

 

They offered a legitimate package with every intention of getting the man.

Are you referring to Santana? If so then.....WRONG. The Yankees turned down several proposals from the Twins, and would have only gone all out to get Santana if he appeared likely to be headed to the Red Sox. Cashman really wasn't willing to sacrifice both prospects and money to get Santana. Either or would have been fine, but that's why he favored Sabathia.

 

They made an offer, just like the Sox did, Twins balked Cashman got frustrated, pulled it back, and didn't revisit it.

 

However they devised a package of player for Santana that would denote someone who is genuinely interested in a player.

They went back and forth quite a bit. Cashman just wasn't willing to give up any of his big prospects, namely Hughes. By the time Minnesota was willing to accept a lesser package and countered with an offer that didn't include Hughes, Kennedy, Joba, Melky, or any of their other top prospects at the time the Sox were already pretty much out of it and Cashman had grown frustrated and content with letting him go elsewhere, particularly to the NL. Cashman's interest in Santana came nowhere near that of hank Steinbrenner, and he only engaged in discussions because a) it would be foolish not to, and his boss told him to.

 

What we can all agree on is that the Twins s*** the bed, and Cashman was dumb not to revisit trade talks.

Agreed. The Yankees should have jumped on that final offer.

[Rdsxmbnt]

http://www.collegehumor.com/video:1924701

[Dipre]

I didn't know 26 to 7 was part of the Yankees FO.

 

So Cashman didn't really "want" Santana?

 

That is downright hilarious.

[Dipre]

You should follow his lead.

 

Yankees advantage over Red Sox>>>>>>>>>>Sox advantage over rest of the league.

 

Yankees advantage over rest of the league>>>>>>>>>>> Everything.

 

How about looking at it that way?

[Gom]

Actually Dipre, his post was was thought, with references cited and well written. You just don't agree with it because it's not fiction.

[yankees228]

I love how Dipre called him 26-7.

[Dipre]

I love how Dipre called him 26-7.

 

I love how you picked that up.

[Dipre]

Actually Dipre' date=' his post was was thought, with references cited and well written. You just don't agree with it because it's not fiction.[/quote']

 

Where are the cited references?

 

Also, you have been one of the main proponents of "Cashman s*** the bed on the Santana deal".

 

This same point had been proposed to you before and you had refuted it.

 

What.A.f***ing.Hypocrite.

 

Wow.

[Gom]

Where are the cited references?

 

Also, you have been one of the main proponents of "Cashman s*** the bed on the Santana deal".

 

This same point had been proposed to you before and you had refuted it.

 

What.A.f***ing.Hypocrite.

 

Wow.

 

He cited every quote and answered it in a clear and concise manner.

 

I don't agree with the non-trade for Santana. I just said that it was well-written. I hope to read something well-written by you one day as well.

[Emmz]

You mean like the Patriots of recent history?

I'm not even a Giants fan; I'm a Jets fan, but I was so damn happy when the Giants pulled off that upset.

 

Protip-1: There is a salary cap in the NFL.

 

Protip-2: Do not shoot your argument in the foot. You're arguing that the Yankees' financial power and ability to buy an all-pro roster is okay. However, you then say that the Patriots are guilty of the same thing, which is essentially admitting that the Yankees are, indeed, guilty of buying all-pro rosters.

 

Protip-3: The Patriots roster of a few years back consisted of a powerhouse defense, and a powerhouse offense. However, there were several guys who weren't exactly expected to be "all-pro" material. The Yankees, however, have this:

 

Johnny Damon, Derek Jeter, Hideki Matsui, Alex Rodriguez, Mark Teixeira, Nick Swisher, Jorge Posada, Robinson Cano, Xavier Nady. So basically everyone in their lineup is all-star material, or has been at some point of their career, besides Melky Cabrera. So you tell me, is that a fair comparison? Either way, you still admitted that teams stacked up the ass are unfair

[yankees228]

It's worth noting that most of the guys in that lineup outperformed expectations (some did it by a lot). There were a ton of questions surrounding the Yankees' offense before the year started, which are forgotten at this point. There were a lot of articles written claiming that the Yankees, going into the year, only had one non-question mark in the lineup (Teixeira).

[Emmz]

It's worth noting that most of the guys in that lineup outperformed expectations (some did it by a lot). There were a ton of questions surrounding the Yankees' offense before the year started' date=' which are forgotten at this point. There were a lot of articles written claiming that the Yankees, going into the year, only had one non-question mark in the lineup (Teixeira).[/quote']

 

everyone in their lineup is all-star material, or has been at some point of their career recently

 

Forgot to add the recently. My bad

[Emmz]

Basically, they had a group of guys who were capable of being all-stars this year. Don't tell me that Jeter, A-Rod, Damon, Matsui, Cano, etc weren't going to have good years this year. That lineup was an all-star lineup

[Dipre]

He cited every quote and answered it in a clear and concise manner.

 

I don't agree with the non-trade for Santana. I just said that it was well-written. I hope to read something well-written by you one day as well.

 

Says the guy who answers 95% of the time in one-liners.

[Dipre]

But my good sir.

 

My whole point is that they spent $450 million dollars. Had they traded for Santana and extended him, they could've done it by absorbing the hit of the amount of money that was coming off the books this year, (and that's actually exactly what they did).

 

What i don't get is the whole they didn't trade for Santana waiting for CC.

 

They offered a legitimate package with every intention of getting the man.

 

Look at what the Mets ended up giving up for him. Cashman did screw up.

 

They made an offer, just like the Sox did, Twins balked Cashman got frustrated, pulled it back, and didn't revisit it.

 

However they devised a package of player for Santana that would denote someone who is genuinely interested in a player.

 

Gom doesn't consider any of these posts "Well written".

 

Oh well, i shall rescind my TalkSox membership and go hide in a corner.

 

There is nothing left for me to live for.

[Emmz]

Gom: [insert one-liner about lack of education here]

 

Any takers?

[yankees228]

Basically' date=' they had a group of guys who were capable of being all-stars this year. Don't tell me that Jeter, A-Rod, Damon, Matsui, Cano, etc weren't going to have good years this year. That lineup was an all-star lineup[/quote']

 

At their ages, considering what they had done the previous year (or previous couple years) and past injuries (Posada and Matsui), there was definitely reason to think that Jeter, Damon, Matsui, and Posada would continue to decline. There was also question as to whether guys like Cano, Swisher, and Cabrera would have bounce back years. And A-Rod, all things considered, was an enormous question mark. Like I said, the only sure thing going into this year was Teixeira.

[Emmz]

You're really stretching that. That's all I'm going to say.

[yankees228]

You're really stretching that. That's all I'm going to say.

 

What aspect of my post is not 100% factual? At this point, considering what they accomplished, everyone looks at the Yankees' lineup the way you do. However, before the season, it was an entirely different story. I'm not saying that all of those guys were going to have bad years. If you think I'm saying that, you're misinterpreting my post. However, all things considered, there were a ton of question marks. You almost never see a year where an entire lineup, from top to bottom, outperforms expectations. If you think about what happened to some of those guys the past few years, and what was reasonably expected of them this year, what actually transpired is pretty remarkable.

[Emmz]

What aspect of my post is not 100% factual? At this point' date=' considering what they accomplished, everyone looks at the Yankees' lineup the way you do. However, before the season, it was an entirely different story. I'm not saying that all of those guys were going to have bad years. If you think I'm saying that, you're misinterpreting my post. However, all things considered, there were a ton of question marks. You almost never see a year where an entire lineup, from top to bottom, outperforms expectations. If you think about what happened to some of those guys the past few years, and what was reasonably expected of them this year, what actually transpired is pretty remarkable.[/quote']

 

Okay, so there was a slight chance that some of these guys may have been over-the-hill. Now what? It was still an all-star lineup. Randy Moss was considered out of his prime when the Pats got him. So was much of their defense. They were still, on paper, considered to be a juggernaut before the season. So were the 2009 New York Yankees

[yankees228]

Okay' date=' so there was a slight chance that some of these guys may have been over-the-hill. Now what? It was still an all-star lineup. Randy Moss was considered out of his prime when the Pats got him. So was much of their defense. They were still, on paper, considered to be a juggernaut before the season. So were the 2009 New York Yankees[/quote']

 

You're downplaying the question marks to fit your argument. Regardless, using the numbers that I showed in another thread (Related note to W.S. celebration), I outlined quite clearly that most of these guys outperformed realistic expectations, some by a wide margin. It really is completely factual.

 

Now, before the season, if things played out as the Yankees hoped (which they did), they were going to be an excellent team. However, it was just as probable, if not more probable, that things wouldn't work out like they hoped. And as I said before, this theory was repeated time after time before the season started.

[Emmz]

You're downplaying the question marks to fit your argument. Regardless, using the numbers that I showed in another thread (Related note to W.S. celebration), I outlined quite clearly that most of these guys outperformed realistic expectations, some by a wide margin. It really is completely factual.

 

Now, before the season, if things played out as the Yankees hoped (which they did), they were going to be an excellent team. However, it was just as probable, if not more probable, that things wouldn't work out like they hoped. And as I said before, this theory was repeated time after time before the season started.

 

And you're downplaying the talent that was there to fit your argument. Agree to disagree. Sure there were injuries, but if you're saying that Alex Rodriguez and Derek Jeter were question marks, that's just not true. Jeter's been consistent, all-star caliber player throughout the course of his entire career. Rodriguez has consistently been one of the best players in baseball throughout the past 10 years, but he's a question mark because of an injury? I really don't think so. It was more probable that the Yankees put together one of the best lineups in the history of baseball, and if not, they would have made trades to acquire whatever adjustments they needed. For the wheels to fall off, and the Yankees to not make atleast 95 wins this season, all of the question marks would have to have failed. Otherwise, if say, one or two of those questions marks failed, you know the Yanks would have filled the holes with another all-star. They always make sure they're the most loaded team in baseball

[yankees228]

Again, I'm not downplaying the talent that was there. I stated in the post you quoted that this lineup had the potential to be great.

 

However, how you can say that Derek Jeter and Alex Rodriguez were not question marks is absolutely ridiculous. Lets look at each by themselves.

 

In 2006 Derek Jeter had one of his best seasons, producing a .343/.417/.483. The next year, 2007, he produced a slash line of .322/.388/.452. Still good, very good in fact, especially for a shortstop, but worse than he previous year. Then, in 2008, he produced a slash line of .300/.363/.408. That came out to be an OPS+ of 102, ever so slightly above average. Notice a trend here? Jeter was entering his 14th full season, and he was due to turn 35 years old during the year. If you don't think there was a distinct possibility that that trend would continue, you're kidding yourself. It also would have been reasonable to think that he would produce similar numbers to his 2008 season. You could even go as far as thinking that he would improve a bit. However, all things considered, you would have been laughed at if you suggested that he would finish the year with a slash line of .334/.406/.465, tying his second best OPS+ of his entire career. He outperformed expectations by a wide margin.

 

Now lets look at A-Rod. It was reported in early March that he would have to drop out of the World Baseball Classic because of a hip injury. After his was initially evaluating, there was a lot of speculation that he would have to undergo surgery that would keep him out for up to four months. Essentially, it would have been a lost year. Then it came out that they were going to attempt a hybrid surgery, that wouldn't completely correct the problem (remember, it was said at the time that he would definitely need a follow up surgery at some point), but would allow him to play with it. It was also made clear that there was a good chance, even if the surgery was successful, that he was not going to be 100%. Recently, A-Rod has even admitted that, at times after the surgery, he wasn't even sure if he was going to play this year (believe him or not, but the facts back him up). After hitting some home runs after returning, A-Rod plummeted into one of the worst slumps of his career, and there was a lot of concern over whether or not he was truly healthy. If that isn't an enormous question mark, all the way through June, then I don't know what is.

 

Couple that with the other question marks, that you haven't disputed, and you have a lineup with the potential to be great, but also the potential to be very average. And there's a limit to how much they could have corrected in season, because there wasn't that much available, and the Yankees have shown a reluctance in recent years not to mortgage their future for a quick fix. That's what it would have taken to make a big deal in season, and it is extremely far from a certainty that the Yankees would have made that trade.

[Emmz]

Again, I'm not downplaying the talent that was there. I stated in the post you quoted that this lineup had the potential to be great.

 

Not as much downplaying their potential as you're overplaying their potential to be average.

 

n 2006 Derek Jeter had one of his best seasons, producing a .343/.417/.483. The next year, 2007, he produced a slash line of .322/.388/.452. Still good, very good in fact, especially for a shortstop, but worse than he previous year. Then, in 2008, he produced a slash line of .300/.363/.408. That came out to be an OPS+ of 102, ever so slightly above average. Notice a trend here? Jeter was entering his 14th full season, and he was due to turn 35 years old during the year. If you don't think there was a distinct possibility that that trend would continue, you're kidding yourself. It also would have been reasonable to think that he would produce similar numbers to his 2008 season. You could even go as far as thinking that he would improve a bit. However, all things considered, you would have been laughed at if you suggested that he would finish the year with a slash line of .334/.406/.465, tying his second best OPS+ of his entire career. He outperformed expectations by a wide margin.

 

Derek Jeter:

 

1999: .349/.438./.552

2000:.339/ .416/ .481

2001:.311/ .377/ .480

2002:.297/ .373/ .421

2003:.324/ .393/ .450

 

I can keep going if you'd like. This is a trend with Derek Jeter. His lines go up, and then gradually down, and then back up, and down. That's the legitimate trend. He's inconsistent with his lines, BUT, his lines have been consistently better-than-average.

 

Now lets look at A-Rod. It was reported in early March that he would have to drop out of the World Baseball Classic because of a hip injury. After his was initially evaluating, there was a lot of speculation that he would have to undergo surgery that would keep him out for up to four months. Essentially, it would have been a lost year. Then it came out that they were going to attempt a hybrid surgery, that wouldn't completely correct the problem (remember, it was said at the time that he would definitely need a follow up surgery at some point), but would allow him to play with it. It was also made clear that there was a good chance, even if the surgery was successful, that he was not going to be 100%. Recently, A-Rod has even admitted that, at times after the surgery, he wasn't even sure if he was going to play this year (believe him or not, but the facts back him up). After hitting some home runs after returning, A-Rod plummeted into one of the worst slumps of his career, and there was a lot of concern over whether or not he was truly healthy. If that isn't an enormous question mark, all the way through June, then I don't know what is.

 

And without A-Rod, the Yankees struggled. I'll concede that. But when he came back, they were by far, the best team in baseball. And it wasn't even a close second. That offense was a juggernaut to end all juggernauts. However, they never attempted to fill A-Rod's hole. (That's Jeter's job, a-thank you)

 

Couple that with the other question marks, that you haven't disputed, and you have a lineup with the potential to be great, but also the potential to be very average. And there's a limit to how much they could have corrected in season, because there wasn't that much available, and the Yankees have shown a reluctance in recent years not to mortgage their future for a quick fix. That's what it would have taken to make a big deal in season, and it is extremely far from a certainty that the Yankees would have made that trade.

 

Like Abreu, Nady, etc?

[yankees228]

I'm not overplaying anything. I'm providing legitimate facts that back up my claims. I'm not saying those guys were going to have bad years, but there concern with them, and even more concern with others.

 

You're taking Derek Jeter's numbers from the prime of his career. To me, that's completely irrelevant. We'll have to agree to disagree on that one.

 

As for A-Rod, you completely ignored my entire point. Because of the injury concern, he was a huge question mark going into the year. There just isn't any way around it.

 

They got Abreu for next to nothing. Considering the asking price for the available names this offseason, I find it hard to believe that the Yankees could have pulled off a similar deal. As for Nady, he would hardly be considered a difference maker. He's a nice piece, but he's not someone that is going to come in here and really change things. Regardless, they didn't give up any big pieces for those players (Tabata's stock had decreased dramatically). What player could they have gotten this trade deadline, that would have made a difference, and who the Yankees could have acquired for as little as they acquired Abreu and Nady with?

[Emmz]

I'm not overplaying anything. I'm providing legitimate facts that back up my claims. I'm not saying those guys were going to have bad years' date=' but there concern with them, and even more concern with others.[/quote']

 

Saying that practically every single last one of those guys were a question marks is a massive stretch.

 

You're taking Derek Jeter's numbers from the prime of his career. To me, that's completely irrelevant. We'll have to agree to disagree on that one.

 

He still hits for good numbers now. Almost as good as he ever has. How can you just expect him to all of a sudden be an average offensive player? He's done this throughout his entire career. His lines are inconsistent. So yeah, I guess agree to disagree.

 

As for A-Rod, you completely ignored my entire point. Because of the injury concern, he was a huge question mark going into the year. There just isn't any way around it.

 

Didn't dispute that he was a question mark going into the year. Disputing the fact that his injury was going to heal in time for him to come back. It wasn't an injury that was going to keep him from putting up typical A-Rod numbers upon return.

 

They got Abreu for next to nothing. Considering the asking price for the available names this offseason, I find it hard to believe that the Yankees could have pulled off a similar deal. As for Nady, he would hardly be considered a difference maker. He's a nice piece, but he's not someone that is going to come in here and really change things. Regardless, they didn't give up any big pieces for those players (Tabata's stock had decreased dramatically). What player could they have gotten this trade deadline, that would have made a difference, and who the Yankees could have acquired for as little as they acquired Abreu and Nady with?

 

They still displayed their financial might. They have the money to swallow entire contracts. And also, if it were to fill the gap that A-Rod left, I'm certain the Yanks would be willing to pay the price for a rent-a-player for the rest of the season. That is, if it came down to that.

 

And btw

 

Nady's line pre-Yankees:

 

.330/ .383/ .535

 

He was seen as a guy who could make a big difference at the time