Super User Gone_Phishin Posted November 3, 2009 Super User Posted November 3, 2009 If the Yankmees win it, I cry FOUL. Must be nice to sign Sabathia, Burnett, and Teixeira to long term deals all in a week or so. Come time when the current labor contract expires, which is coming soon, a CAP in necessary. I don't care if the players strike two years, a cap is a MUST. Quote
ArcticCat500 Posted November 3, 2009 Posted November 3, 2009 If the Yankmees win it, I cry FOUL. Must be nice to sign Sabathia, Burnett, and Teixeira to long term deals all in a week or so. Come time when the current labor contract expires, which is coming soon, a CAP in necessary. I don't care if the players strike two years, a cap is a MUST. :'( let me get you a tissue Quote
Super User J Francho Posted November 3, 2009 Super User Posted November 3, 2009 A cap would seriously threaten some small market teams livelihood, since they operate on profit sharing by larger, more profitable teams. Profit sharing is MLB's version of the salary cap. Quote
Super User roadwarrior Posted November 3, 2009 Super User Posted November 3, 2009 A cap would seriously threaten some small market teams livelihood, since they operate on profit sharing by larger, more profitable teams. Profit sharing is MLB's version of the salary cap. Nope, profit sharing and parity is the NFL business model. Baseball has subsidies for the smaller markets, but the rich (generally) rule! http://www.economist.com/businessfinance/displaystory.cfm?story_id=6859210 8-) Quote
Super User J Francho Posted November 3, 2009 Super User Posted November 3, 2009 That's not true all the time. Many lower rung markets go to the playoffs, and many succedd. Here's the breakdown of 2009: http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/salaries. By your logic, it would be Yanks, Sox, Mets, Cubs in contention every year, and its far from that. Tampa, Col, Twinkies, D'Backs, Brewers, White Sox, etc. have all been in contention, and some have won the whole shebang in the past decade. Its the teams that choose to spend the profit sharing on players that end up doing well in the playoffs. Big market teams have no incentive to curb spending on players. Quote
Super User roadwarrior Posted November 3, 2009 Super User Posted November 3, 2009 It's not true all the time, but you probably remember the Marlins buying a World Series. A-Rod's salary is more than several team rosters! 8-) Quote
Super User J Francho Posted November 3, 2009 Super User Posted November 3, 2009 The other problem Kent, is player development. An NFL team realize a lot more potential out of a good draft pick than a MLB team. It takes years to develop a player, especially pitchers. They just do not have the arm strength and knowledge of pitching coming out of college. They really are very different sports, with a different type of athlete playing each game. Quote
Super User J Francho Posted November 3, 2009 Super User Posted November 3, 2009 you probably remember the Marlins buying a World Series. Touche, LOL. But the Yankees, Red Sox, Mets, and Cubs have trying to buy WS rings for more than a decade, and look how well that's worked out. In fact, its actual organizational farm team players that have really been the success story of big market teams. In some way, the economic downturn has resulted in smarter business by the big market teams....Cano, Wright, Cabrera, Joba, Robertson, et. al. The big name free agents have just been the extra edge. It would have been way too expensive to assemble a team of solely free agents for even the top four. Quote
Dalton Tam Posted November 4, 2009 Posted November 4, 2009 GO PHILLEYS! and GO CHASE UTLEY! I don't think anyone, even a yankees fan can say that Chase is not a bad S.O.B. with a baseball bat. He will break the record for most homerun hits before it's all said and done. Quote
Super User Gone_Phishin Posted November 4, 2009 Super User Posted November 4, 2009 you probably remember the Marlins buying a World Series. Touche, LOL. But the Yankees, Red Sox, Mets, and Cubs have trying to buy WS rings for more than a decade, and look how well that's worked out. In fact, its actual organizational farm team players that have really been the success story of big market teams. In some way, the economic downturn has resulted in smarter business by the big market teams....Cano, Wright, Cabrera, Joba, Robertson, et. al. The big name free agents have just been the extra edge. It would have been way too expensive to assemble a team of solely free agents for even the top four. It's true a small market team can squeak their way into the playoffs (Min, Mil), but over time, look at the majority of the playoff teams: they've all got deep pockets. Kent is right on. Of course the model would have to be adjusted to fit MLB, but the groundwork is there. The guys and gals in the commissioners office make big bucks...I'd like to see them actually do something to warrant their salary. Quote
Super User K_Mac Posted November 5, 2009 Super User Posted November 5, 2009 Congrats Yankee fans. great team/ great series Quote
Super User roadwarrior Posted November 5, 2009 Super User Posted November 5, 2009 The Beatles were wrong: Quote
Super User J Francho Posted November 5, 2009 Super User Posted November 5, 2009 Money can't buy chemistry....its only one part of the equation. Look at the list of team salaries. Note all the clunkers in the top ten. http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/salaries Quote
ArcticCat500 Posted November 5, 2009 Posted November 5, 2009 The Beatles were wrong: They sure were, but JF has very good point, they all worked togather. Chemistry! And to think I almost sat thru that video, 9 secs was enough for me to turn it off. ;D Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.