<p>They’re called financial constraints. I know that’s a completely foreign concept to a Yankees fan, but it’s very real to most of the other teams. Unlike NY, Cleveland does not have a practically unlimited amount of money to spend.</p>
<p>As to the contract extension you propose, there’s no way either player accepts it when their FA value is so much higher. CC Sabathia for example got $23 million a year from the Yankees. Please explain why he’d even consider taking the same amount over 4 years.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>No, that’s a $2 million deficit. Adding $25-$30M makes it a $27-$32M deficit.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’m not really sure what your point is when you bring up Manny. Sure, he’s overpaid relative to what he produces. That happens to every team. It just makes a much bigger difference when the one superstar is all you can afford. The Yankees can swallow the losses on any mistake they can and have made and go out and get the next star.</p>
<p>CC had no clue he was worth $162M a few years ago, you know. When the Yanks came in to drive up the price, that is why he made $23M this year. Mid-Contract, players always do not know what their worth is, especially if they have not had a big “cash-in” contract. I say a 4 year/$25M seems nice to a pitcher that is just getting to be known around the league. Hamels got a similar contract to this, as did Lincecum. If that is too little, throw the notion of $10M at the guy. How could you argue that $10M per year for an ace is too financially impossible? He sells tickets…</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That one was my bad, their payroll was actually around $82M this past year. So, if the owner cares about winning, then he can afford to dump an extra $25-30M a year back into the team, and walk away with several tens of millions of dollars. And, you should have realized that was a typing error, seeing as how you provided info on payrolls of other teams. ;)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Uhm yeah, you say that the Yanks overpay for their free agents, and I said at least they target the correct players. Sure, some guys bust (ie Pavano), but do you think we fans “swallowed that.” We could have used that $10M a year on a real pitcher, and possibly won more titles. You guys, with no competition, pay the guy like $50M/2 years when NO ONE offered him anything. C’mon! Horrible negotiation, you can’t excuse that. The Yanks drive up the price when the free agent is coveted. </p>
<p>Hmmm, the Dodgers had a $100M payroll, you can afford some better players. The Angels and Phillies both spend $113 per year, yet have multiple all-stars. That is poor management of contracts on you guys’ part if you stick to a strict budget. Or teams could be like the owners of Olympiakos, who have publicly said that they would rather lose money and win titles if that is what it came down to. Sure, pro sports are a business, but if you can afford a team, then that means that you have had another succesful business venture that got you that wealth (most of the time). Why not be close to breaking-even, win titles (possible to become a bigger TV market, more merchandise, more revenue-sharing, TV contracts, etc); and then rely on your other business(es) to keep you afloat in the meantime?</p>
<p>But payrolls aren’t the only costs to running an organization. Cleveland ended up with $30 million in profits. Keeping Sabathia would’ve taken a huge cut out of that, and Lee would’ve taken some too. Since they weren’t winning with those two pitchers, and they wouldn’t have had the money to upgrade the other positions, they decided it would be best to cut their losses and rebuild. Whether that turns out to be the best decision in the long run isn’t clear, but the decision wasn’t simply “cheap.”</p>
<p>Sabathia and Lee were both much older and had very different contract situations from Lincecum and Hamels. They were going to be FA’s all the way, especially since Sabathia is Boras guy. Not sure about Lee.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>When I say swallowed it, I mean the Yankees lost the money and moved onto someone else the next year. They didn’t have to wait 5 years or whatever for the contract to come off the books. In Ramirez’s case, he was holding out and wouldn’t have signed. The choice the Dodgers had last off-season was between Manny and a run at Sabathia. The Dodgers simply didn’t have the money to throw at Sabathia though.</p>
<p>The comparison between the Dodgers and Angels/Phillies is silly. None of LA’s best players were All-Stars, even though the team had the best OF of any of the last 4 playoff teams. None of them were All-stars though because they’re younger.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>They could, but that’s not the reality of American sports. Owners buy in here primarily to make money. And for whatever reason, American sports owners tend to be less wealthy than many of their International counterparts. I don’t know about Olympiakos in particular, but their net worth probably dwarfs that of most owners here.</p>
<p>First of all ThisCouldBeHeavn, I think we should end this thing, we are getting nowhere, and we will not concede to each other. But this is what I will say:</p>
<p>Lee is 32 ( I think) and CC is 29. 3 years ago nobody would have thought CC would be making a minimum salary of $23M a year. I think Lee makes around $9M a year and is under contract for 1 more season. The Indians had a chance to extend these guys, just make an offer.</p>
<p>Hamels is around 24-25 I think now, but his contract ran up. For his deal, LA could have gotten him, same with Lincecum. Their salaries are low even though they are considered to be in the upper echelon of MLB pitchers. True, CC is a Boras guy, but nobody really knew he was amazing until the last 2 years. </p>
<p>Like Grienke, the Royals should lock him up for a longer time before the Yanks will sweep in and sign him in a few years (I actually feel like we’ll get him because he is considered good now, lol just watch it happen). The Royals need to sign him, like the Rays extended Longoria already. You extend their deals when they are proven, but still 2 years from FA. That way, a team like the Yankees won’t drive the price up.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Hunter and Abreu are in their mid 30s, which is a little old in baseball nowadays. But Vladimir (he’s good even though he is an erratic batter), Hunter, Abreu, Napoli, and Lackey are not at an all-star level. Sure, maybe not this particular year, but that team has plenty of talent, and are replenishing themselves through the draft (like you said). </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Actually, their wealth is around $1.5-2.5B I think, so not really that much off from sports owners in the States. It is 2 brothers, so their net worths are combined. They generate MUCH less revenue, their stadiums sit 1,200 people and are at fair prices. They just rely on shipping business to fund their personal lifestyle, and the basketball team is for fun, hence the lower proffit. </p>
<p>True, payroll is not the only expense for a baseball team, or any team really. But the thing is, if Lee is at $9M (a really good price for an ace), then take $21M in proffit instead. Cleveland fans have suffered for a long time because the owner is a bit greedy and does not believe in the adage, “Spend money to make money.” He needs to put a little more money into his business, which may lead to maore wins, and then more revenue opportunities when the team is more popular. It’s like when you own a business, and you struggle a bit, then you advertise more so people know what your product is. If you do this, and your product is generally good, people will buy from you. Meaning, assemble a better team with more money spending, or lose fan support and game attendance. The Phoenix Suns’ latest contract with Steve Nash pays him less money per year, but he will still get paid after the contract runs up (backpayments). The Reds did this with Griffey, Jr. Seattle pays him very little because he still has some money coming in. The backpayments are effective in paying a player his money, but over a spread amount of time.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yeah, the Yankees threw so much money initially that they did make sure they got him, true (that appears to be the only reason why Cashman still has his job haha lol). The thing is, don’t sign Manny if he will not take like $10-15M per year. How many teams will sign him, even if he sits out the year? Not many teams will sign a 37-year old LF who has not play in a year, has laziness/selfishness issues, and a kind of bad reputation. Make him come crawling back to you, and if another team steps in, then throw more $$$ his way. Or, do the backpayment thing. Give him his $50M over 5-7 years, and have more cap room per year to sign other players or extend contracts. Sure, you pay him longer, but it gives you some flexibility. Plus, the players grew a TON when he ws suspended, he did not carry the team like he did last year. He was playing for a big contract last year; the young guys really stepped up this year (that’s good for your future there! ).</p>
<p>Well, I do think we should end this now hahaha. We have argued to no avail, neither of us will budge lol :D</p>
<p>Hahaha, nice. I want to bury the hatchet, you cop-out of the arguement, and claim victory. Nice. Yanks advantage is their wallet, yes, but how do other teams make it work? Phillies made it work last year. Angels have had a fine season. Why did Griffey, a mega-star, take backpayments, as did Nash? Who would sign Manny if he attempted a hold-out? Crabtree tried that with the 49s, and did not get more than the initial offer.</p>
<p>There’s a difference between an advantage and automatically winning. And it’s easy to say the Manny deal was bad in hindsight, even though he was still one of the best hitters in the majors before the wrist injury. Previous post still stands.</p>
<p>Nice to see NY ******s taking over this thread. LOL @ your homerism if you don’t think it’s all about money. Create a salary cap and the Yankees will fluctuate just like you see in the NFL.</p>
<p>The Yankees destroy every other team in revenue and name recognition. Yet I can’t even remember their last World Series. With their salary they should be winning it all at least every 5 years.</p>
<p>Frankly, this is the first year in quite a while that the Yankees have been a good team. Teams with much lower payrolls have dominated them in the past decade.</p>
<p>hatersunite, you are simply a hater. And it’s been 6 years since our last appearance, like 9 years since the last victory. It’s really easy to hate us for spending the most money starting in the 70s, and making a habit of it. Why don’t you wonder why the Orioles still suck and Tampa has put together a better team than you. </p>
<p>How am I homer? Whatever man, you are WACK.</p>
<p>The Manny move was bad from the beginning!!! How could you not foresee these problems? He has not cared how well he has produced (as long as it’s not anemicly bad, but still bad) since he got paid mucho dinero buddy. </p>
<p>Yes, the Yankees money is their trump card. It does not garauntee succes as you people think it should. Have your owner break even for a season, buy some players he wants, and then make money through extra advertising/tv contracts/merchandise. Then talk to me. Steinbrenners were willing to invest the right money in the right players when they wanted. Any owner can do this. It’s personal greed that has gotten in the way. Yes, the Yanks make lots of cash. But, would they have generated so much revenue because they won so many titles, which stemmed from spending money on good players. Refute that please. Geez. haterz.</p>
<p>The Yankees spend lots of cash basically every year, but they targeted the wrong people lately. Last year was a great offseason for us because we got 2 big-tim winners, CC and Texiera. Burnett is inconsistent really, but he is not a slouch. Guys like Pavano, Johnson, Brown, etc were not good investments in hindsight. Pitching was an issue for us since our last serious. We have a legit startign rotation, but our young relievers are having issues. As long as we can go get the ball to Rivera.</p>
<p>If the MLB had a cap, yes it would be very different. But it would need to gradually be instilled because if the Yankees dropped suddenly, baseball would indeed suffer.The major market teams need to thrive for the better success of the league (TV contracts), as the NBA loves Boston, LA, New York, Chicago, etc teams succeeding.</p>
<p>And to ThisCouldBeHravn: You know what, this is really pointless. Ok? I told you, stop this stuff, we are getting nowhere. You claim your last post stands? Well then, my last post still stands too. You could not refute backpayment contracts, holdouts, and distribution of salary on teams with less bank than the Yankees. Like you said, sports are businesses, but the shrewdest businessman always succeed. Who’s the smartest? The team that decides to pay top-dollar for the best players. Any team can do this! Just get more owner involved, like how the Red Sox owneship group forged a partnership with Roush Racing, that way Roush raised more money for his business. There are ways to get this big name players, you have yo pony up the cash.</p>
<p>I’m a hater for stating what all non-Yankees and Red Sox fans believe? </p>
<p>It’s incredibly hard to compete with teams that spend more than you. Would you like to dispute this? lol</p>
<p>Let’s take a look at this year’s Playoffs.</p>
<p>NY, Boston, LA x 2, Philly, St. Louis, Denver, and Minneapolis.</p>
<p>5 major city teams. </p>
<p>Face it, teams like KC, TB, Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Seattle, etc. really have no chance at sustained success. A fluke year is possible like TB last year but otherwise they aren’t constant contenders like Boston, NY, LA, and Chicago teams can be.</p>
<p>Revenue has little to do with success. That’s why a crappy franchise like the Mets is 3rd in the league. The Yankees have revenue streams that simply aren’t possible for other teams, whether because of long-standing contracts from previous owners or because of the size of the town. Every team does what you’re proposing, but you can only build so much revenue.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Bad from the beginning? The Dodgers were in the middle of the Wild Card race then traded a declining prospect and received a 1.230 OPS over 50 games. They then resigned him and he had an OPS of 1.155 until a mid-July hand injury. After that it declined to a mere .949, only 16 points higher than the Yankees’ Rodriguez. For that production, the Yankees paid only $26 mil more than the Dodgers this past year. Wait a sec, who made the bad deal?</p>
<p>
Can’t get anymore arrogant than that as a fan. The league needs the Yankees? Please.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Manny was never going to take $50M over 5 years, the Dodgers didn’t want to guarantee him extra money to get less per year when it was likely he would decline over the back half of the contract. The solution - a short contract with a lot of money.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>NO. THEY. CAN’T. Simply having more money does not make the Yankees the shrewdest businessmen, and the Yankees don’t have more money because of shrewd business. We can go round and round on this, but you’re simply wrong. It’s just not possible for any other team to approach the Yankees financially without taking huge losses. And as you admit, that allows the Yankees to pay higher salaries and give them to more people.</p>
<p>The Twins are near the minimum of the payroll distribution and the Rockies are a bit below the median. The Mets, Cubs, and Astros have high payrolls but did terribly (and that was nothing new).</p>
<p>It would be interesting to see more detailed information on salaries. I know where to find good stuff for the Dodgers (info that differs from the major sites) but I don’t know about others.</p>
<p>People are using fluctation in their arguments?</p>
<p>LOL of course 1 or 2 small market teams will make the Playoffs. That happens every year. Doesn’t mean that their overall salaries are meaningless.</p>
<p>Uhm, that was my point about targeting the right people. The Mets have made bad personnel moves as of alte, yet they pay as much as the Red Sox do. Sure, injuries occurred, but they were flat-out horrible. </p>
<p>You then said that the Yankees wealth does allow them to pursue the best players, and attain more success that way. But that is a contradiction because prior to that you said that revenue does not garauntee success. My point was that the Yankees use their revenue to target the right players, which leads to wins, which leads to more money, and the cycle goes on and on. I sadit the Mets misproprly disperse contracts, which you just agreed with by using it as a point. </p>
<p>You mean to tell me that you could not foresee laziness and lack of committment from the beginning. You brought up his insane numbers from lasy year, which I said he attained because money had motivatd him. Then you resign him, and production barely dropped. Uhm, he was on steroids as well. You do not take medication to return to normal testosterone levels if you are not on steroids before, hence the suspension. Manny believed that he lost his edge, so he psychologically wimps out sometimes now. He knows that he is a proven cheater, and this is in the back of his mind when he is playing. Part of his stats last year can be attributed to steroids, unless those were taken in the offseason so he could keep up that incredible production. </p>
<p>A-Rod’s salary, I may be wrong, is only $6M more than Manny this year, and he carried us to the World Series. Yeah, we made a bad deal I guess. How did Manny do when you guys needed him?</p>
<p>YOU are arrogant if you belive that baseball lost the Yankees. Think about, all those lucrative TV contracts depend on popularity of the team, and you have said that the Yanks are the most famous team (due to 26 titles, which stem from paying FAs to play for them). You think that the NBA does not want the Lakers, Bulls, Knicks, Celtics, etc to succeed? You have got to be kidding! Marquee frachises ARE the league, that’s where all this money comes from to begin with. Every league wants the big market teams to win, and when they don’t, product suffers. Why do you think there is no cap in baseball? To keep the richer teams in the spotlight!!! That is how popularity ensues!!! Yes, that means rich teams like the Yanks have an advanage in signing free agents, but if owners actually care about winning, they make the sacrifice. You sell minoirty shares, do more promos, etc to bring more money in! That’s what the Miami Dolphins did last year, and they made the playoffs. Granted, they are not at a level like the Colts, but still, they went from 1-15 to Division Champs. </p>
<p>Do you even know what backpayments are? It is when the player signs to play for X years, but you pay him for X years. Like Nash’s contract is for 2 years, but he gets paid over 5 years (I think). That gives financial flexibility! Giving Manny less money initially allows you guys to go get another player or extend current contracts. So, a 2 year contract, but payments over 5 years at $10M per year would financially help the Dodgers out. </p>
<p>Again, let’s drop the arguement and just enjoy the World Series please? :)</p>
).</p>