2009-2010 Offseason

[MSBNYY]

So here we are, the champs. But now that the quest for the 27th championship is over, it's time to start looking ahead and to the quest for number 28.

Another year, another year older. This should be an interesting offseason because unlike most offseasons, there just isn't that much out there on the free agent market.

Should we keep Matsui, Damon and Pettitte? Let one or some go? Who is out there?

Trades?

Time will tell.

[mac0822]

Time to start buying. John Lackey would make a nice $17M 5th starter. How about Holliday to bat 7 hole for $16M for 7 years?

Half a Billion last winter and it worked. At least their may be a cap some day if NY wins every year.

[Chris]

Says the fan of the team with the 4th highest payroll, who got ousted from the playoffs by the team with the 6th highest payroll

[MSBNYY]

A cap is stupid, and yeah, a Red Sox fan complaining about payroll, which won them 2 championships (along with steroids), has no business complaining about anything.

In any business, the best employees get paid the most money. That's the way it is.

The Red Sox could have easily had Texeira. They made their choice, and they have to live with it.

I don't care if the Yankees spend another half billion, as long as they win.

[mac0822]

4th place and $75M behind. It's like comparing the winner of a NASCAR race when he lapped the 2nd place car. Would they say "Wow, that was a close 2nd"??

Ya, they could have had Texieira, but even Boston has limits. Their choice would have been to have him if money wasn't a factor.

NFL, MLB and NHL have a cap and the best players get paid the most, so what's your point?

There's no way in hell a team with a 200M payroll can NOT win a WS at least once every 10 years.

[MSBNYY]

The difference between what Tex wanted and what the Sox offered wasn't that much. John Henry called Tex's bluff, and well, you know what happened.

Caps are stupid. Caps prevent teams from doing what they need to do to win. If any business has the money to pay a player, they should.

And like it or not, there are plenty of teams out there with more money than the Steinbrenners. They CHOOSE not to go after the talent. The Red Sox are easily capable of going toe to toe with New York, and they have in the past. Much of the Yankees' payroll is taken up by the core.

We're not a socialist country yet.

[Chris]

If anyone thinks the Lakers aren't circumventing the cap somehow, they're INSANE!

Kansas City could have afforded Tex. But they'd rather massage the books, claim poverty, put an inferior product on the field and pocket all the profits from their captive audiences who have no other outlet to spend their entertainment dollars on.

Caps are malarky, and so are the small market teams crying poverty. The LAST thing Kansas City wants to do is to introduce a cap and actually be held accountable for their shitty product.

Gimme a break with this nonsense.

[mac0822]

As we're covered many many times....You can't compare the Yankees to other teams. They have a worldwide following, reside in the biggest city, generate the most revenue, etc etc.

As far as owners have more money....These guys didn't get rich by LOSING money on investments.

Caps aren't stupid. Caps prevent stupid people from winning. They make you actually evaluate players and pay for your mistakes. I'm with you though - If the left side of the NY infield can make more than 7-8 TEAMS, they need to eliminate those teams (or have a cap). That's just ridiculous.

[mac0822]

Think the Lakers don't want to sign Lebron James?? Think they are happy with their team and couldnt' use him? If this was baseball and they were NY, they'd sign him. That's the difference and if you can't see that, you are retarded.

KC doesn't have the city, the stadium, the tv $, etc etc etc to support a $200M payroll. Are you kidding?

[Chris]

I love that the businessman who decides that reinvesting in the product, improving the product, thus boosting consumer loyalty to the product is being called STUPID here.

[Chris]

a MORON Dodger fan I was recently arguing with said to me, "at least Dodgers ownership doesn't put 3/4 of their profits into players."

Yeah, no kidding they don't...and it shows, IDIOT!

[mac0822]

If the Lakers = Yankees then why won't LA go after Lebron this offseason?

If the Yankees were a NBA team, they'd have this for a starting lineup:

Steve Nash
Kobe Bryant
Lebron James
Tim Duncan
Dwight Howard

Then their fans would be pumped when they won the title, like it was something special.

[$heriff Tom]

Im with Mac to the point that winning this one was not nearly as gratifying to me as the one in 96, for example, as this won was won - in my eyes at least - mainly due to an immense payroll.

Im happy we won, but is not like anyone should be surprised.

This team was not built, it was BOUGHT.

[cactusjames]

Cano for Utley and resign Matsui to trade him to Minny for Mauer and have Posada DH.










Yes I'm kidding.

[MSBNYY]

And again, who gives a shit? Cano, Pettitte, Rivera, Joba, Jeter, Posada, Melky, Gardner, most of the bullpen--all home grown.

How many teams have as many homegrown players as the Yankees?

Good players cost money. Deal.

As for the Lakers, if on the open market, they could compete for James, then why not? They should be allowed to. Let the demand dictate the salary and the team with the best presentation get the player.

The Yankees have a worldwide following and generate the most revenue largely because they spent the most money into their product.

[Chris]

Uhhh, kinda like the Celtics Mac? Again, circumvention of payroll.

And do you think the Lakers WON'T make at least efforts to consider LeBron? I wouldn't be surprised at all if the Lakers were somehow able "manage" LeBron into their plan. Probably won't happen, but it would hardly be surprising.

Again....what's going on here is that small market teams are saving face by crying for a cap (mostly because they are confident that there will never be a cap, so they're in no danger of getting what they're asking for). Secretly, they are wallowing in the pennies the pinch on salaries, hording the revenue sharing they get from they Yanks, Dodgers, Mets, Cubs, Red Sox....and loving the fact that they play in Podunk towns where people have no other choice in where to invest their time and money, enjoying the lack of accountability for having shitty teams.

Small Market team owners crying about payroll is totally fraudulent.

[cactusjames]

I'm with Chris, if some team from East Bumblefuck Midwest, USA, won't put the money back in the team fuck them. And Mac, eat a fucking dick. You look like an asshole complaining about buying a championship. Thanks for proving what I knew years ago, you don't know your ass from your elbow regarding baseball, keep those red sox blinders on faggotm eat another cup of clam chowder and shut the fuck up asscock.

Capitalist? Fucking malarky. Again, if some small market team won't put the money George puts back in the team that's their own fault. And most markets can't compete with NY, LA, Boston, anbd cities in the midwest tend to like football more so of course losing teams in those areas aren't going to have the same income as the Yanks.

George could easily be more richer, he'd still be just as bat shit crazy now, but if he would have kept more of the money the fans put in, the Yanks wouldn't have the oppritunity to home grow and keep guys. Make a big deal out of home grown guys, you have to be able to keep them. That's why the Red Sox got Damon from the fucking Royals in the first place(Mac). And also, if I got my shit right, the Yanks get a couple hundred million from the Empire of Japan for putting Matsui in pinstripes all these years, IT'S SMART FUCKING BUSINESS.

If you don't like it you don't have to, don't fucking watch baseball again. Until there's a cap this is the way it is, if teams refuse to adapt then it's law of nature, if you don't adapt you die. Fuck off, eat shit and die all you fucking haters that bitch about capitalist this and that. It's called common fucking sense, and last I checked common sense is pretty fucking fair. If you don't have it, it ain't our fucking problem. Keep thinking the same way, this time next year I'll have a shirt that says 28 championships. Or, put money back into your team and try to knock us off. Dipshits.

[$heriff Tom]

Cano, Pettitte, Rivera, Joba, Jeter, Posada, Melky, Gardner, most of the bullpen--all home grown.

You dont get it. EVERY team has a gaggle of superduperstars that are homegrown.....problem is, they LOSE them, cause they cant pay the team 200 million freaking dollars. The Yankees end up with most of the other teams homegrown stars.

There WILL be a cap someday, and I will throw a party that day. And then I will look with interest, and root on the Yankees, as they try to win it the real way, without buying the damn thing.

[sean]

I'd like to see a cap that exempts homegrown players. Jeter can be paid $50 mil/ year and none would count towards the cap. but every penny of Tex, AJ, ARod, CC, Arod, etc... counts. It'll never happen as it would limit free agency to an extent so the players would be against it. if there is a cap, must there also be a floor?

[MSBNYY]

I don't think any cap at all is right. First, how can anyone complain when there is revenue sharing (which is also malarky)? Second, since 2001, you have seen the Diamondbacks, Angels, Marlins, Red Sox, White Sox, Cardinals, Phillies, and Yankees win championships, and only one of those teams, Boston, has two. That's pretty good parity.

Two of those teams broke streaks that lasted over 85 years, and one of them broke a streak that lasted 27 years. Seems like the system is fine.

If anything, as Sean suggested, there should be a FLOOR, not a cap.

[MSBNYY]

You dont get it. EVERY team has a gaggle of superduperstars that are homegrown.....problem is, they LOSE them, cause they cant pay the team 200 million freaking dollars. The Yankees end up with most of the other teams homegrown stars.

No, you're the one who doesn't get it. These smaller teams have the money. They CHOOSE not to spend it on players. There are teams that get plenty of revenue sharing money and do not raise their payroll. There are teams that can't support major league franchises. Contraction is far better than a salary cap. Obama hasn't turned this country socialist yet.

[mac0822]

Yes, there are some sandbagging teams that could afford more payroll, but you think $200M in payroll would work for them? I'd also be ok with a floor - that's logical.

As far as homegrown guys..LOL...ya, I suppose those guys are homegrown, but their combined salary must be like $60-$70M per season. The Expos had a lot of homegrown talent too, but you didn't see them in any World Series.

The Lakers could offer Lebron what? A one year $5M Cap Exemption?? I don't know the NBA cap very well, but I bet that's about all they'd have for him. That's how it SHOULD be. You SHOULD have to draft well and make smart trades. The Yankees don't even have top picks because they'll all given away after they steal other teams home grown talent. I don't understand why NY doesn't just drop their minor league system.

[$heriff Tom]

I do enjoy how Balls rants and raves about a salary cap when every other major sport aside from the grand game of baseball has one, and they work.

Balls, if you have tons of thrill from winning a WS you are SUPPOSED TO WIN, good for you. For me, its a tainted victory.

A floor makes sense, but should not be revisited without a cap. The Yankees pay the guys on the bench each game more than most teams pay who is on the field. And the Yankees are the EXCEPTION, not the rule. They are all by themselves in the sporting stratosphere.

That article from The Onion about the Yankees signing everyone in baseball to a free-agent contract was not too far off the mark.

And here on the board we got people saying, "we must get Halladay...we must get Lackey....we must get Crawford......" - the sense of entitlement is ridiculous.

[MSBNYY]

Ah--the old two wrongs make a right defense. Just because other sports do it doesn't make it right. If anything, baseball is the only sport that has it right by NOT having a salary cap because salary caps are stupid.

Last I checked, we're not socialist yet. What's next, salary caps for doctors? Who the hell is anyone to say how much someone can make in a profession?

And who the hell is anyone to say, "even though this company wants pay you, they aren't allowed."

If you think this is a tainted victory, you are an idiot. There's a reason games are played, and there's a reason it TOOK as long as it did.

The Yankees are by themselves because no other team is as committed to WINNING as the Yankees. None. No one puts their money where their mouths are, and no one reinvests in their team like they do. Those that do put money back into the team get results.

[mac0822]

Ther NFL murders MLB in popularity. It's because of the competitive balance. Teams have to draft right or they are the Lions. The Yankees draft like the Lions, but put a Patriots team on the field. That makes no sense.

As for the cap limiting salaries. Have you seen the yearly salaries for even the average NBA player? How about an Peyton Manning? Think he's underpaid?

You are flat out WRONG if you think other teams could do what NY does as far as payroll. Sure, SOME teams may be able to, but not many. Do you actually think KC or Tampa could pull off a $200M payroll? Do you think Boston "only" has a $120M payroll because they are cheap? Fuck no.

[MSBNYY]

You can't compare football to baseball, when one sport has 1/10th the amount of games. There is far LESS football out there. That would be like me countering by saying "home come 4 million people don't see the Giants every year?"

And again, baseball HAS a competitive balance, as shown by a different team winning every year. There are far fewer NBA players than MLB players--so they CAN make what they make, but now imagine what they'd make on a fair and open market. You think things would be different if a team like the Knicks could turn loose their full resources?

While the Royals can't pull off a $200 million payroll, they CAN pull off more than they do now. It has to start somewhere. The bottom line is they CHOOSE to run their team the way they do, with no emphasis on winning. And if the Royals can't compete, then they should have the same fate as other business do when they can't compete. Go out of business. Contraction.

Salaries would go down if that happened.

[thecaptain15]

The NFL murders MLB in popularity. It's because of the competitive balance.


Mac are you kidding?? Competive balance???

The NFL murders MLB due to one reason..

Gambling....

[mac0822]

The Knicks are a perfect example. The Yankees and Knicks are run about the same way, BUT the cap won't let the Knicks recover until the smarten the fuck up. They draft like shit, sign terrible free agents and have shitty coaching. Now they are throwing away an entire season in hopes of signing one player. If this was the Yankees, they'd KNOW they'd be getting Lebron because they'd overpay (CC) to get him.

NFL fans know that if their team is smart, they will compete. KC could be the smartest team in the world and still be a .500 team.

[MSBNYY]

The Yankees are run MUCH better than the Knicks, as evidenced by the fact that so many homegrown players, not including the core four, were factors in this team. They don't draft like shit every year. Given their constant time at the top, the fact that they have so many homegrown players despite usually not getting decent draft slots, says plenty on how WELL they draft.

You can't compare baseball, which has an extensive minor league system and takes years to develop players, to basketball, which takes players out of college and has no real minor leagues.

Given that other small to mid market teams HAVE competed and even WON World Series', even in the last ten years, it's safe to say that the reason KC doesn't compete is because they don't want to compete. Why should they? They get free Yankee money.

[MSBNYY]

Get this--Boras is nuts:

At this moment, the Yankees have downplayed any desire to get into a Matt Holliday derby and the Mets are telling outside executives they could not imagine chasing the slugger to the top of the market.

The Cardinals have made re-signing Holliday their offseason priority.

However, agent Scott Boras is portraying Holliday as "a franchise player" and comparing his value to that of Mark Texeira, who received an eight-year, $180 million deal last offseason from the Yankees.

"When you have a franchise player available, that is the foundation of how you build a champion," Boras said. "Because of that I expect Matt to have a very aggressive market."

Boras disputed the theory that Holliday does not want to play at Citi Field. Boras said Holliday is a line-drive hitter who would be helped by the deep gaps, which might depress a few homers but enhance doubles. Boras guaranteed his client would be a 100 RBI/100 run guy in Citi Field.