|
Post by heartybooooo on Nov 10, 2009 16:31:33 GMT -5
I actually think Boras is a genius.
On the cap front, I generally don't believe in them and most of the other sports with them are about to implode. The NFL has a huge have/have not split. The cap is based on a percentage of overall revenue, but that revenue is disproportionately being earned which is causing those on the bottom to almost have a built in loss. The big difference is stadium revenue which some have a lot and some not much and it is not shared. The NBA is heading toward a lock out or a cave in by the players. Hockey is a disaster. Not the pancea some hope for.
The core issue is that expenditures can't be fixed until revenue is more equal. And I don't see the teams bringing in the cash going socialist. Jerry Jones says the same thing in the NFL. He maximizes revenue at his stadium, some sit on their hands. Fuck them.
|
|
|
Post by Chris on Nov 10, 2009 17:50:45 GMT -5
Exactly!
It's been widely documented that these "small market" teams aren't anywhere near the poverty level they are claiming. One huge gripe has been that teams are not including minor league revenues when evaluating their worth...and that's just one small example of these fraudulent claims.
The bottom line is that any baseball team could afford an A-Rod-like contract if they wanted to. Texas did it...they don't play in NY, Chicago, or L.A.
There are two schools of thought - teams who believe that reinvesting profits in the team, putting a higher quality product with a better chance of winning on the field will ultimately boost their revenue via increased fan support. Then there are teams who feel that the best way to boost revenue is to skimp anywhere they can...namely player's salaries.
Look at Anaheim - Angel's fans are the biggest Yankee-Payroll gripers I know...but their owner has accumulated the 6th highest payroll and has openly and publicly admired George Steinbrenner's financial commitment to putting the best possible product on the field.
|
|
MSBNYY
Administrator
El Guapo
Posts: 15,545
|
Post by MSBNYY on Nov 10, 2009 18:23:39 GMT -5
Don't get me wrong--Boras' results speak for themselves. But I don't see ANY team giving Holliday that kind of a deal. It's not that he isn't the top hitting free agent. He is.
He's a damn good hitter. His defense is nowhere near the caliber of Tex's. He played in Colorado for most of his career too. But ultimately, I don't think a team will be willing to pay him that kind of money. I would be shocked to see that kind of a deal.
He's a good player in his prime. The age is right, but if the Yankees aren't in the game, I don't see it happening with another team. And I just don't see the Yankees giving him the YEARS that Tex got, even if he is the right age.
|
|
MSBNYY
Administrator
El Guapo
Posts: 15,545
|
Post by MSBNYY on Nov 11, 2009 8:53:42 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Chris on Nov 11, 2009 13:05:56 GMT -5
Riduculous!
|
|
|
Post by heartybooooo on Nov 11, 2009 13:24:52 GMT -5
He is positioning himself as a healthier Posada or Mariano and trying to be overpaid in a similar fashion. Different world and Yanks aren't as desperate. And seemingly smarter (maybe due to Cashman control).
|
|
MSBNYY
Administrator
El Guapo
Posts: 15,545
|
Post by MSBNYY on Nov 11, 2009 13:36:19 GMT -5
Exactly. If the Yankees lose Damon, it will suck, but it would NOT be as bad as losing a Posada or Mariano. And both Posada and Mariano were career Yankee homegrown players, and right or wrong, there is a reward for that.
Damon is a leftfielder whose defense is to be polite, below average. At his position, his offense can be duplicated. And even if they sacrifice him THIS year, next year, the free agent market is better, and who knows? Maybe Jackson gets the promotion to the bigs and shines.
Interesting you mentioned the whole healthier Posada thing. When Posada signed that contract, he had never been on the DL. Year one was pretty much wasted. He returned to form in 2009, but the point is, you never know with a 36 year old.
I really think that the Yankees should be cautious with Damon. Would LOVE to keep him, but not for 4 years, or even 3. And if he can get that kind of contract elsewhere, then hopefully it won't be Boston, and he can go and get a nice hand when he comes to the Bronx.
|
|
|
Post by heartybooooo on Nov 11, 2009 13:39:50 GMT -5
I think if the Yanks offer him arbitration, he'll end up accepting it. It would kill his value on the market as a team would have to be willing to give up a draft pick and there are fewer teams willing to do so for a marginal player like Damon. The most the Yankees should do is one year with a vesting option for playing time.
|
|
MSBNYY
Administrator
El Guapo
Posts: 15,545
|
Post by MSBNYY on Nov 11, 2009 14:15:14 GMT -5
That's the beauty of it. If you have a free agent that you want to keep, offer him arbitration. If he accepts, you kept your guy for another year, and if he doesn't you get the compensation picks. And yeah, one year with some sort of second year option would be fine.
|
|
|
Post by 9 on Nov 11, 2009 19:38:21 GMT -5
Damon is a leftfielder whose defense is to be polite, below average. Why be polite about it? I cringed every time a ball was hit to left field, and he throws like a six-year-old girl.
|
|
|
Post by Chris on Nov 11, 2009 19:39:59 GMT -5
His throws from the outfiled remind me of playing catch before my softball games, throwing each other pop flies for practice.
|
|
MSBNYY
Administrator
El Guapo
Posts: 15,545
|
Post by MSBNYY on Nov 12, 2009 8:42:39 GMT -5
Curtis Granderson on the market, Yanks interested. Not a fan. Granted, he had a down year and may get back to his 2007-2008 numbers, but he strikes out WAY too much and had a Swisheresque season. He's obviously better than Swisher, but having TWO high strikeout, low average guys who connect once in awhile is not good. Not interested in another guy that strikes out 140 times a year. They tend to disappear in the playoffs. Pass.
|
|
MSBNYY
Administrator
El Guapo
Posts: 15,545
|
Post by MSBNYY on Nov 13, 2009 13:23:29 GMT -5
Interesting article today discussing that the Yanks' best chance of improving for next year may be via trade since the economy may provide a climate for various big name fire sales, and they are among the few teams that can afford these players. Plus, the free agent market blows this year.
|
|
MSBNYY
Administrator
El Guapo
Posts: 15,545
|
Post by MSBNYY on Nov 25, 2009 13:45:20 GMT -5
Shelley Duncan was booted off the 40 man roster and is going to refuse the assignment, thereby becoming a free agent.
I sure hope he goes into the Hall of Fame as a Yankee.
|
|
|
Post by 9 on Nov 25, 2009 16:46:50 GMT -5
He might be playing softball next season.
|
|
|
Post by Jason Giambi on Nov 25, 2009 17:45:54 GMT -5
he might be cut from a softball team also?
|
|
MSBNYY
Administrator
El Guapo
Posts: 15,545
|
Post by MSBNYY on Nov 25, 2009 22:17:19 GMT -5
If I coached him, he'd be a champion, like the Bad Jews Bears.
|
|
MSBNYY
Administrator
El Guapo
Posts: 15,545
|
Post by MSBNYY on Dec 1, 2009 8:51:32 GMT -5
So according to the Daily News, it looks like the Yankees will not offer Johnny Damon arbitration. This doesn't make any sense to me given that they actually want him back.
This isn't Bobby Abreu, who was vastly overpaid and just didn't have a winning attitude. Damon's defense isn't great, but it's better than Abreu's. Damon is just a different player, who IS a winner, IS a good clubhouse guy, and can still hit, busts his ass, and stays fairly healthy.
Would I want him signed to a long term contract? No. But for one year? Absolutely.
I can understand why they didn't want to risk Abreu coming back. But Damon's a different story.
Abreu wasn't going to accept arbitration, but they didn't want to take the chance on being stuck with a guy they didn't want.
They WANT Damon. So let's say he accepts. Will he get a raise? Maybe. Probably. But it's not like some arbitrator is going to make him a $20 million man. What will he get, $15 million? That's a $2 million raise. They could make that up just by not tendering Wang (which they are leaning toward doing).
That's IF he accepts. He probably won't, because he wants a multiyear deal.
Seems like offering arbitration is the smart move. If he accepts, what you lose in dollars you make up for in lack of years signed.
If he declines, then sign him on better terms. If you can't get those better terms, you part ways with a draft pick.
If you don't offer him arbitration, you get screwed if he leaves.
Seems like a no brainer.
|
|
|
Post by mac0822 on Dec 1, 2009 13:05:20 GMT -5
If they offer him arbitration and he declines (which he would), can they sign him to a contract? It seems like they couldn't offer him a contract until like April/May (don't quote me) if that situation played out.
I think that may be the issue here, but I could be wrong.
|
|
MSBNYY
Administrator
El Guapo
Posts: 15,545
|
Post by MSBNYY on Dec 1, 2009 13:26:46 GMT -5
I believe that USED to be the rule, and it was the rule for years. But I'm almost positive that rule was scrapped with the last collective bargaining agreement. If they DIDN'T offer him arbitration, under the old rules, he would be lost until April/May as well. If you notice, we haven't heard talk about that May 1 rule in years.
That was a stupid rule. It makes sense that they repealed it. I actually think that the draft pick should not be tied into offering arbitration.
A player that sucks wouldn't be Type A, so he wouldn't involve a draft pick anyway. The only reason to part with a productive player is over money. If that's the case, if a team wants to take a free agent, it should part with the draft pick no matter what. A team shouldn't be forced to offer arbitration for that draft pick to kick in.
I think if they don't offer him arbitration, and lose the potential draft pick, it would be a mistake. I would only want him one year at a time anyway.
|
|
|
Post by jwmcc on Dec 1, 2009 15:31:03 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by thecaptain15 on Dec 3, 2009 10:44:05 GMT -5
THough he strikes out too much and gets hurt for some reason I am intrigued at the idea of the Yanks taking a chance on Rick Ankiel as a low cost option as a LF/CF in the event Damon does not re up. I think his lefty power would be off the charts with the right field "porch" in the Stadium.
Tom what do you think? Obviously I am thinking low cost one year deal.........
|
|
MSBNYY
Administrator
El Guapo
Posts: 15,545
|
Post by MSBNYY on Dec 3, 2009 12:59:22 GMT -5
He would make Nick Swisher look like Mickey Mantle. .231, 86 hits, 99 Ks. Hard to take advantage of power when you don't put the bat on the ball. We already have one Nick Swisher.
|
|
|
Post by Chris on Dec 3, 2009 14:12:38 GMT -5
I think we're getting consumed with hiring "low cost" guys who suck just to diffuse the payroll complaints.
No thanks on Swisher last year, and no thanks on Ankiel this year.
But on the flip side, again just for the sake of quelling all this payroll talk, I would like to see the Yanks and Sox bow out of the Halladay sweepstakes.
|
|
MSBNYY
Administrator
El Guapo
Posts: 15,545
|
Post by MSBNYY on Dec 3, 2009 14:17:07 GMT -5
It will be interesting to see where Halladay ends up with the Red Sox adamant about not trading Buchholz and the Yankees not wanting to part with Chamberlain or Hughes.
It really sucks that Jesus Montero is not expected to be a decent defensive catcher. What do you do with a 20 year old can't miss DH? Trade him.
|
|
|
Post by Chris on Dec 3, 2009 14:47:44 GMT -5
With Angels pretty much a lock to lose Lackey (not that they don't want him, but he's not worth the money he'll command) they ought to full court press the Jays for Halladay.
|
|
MSBNYY
Administrator
El Guapo
Posts: 15,545
|
Post by MSBNYY on Dec 3, 2009 15:11:54 GMT -5
I wouldn't be surprised if they do. The only issue would be whether they want to meet Toronto's price, or if they have the right prospects for Toronto. I always thought their farm was pretty good, so I would guess they do have the prospects, but maybe not the desire.
The strategy didn't work for the Twins either when they tried to trade Santana, who was younger than Halladay when on the trading block and a lefty.
|
|
MSBNYY
Administrator
El Guapo
Posts: 15,545
|
Post by MSBNYY on Dec 7, 2009 7:58:53 GMT -5
So the winter meetings have begun. It would be great to see the Yankees take care of SOMETHING that will help the team win in 2010. But given the way things are, I bet it's another round of boring winter meetings.
|
|
MSBNYY
Administrator
El Guapo
Posts: 15,545
|
Post by MSBNYY on Dec 7, 2009 13:08:07 GMT -5
Brian Bruney has been traded to the Nationals for a player to be named later. Though unconfirmed, my sources are saying that the player to be named later will NOT be Steve Strasburg.
I hope he goes into the HOF as a Yankee.
|
|
|
Post by thecaptain15 on Dec 8, 2009 12:46:30 GMT -5
From Heyman...
TUESDAY, DECEMBER 8
Blockbuster three-way trade back on the table The blockbuster three-way trade that would send top young pitcher Edwin Jackson to the Diamondbacks, Curtis Granderson to the Yankees and good young players to the Tigers is being heavily discussed again, and one involved party said he believed it had a "50-50'' chance of happening.
In the latest form of this trade, the Yankees, who balked late Monday night, would surrender slightly less. Now they'd be sending top outfield prospect Austin Jackson and reliever Phil Coke to Detroit, plus pitching prospect Ian Kennedy to Arizona, in order to land Granderson from Detroit. The Diamondbacks would wind up with the two pitchers, Edwin Jackson and Kennedy, while the Tigers would get Max Scherzer, Daniel Schlereth, Austin Jackson and Coke.
The Yankees and Tigers were believed to have been dissatisfied with the trade late Monday, and the removal of Michael Dunn from the deal seems to have allayed their trepidations. The Tigers still have to sign off, too, though.
The Tigers have been looking to pare down their payroll, and trading Jackson and Granderson is a way to do it. Jackson is arbitration eligible, while Granderson has $25.75 million and three years remaining on his contract.
To this point, the Yankees and free agent outfielder Johnny Damon seem to be apart in contract talks, with the Yankees looking to pay him about $20 million over two years and Damon believed to be seeking a four-year deal while trying not to take a pay cut from the $13 million a year he made.
If the Yankees get Granderson, they could still sign Damon, but it might mean trading either Melky Cabrera or Nick Swisher. Or they could simply let Damon go elsewhere.
|
|