Good reading...

[Skyboxer]

For Yankees fans and those that always jump on the "Yankees spend to much money" "That's why they win" bandwagon. Check it out and try to be unbiased when reading...

http://msn.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/klapisch_bob/1423271.html

[**DONOTDELETE**]

Re: Good reading...

very interesting. he has some good points.

[snowmizer]

Re: Good reading...

Of course, to be unbiased, the writer could follow through with something like...

Thanks to the local tv contracts, the Yankees can afford to retain every player that they develop into a star, and they can go after star free agents.

The Oaklands, Montreals, and Minnesotas of the world can come together for a good streak of one to possibly three years before expiring contracts rip the team apart.

Pointing out the incompetence of a team like Texas doesn't disprove that there's a huge problem with the sport's financial structure.

[cookusu]

Re: Good reading...

The Yankees throwing money around didn't always help them in the past. But it sure helps if you are running an organization properly as Snowmizer points out.

[Will]

Re: Good reading...

So tell me, would a team comprised of Derek Jeter, Andy Pettitte, Jorge Posada, Mariano Rivera, Bernie Williams, and a bunch of washed up free agent acquisitions be competitive? Absolutely not.

The only reason the Twins are competitive is because they've done an amazing job of scouting and developing. They don't have just a handful of guys they've developed, and then some huge free agents/traded-for players like other teams, every single starter with the exception of Milton, Guz, and Reed was brought up in the Twins system. Milton and Guz were both traded for (thanks Yanks) before they were any good, and the Twins did a great job in developing them.

I'd love to see how things would be if the Twins had the money to sign Giambi this offseason.

[FatPitcher]

Re: Good reading...

Just because it's on ESPN doesn't make it any more valid. A good organization can have good team for 3 years out of every 20 or so. A rich organization can have a good team every year. Arguing that poor teams can be good and rich teams can be bad does not change the fact that rich teams have a huge advantage, especially long-term, over poor teams.

Also, blowing off all the bad trades and bad signings the Yankees made doesn't help support this guy's argument. Just because they aren't as stupid as the Rangers doesn't make them great.

[Skyboxer]

Re: Good reading...

Again..like the article says...why didn't the Yanks win in the 80's and early 90's....
Also. the Yanks only spend their money, from what THEY make. If a team can't fill their own stadium why should the Yankees have to give them money in the proposed profit sharing deal. Like the article says, it's more about the players not the money and the Yankees get the majority of thier talent from thier own farm system. When they spent the money and lost every year, you never heard a word from anyone.

[cookusu]

Re: Good reading...

Skyboxer,

Money alone is not the only reason a teams wins, but I think peoples points are that if the Expos or Twins had the money to keep there free agents, they may be up there evey year as well. Spending your money wisely is the difference, back in the 80's and 90's the Yanks didn't spend wisely, and most of there prospects were more hype than anythin else. Also it takes money to maintain a productive farm system, some teams spend a lot more on scouting then others, mostly because they can.

On one hand, I agree that the Yankees shouldn't have to share, but on the other hand if they have no one to play, that would be kind of boring. Certainly a compromise should be able to be reached.

[FatPitcher]

Re: Good reading...

In the 80's $1-3 million could get you a Hall of Famer, which is why more players played their entire careers with only 1-2 teams, even if that team was Baltimore or Milwaukee, and why more teams could afford to keep their stars. Now you have that you have to pay one player more than the entire 1984 Tigers starting lineup, a lot of teams are priced out of the market.

[p2xgamers]

Re: Good reading...

I guess people won't admit that a big part to the yankees success is the dough. Yea he said they developed those guys, but guess what has kept them there? Yes, thats right, there dough. How did they get weaver, everyone that is good on there is there becuase 1)Yankees heritage 2)the money 3)the fans, a player on the yanks and 4)the dough. I would love to have Steinbrenner give the money out to teams evenly and would love to see how the yanks would re-sign all those players, they couldn't and the Reds could spend more than 10Mill on someone. As for the Rangers explination, the Rangers go after hitters and they are doing good but need a little something they they apperently are noobs on which is pitching. The other small teams do good drafting and searching (forget what it is called) and have good fans which makes them do good and the yankees, yes, work as hard as everyone else and have a reason for it, maybe that's why Moeller, Dempster and possibly Griffey are slacking off, either the $ or the team, and being Moeller I would choose Cincy over Detroit.

[Skyboxer]

Re: Good reading...

Again it's money they earned. They are not supposed to make money and spend it the way they want? And other teams have spent the money and lost. It's only becasue the Yankees are winning that people are Mad"...Where was the anti Yank crap in the 80's..oh wait they didn't win in the 80's.
It's a lot of things not a Yankee only problem. Yanks did not sign Arod for the gazillion dollars but that does just as much damage..But Rangers don't win so we don't here about that.

[FatPitcher]

Re: Good reading...

They wouldn't earn squat if there was no competition. Fans aren't interested in leagues where the same team wins every year. Things are going that way more and more because of how salaries are going through the roof, making it so that only the top few teams can afford the elite players.

For baseball to succeed as a whole (which I assume even Yankees fans want), the MLB has to be a viable business, not just the Yankees. For the MLB to be a viable business, it has to have support across the country, not just in N.Y., Boston, and L.A. For it to have support across the country, teams across the country have to have at least the opportunity to be regularly competitive. That means the teams with the most revenue should be investing it in the MLB as a whole.

[keRplunK]

Re: Good reading...

money makes a huge difference just think of the twins, if they had money they would have mark prior right now, in that rotation! they would be plain nasty

[Skyboxer]

Re: Good reading...

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />
That means the teams with the most revenue should be investing it in the MLB as a whole.


<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

Why? Simple as that, why? They earned the money, why should they have to give it away? The simplest solution is to have a good form of salary cap, not make large market teams the "welfare" teams of MLB.
I'm not saying money doesn't make a difference because of course it does. What ticks me is teams that don't even come close to filling their stadiums want other teams money. In any case I respect your opinions and just hope some day there is a cap solution.
You have to admit, there are some teams out there that even if they got the money, they would waste/squander it away.

[Heelfan71]

Re: Good reading...

I think they need a salary cap for sure. Not sure how I feel about revenue sharing. A good cap would help in my opinion.