Phil Sheridan is a moron

[HollywoodLeo]

Originally Posted by DaddyWarbucks #1: The Nationals offered Mark Teixeira $5 more thank the Yankees

That's nice.

Did they also offer more money to AJ Burnett and CC Sabathia? And do they already have Alex Rodriguez's contract?

Originally Posted by DaddyWarbucks #2: The Yankees have not won a WS since 2000.

Doesn't negate the fact that their ability to buy all these free agents prevents other teams from competing for their services on an even playing ground.

Originally Posted by DaddyWarbucks #3: Small market teams can compete.. look at the Oakland Athletics, Minnesota Twins, Tampa Bay Devil Rays, and Florida Marlins.

And how many World Series' has these teams collectively won?

2, both by the Marlins, and in one of those years the Marlins went Yankees in the offseason and it paid off....then they sold everyone the next year because they were losing money despite winning.

But, I digress, those teams come and go. The Red Sox and Yankees are in the playoff race EVERY year.

The fact that it's been awhile since the Yankees achieved the ultimate goal isn't that relevant. They always have a chance and never have to rebuild.

Originally Posted by DaddyWarbucks #4: Teams like the Pittsburgh Pirates SUCK... not because of the Yankees, but because they have incompetent people running their team and a owner that refuses to expand payroll... when in fact they do have the money.

They don't have the money the Yankees have

Originally Posted by DaddyWarbucks #5: A salary cap wouldn't necessarily change the "competitive balance" in baseball. If you look at the NBA, the Los Angeles Clippers, despite playing in LA and in a league with a salary cap continuously lose.

That's nice, use the worst franchise in all of professional sports to back up your argument.

Look at the NFL. They have a cap, the top dawgs change out pretty much every year for the most part.

Originally Posted by DaddyWarbucks The Seattle Mariners spent over $100 million last year were the second worst team in baseball.

If you spend a lot of money on crap you're going to get crap on the field.

[HollywoodLeo]

Now, with all of that said, I don't think the Yankees are the villains here.

They're taking advantage of the system the way it's set up, and why shouldn't they?

The rules are what they are and they shouldn't hold back to try and be nice to the competition.

The Yankees aren't the problem, the system is the problem.

[DaddyWarbucks]

They're taking advantage of the system the way it's set up, and why shouldn't they? The rules are what they are and they shouldn't hold back to try and be nice to the competition. The Yankees aren't the problem, the system is the problem.

Good. The Yankees are taking advantage of the system, but other teams are not prevented from doing the same thing.

The owner of the Minnesota Twins Carl Pohlad, has a net worth of $1.8 billion, which is more than George Steinbrenner. Not the Yankees fault that the Twins refuse to up payroll.

The owner of the Kansas City Royals is David Glass (former CEO of Wal-Mart). What is their excuse?

This isn't about a payroll. The good teams are teams with good baseball personal and owners willing to shell out money. Those teams that are not good either have owners who refuse to up payroll (even though they have the money) or bad baseball personal.

That's nice, use the worst franchise in all of professional sports to back up your argument. Look at the NFL. They have a cap, the top dawgs change out pretty much every year for the most part.

The Golden State Warriors from 1994-2008, have made the playoffs just once. The Los Angeles Clippers have made the playoffs 4 times. The Atlanta Hawks have made the playoffs once since 1999.

The NFL is a league of parity but players continually change teams and are not happy because they don't have guarenteed contracts. Expect a strike or lock-out eventually.

[HollywoodLeo]

Originally Posted by DaddyWarbucks Good. The Yankees are taking advantage of the system, but other teams are not prevented from doing the same thing.

Yes they are. They don't bring in the same cash flow as the Yankees do.

Silly business owners and their desire to keep their businesses out of the red.

Originally Posted by DaddyWarbucks The owner of the Minnesota Twins Carl Pohlad, has a net worth of $1.8 billion, which is more than George Steinbrenner. Not the Yankees fault that the Twins refuse to up payroll.

Who gives a shit what Carl Pohlad's net worth is? What is the income of the Minnesota Twins?

Heaven forbid Carl Pohlad operate his business at a profit.

Originally Posted by DaddyWarbucks The owner of the Kansas City Royals is David Glass (former CEO of Wal-Mart). What is their excuse?

His excuse is Wal-Mart sales don't add to the income of the Kansas City Royals.

Originally Posted by DaddyWarbucks This isn't about a payroll. The good teams are teams with good baseball personal and owners willing to shell out money. Those teams that are not good either have owners who refuse to up payroll (even though they have the money) or bad baseball personal.

Of course it's about payroll.

How is a discussion on obscene payrolls and a proposed salary cap not about anything but payroll?

Originally Posted by DaddyWarbucks The Golden State Warriors from 1994-2008, have made the playoffs just once. The Los Angeles Clippers have made the playoffs 4 times. The Atlanta Hawks have made the playoffs once since 1999.

That's nice.

Originally Posted by DaddyWarbucks The NFL is a league of parity but players continually change teams and are not happy because they don't have guarenteed contracts. Expect a strike or lock-out eventually.

Professional sports players are greedy ****s who get paid millions of bucks to play a sport for a living, but like to cry that they're underpaid, tell me something I don't know. (meanwhile teachers, cops, and fire fighters struggle to live paycheck to paycheck)

And, while you're at it, tell me what this has to do with the convesation at hand.

[cjkalt]

Only 1 team has won a WS with a payroll of 100 mil or more and that was the Red Sox, let them spend like drunken sailors and still lose. Its fun to laugh at

[DaddyWarbucks]

His excuse is Wal-Mart sales don't add to the income of the Kansas City Royals.

Wouldn't increasing payroll and signing big-name free agents to be more competitive... thus winning more games, increase profits?

Actually, baseball has far more parity than football. Football has an imbalance, too. Teams like the Redskins and Cowboys have much higher revenue streams and are therefore able to pay the large signing bonuses that attract free agency.

The truth is when the Yankees win, it is good for baseball, just like when the United States is flourishing and the most dominant nation, that is good for the entire world.

When the United States is bringing in obscene amount of profits, the benefactors will be third-world countries that need the money. When the United States is not making a profit, third-world countries suffer.

Listen up Leo. When the Yankees win, every other team benefits. I hope the Yankees sign Ben Sheets and Manny Ramirez because the luxury tax system benefits teams like the Royals and Pirates. Is it the Yankees fault that the owners of those teams will pocket those checks when the Yankees overspend instead of using that money to increase payroll? You can't blame the system or the Yankees, the onus is on David Glass and Robert Nutting.

Also, when the Yankees win, the ratings go up. People like to either root for them or root against them. They are like the Dallas Cowboys. When the Yankees win, it is good for the sport, end of discussion.

[Dry1313]

Originally Posted by cjkalt Only 1 team has won a WS with a payroll of 100 mil or more and that was the Red Sox, let them spend like drunken sailors and still lose. Its fun to laugh at

Only one team is full of jack-offs who think they're "true to the game" when they're making at least seven figures.

The Red Sox and their fanbase can all suck my Pinstriped dong

[Pronk48]

IMHO, the problem isn't so much the Yankees, Red Sox, Mets, etc. but it's the teams like the Pirates & Marlins.

All the owners can spend money. But a lot of them put out a crap product on the field and just pocket everything. A lot of owners don't care about having a winning team, as long as they aren't losing money.

I like what the Indians did this offseason. They went after Kerry Wood, and I think he's going to be very good closing out games for the Indians. They knew they couldn't afford K-Rod, so they went for IMHO the next best closer available.

Dolan is never going to spend like the Yankees and Red Sox, hell he will probally never spend like Dick Jacobs did in the 1990's. But he's also not going to be like the Marlins or the Pirates who seem to achieve to be bad most of the time.

[realmofotalk]

You'll always have the cheap teams like the Pirates and Marlins, which is fine if they nail the fundamentals of building a team, notably scouting and player development. But even the most talented scouting department can't compete with the free spending of New Yorks and Boston.

[HollywoodLeo]

Originally Posted by DaddyWarbucks Wouldn't increasing payroll and signing big-name free agents to be more competitive... thus winning more games, increase profits?

There's no guarantee spending all the money will build a winner.

And, even if there was, yeah it'd increase profits, but nowhere near that of what the Yankees bring in.

Furthermore, I'm not going to argue the notion that the Royals owner is cheap. I'd pick on him as well if I was a Yankees fan trying to justify the system because my team benefits from it.

But the bottom line is Wal-Mart is irrelevant to the discussion because Wal-Mart sales have absolutely nothing to do with the income of the Kansas City Royals.

Originally Posted by DaddyWarbucks Actually, baseball has far more parity than football. Football has an imbalance, too. Teams like the Redskins and Cowboys have much higher revenue streams and are therefore able to pay the large signing bonuses that attract free agency.

And how often are the Redskins and Cowboys in the playoffs? Or even just the playoff hunt these days?

Not every ****ing year like the Red Sox and Yankees.

Originally Posted by DaddyWarbucks The truth is when the Yankees win, it is good for baseball, just like when the United States is flourishing and the most dominant nation, that is good for the entire world.

Is this you admitting the system favors the Yankees?

That's the only conclusion I'm capable of drawing in regards to a point behind this statement.

The Yankees winning is good for baseball therefore we shouldn't change the system that gives them an added advantage? This, despite the fact that you've been arguing this whole time that they don't have one?

Originally Posted by DaddyWarbucks When the United States is bringing in obscene amount of profits, the benefactors will be third-world countries that need the money. When the United States is not making a profit, third-world countries suffer.

So now other teams are third world countries?

Originally Posted by DaddyWarbucks Also, when the Yankees win, the ratings go up. People like to either root for them or root against them. They are like the Dallas Cowboys. When the Yankees win, it is good for the sport, end of discussion.

Good analogy, considering how the NFL went down the shitter all those years the Cowboys sucked, and continues to do so with the Cowboys still failing to win any games that matter.