The Yankees do not have to get people on a "hometown discount" because they know evey player wants to wear their pinstripes. They have the money, they have the talent, and they have the championships.
That said, I understand that a lot of Twins over the years have gone on to greener pastures. They have some ownership issues that have to be dealt with. But, they do have a good eye for talent. Unfortunately, they do not want to open up the pocketbooks to pay their players to keep them. Will Hunter finish his career there - probably not.
Not to rub anyones face in it, but I really think that A.J. Pierzynski would look great in Cub pinstripes next year.
Joined: 28 Aug 2003
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Wearing the PB with pride looking for my Bears crack pipe...
Tiki Fan wrote:I agree that the competitive balance in baseball is seriously out of whack (and I say this as a Mets fan, whose team has a big budget).
You hit that nail on the head. You can spend a lot of money every year and still have a crappy team if you do not have the right men in charge. People hate the Yankees because, "They just buy a championship. I could win every year if I had $160 million to spend on a team." No you couldn't. The Yankees draft top talent, then Brian Cashman trades that talent to fill holes in their major league team. Remember for years the Yankees had the highest payroll and went nowhere. Only three WS appearances from 1965 to 1996. Cashman walks in and the trophies keep coming.
That's not true for me. I don't hate the Yankees because they buy championships. I hate them because I've had too much exposure to obnoxious, overbearing a$$hole Yankee fans who love to rub your nose in it when they win, and act like they've been robbed of their birthright when they lose. Plus, I hate Steinbrenner - apparently Don Zimmer agrees with me on that one, given his behavior after the game last night.
faselt wrote:I have to agree with blueonion as an Indians fan that watched year after year as the Indians were neither able to bring in marquee players or to keep their best homegrown talent (Belle, Ramirez, and now Thome) from leaving in the free agent market for big money.
Once Thome left this year, a player who purportedly loved Cleveland and was the ultimate hometown hero, I realized there is no loyalty in baseball and as long as the yankees can go out and buy the best player at any position in baseball, MLB is dead to me. (I didnt watch at all this year).
According to your statement then, Cleveland has never had the best player at any position. Because NONE of the players who you described above ever went to the Yankees!!!
What about Karim Garcia? He's definately not the best player at his position, or even close to it, but I just thought I'd add in that the Yankees bought him from Cleveland, and now he's a starter for the Yanks in the World Series.
And you can't forget Brian Giles and Bartolo Colon, two other big name players that Cleveland dumped. Giles hit 149 HR's in the 4 years after he left Cleveland.
"This country was built on immigrants. We need them. Without them, who would train our tigers and kick our extra points?"
Football rules, so make no mistake where my loyalties lay. I like baseball, and sometimes it’s great, but baseball is a game while football is an event.
I would like to debunk a few statements presented by some of our fine forum users.
Yes the Yankees buy pennants and the difference in $ spent on their roster is ridiculously more than the nest closest team. But it doesn’t stop there, they also spend more on player procurement and development in their minor league systems. This is all within the rules so my anger is not at the Yanks but at Major League Baseball for allowing this to keep happening. Maybe a minimum and maximum spending limits at every stage of an organization would help.
The other erroneous statement is that baseball is ‘a thinking man’s ‘ game. Yes the slow pace of the game does give much time to ponder, but that doesn’t mean there is more thinking involved. Yes you do have to think of what pitch to throw or which pitch is going to be thrown, but recognition and reaction is more important than thinking. If you take time to think, your out. The manager has tons of time to decide what course of action to take and his choices are relatively few. Don’t confuse the amount of time to think with actual thought going on.
Football on the other hand demands much more though at every level. Football is a game of continual thought and adjustment. The development of individual game strategies and game time strategies goes far beyond deciding who to pinch hit or do I bring in the lefty or righty. Make a list of how many plays there are in baseball, it would be dwarfed by one football team’s playbook. And they all have different playbooks.
A football team also needs to be in sync and well coached for it to be successful. Every player on the field has to perform his role successfully or a play breaks down. In baseball half of the team could be, and too often is, asleep and it wouldn’t affect the play. No, baseball is the sleeping man’s game, in football-you snooze you lose. If you need another example tell me how many coaches there are on a football team and why? Then tell me what Don Zimmer does? A team mascot? There are fewer coaches in baseball because there is less to teach, and even less players willing to learn. How many know how to bunt?
I think, therefore I am. I think fantasy, therefore I am unreal?
Hall of Fame Hero
(Past Year: 80)
Joined: 20 Jul 2003
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Living in the shame only a Lions fan knows
I have to go with baseball. I know many, many people will disagree, but I just don't think 16 games in the season can tell us who the best team is. Don't get me wrong. Football is fantastic and watching the players have to adapt on the fly and try to kill each other is great. I also love watching football in bad weather. Rain, snow, fog, etc. That's definitely something you don't get with baseball. The action is a lot faster.
As to baseball, by the time the season ends (and I admit that it's a long season) you know who the best teams are. I'm a Texas Ranger fan, and I have no love or hatred for any other team out there including the Yankees. Buy a team? Yes, it's possible to put some fantastic talent on the field, but that doesn't always translate to success, or the Yankees would have won the World Series the last few years.
As to Steinbrenner spending money, he built the team up, brought in the fans, and continues to spend on the team. I don't have a problem with that. Between attendance, cable deals, etc, he made something like 600 million last season. So if he spends another 50 million on payroll and 25 million on the luxury tax while still keeping the same income, he still makes 525 million this season. That's smart business to me. He could have had a fire sale, dropped payroll to 50 million, and only ended up making 100 million this year with a team that couldn't compete. Would you rather make 100 million or 500 million? Pretty easy choice.
Any team can do that. While you are building up your team, year after year, the attendence goes up, which allows the owner to keep his star players. Most teams just don't want to spend the money.
Just for fun, I can answer this:
blueonion wrote:can anybody name a player on the New York Yankees over the past 8 seasons who has played for league minimum?
Alfonso Soriano. And even this year, which is his 4th year with the team (2nd full season), he made less than 1 million. In the $700,000 ballpark.
I am the Reaper of Men, The Chaser of Souls, The Weaver of Nightmares, I am The Heart of Darkness. I now, and ever will be, The Purity of Evil.
I have always liked both......but by far football is much more enjoyable to watch......at least with football, your team has a chance to get a ring.....just really gets old watching the Spankees every year.....and I think a cold, snowy football game is the best kind.......seperates the men from the boys......you guys should post this in the baseball forum and see what kind of responses you get
I think baseball and football require different type fo thinking. The mvoements once the ball is in play have to occur almost automatically. If you wait to think what abse you are throwing to etc, youa re too late. I also think baseball requires a much more acute thought process in terms of probabilites, tendenices and long term memory. Baseabll strategy is accumulated over time, seeign the league and pitching/hitting tendencies. I kinda view it as jsut more mathmatical in its thought. Football to me is more of a chess game that requires ont he fly thinking (more so than baseball). I jsut think it is different skill sets and though processes. That said, you don't hear of too many pro baseball mangers sleeping in their offices to come up witha game plan. On msot regualr season days, you put in your bonds or giambi or torri hunter etc, and let them play, and you tinker with an eye towards the future --a s you can't go all out to win every game because you compromise the next couple (if you use every aviable pitcher or wahtever) in football, there is no tomorrow, you win now, and worry about next week after the current week is over. so I think it is a question basically of mathmatical intelligence vs spatial intelligence and long term vs immdeiate strategy.
The only time baseball is EVER interesting to watch on TV is during the playoffs, and even then, it pales in comparison to watching football. This postseason has been good, but it is the anomaly. As for football, i think my wife described it best: "it is a war." (by the way, she loves watching football ) And every Sunday/Monday we have the opportunity to watch 4 wars and the highlights from at least 10 others!