Text book definition of underachieving based on payroll? Ok, your Red Sox are right behind the Yankees in that case
????? An $84,000,000 difference is right behind? The DIFFERENCE in spending between the Yankees and Sox is more than the total payroll of 20 other teams and you consider that "Right behind". Absolute dillusional Yankee nonesense. If you need a lesson in finance, just ask your buddy frolico.
Also, please come up with something better than deep down inside I think it's wrong and have a problem with MLB or whatever. We've already had this conversation. At length. In another thread. Where I made it pretty clear, to your satisfaction, that I have no problems at all with the Yankee spending. I've never complained, or said it's wrong. They've got the money, they spend the money. And that's why it's so rewarding for me and the rest of the world when they underachieve and lose.
Maybe it is just me, but it seems that more than any other sport, the baseball postseason is a crapshoot. It seems like after 162 games the regular season pretty much settles who are the best teams, but once the postseason starts, it is a roll of the dice. I understand that the Yankees or Red Sox think they should win the series every year, but let's face it, over the last 3 years a wild card team has won the series, and it could be 4 years if the Astros win. I don't recall 3 years in a row that a wild card won the Super Bowl.
So teams may underachieve by not winning the series, but once the playoffs start, it is as much luck as skill.
tdk7, you are pretty much correct. A seven game contest between one team that won 98 games and another that won 94 games is basically a crapshoot. There may be some other small determining factors involved in that contest, but it is a crapshoot. One factor is how the rotation happens to fall, based on the previous series, or the end of the season, but with all being equal in those types of things it is going to be a random outcome.
<< <i>Text book definition of underachieving based on payroll? Ok, your Red Sox are right behind the Yankees in that case
????? An $84,000,000 difference is right behind? The DIFFERENCE in spending between the Yankees and Sox is more than the total payroll of 20 other teams and you consider that "Right behind". Absolute dillusional Yankee nonesense. If you need a lesson in finance, just ask your buddy frolico.
Also, please come up with something better than deep down inside I think it's wrong and have a problem with MLB or whatever. We've already had this conversation. At length. In another thread. Where I made it pretty clear, to your satisfaction, that I have no problems at all with the Yankee spending. I've never complained, or said it's wrong. They've got the money, they spend the money. And that's why it's so rewarding for me and the rest of the world when they underachieve and lose. >>
I don't care how much more loot the Yankees spend than the Red Sox. The fact is, the Red SOx spent more than EVERY TEAM in the game except the Yankees. The disparity between the two teams does not change that FACT. Which is fine, they are ALLOWED to buy their playoff appearances too. You can't sit there are moan about the Yankees payroll when almost every team in the game CAN NOT spend what the Red SOx are spending either!.
I don't care how much more loot the Yankees spend than the Red Sox. The fact is, the Red SOx spent more than EVERY TEAM in the game except the Yankees. The disparity between the two teams does not change that FACT. Which is fine, they are ALLOWED to buy their playoff appearances too. You can't sit there are moan about the Yankees payroll when almost every team in the game CAN NOT spend what the Red SOx are spending either!.
I'm moaning about the Yankee payroll? This is ridiculous. I give up. You win.
????? An $84,000,000 difference is right behind? The DIFFERENCE in spending between the Yankees and Sox is more than the total payroll of 20 other teams and you consider that "Right behind". Absolute dillusional Yankee nonesense. If you need a lesson in finance, just ask your buddy frolico.
Also, please come up with something better than deep down inside I think it's wrong and have a problem with MLB or whatever. We've already had this conversation. At length. In another thread. Where I made it pretty clear, to your satisfaction, that I have no problems at all with the Yankee spending. I've never complained, or said it's wrong. They've got the money, they spend the money. And that's why it's so rewarding for me and the rest of the world when they underachieve and lose. >>
yep, I would say there is some maoning going on. It is rewarding to you when the Yankees season ends early becuase they have a gigantic payroll. You have a problem with that. That is fine, take it up with MLB, you know , the ones that are too weak kneed to seriously try and defeat the players union!.
The DIFFERENCE in spending between the Yankees and Sox is more than the total payroll of 20 other teams There are 20 teams in baseball than spent less than the difference between the Yankees and Red Sox payrolls. The Yankees spent $84 million more than the Red Sox, and there were 20 teams that did not spend $84 on their own team salaries. The Yankee payroll was $205 million, vs $121 million for the Red Sox. That DIFFERENCE in spending ($84 million) is more than 20 other teams spent. The LA Dodgers Houston Chicago Sox Baltimore Detroit Arizona San Diego Florida Cincinnati Minnesota Oakland Texas Washington Colorado Toronto Cleveland Milwaukee Pittsburgh Tampa Bay Kansas City all spent less than $84 million on salaries, which is the difference between the Sox and Yankees Softparade was ridiculous in calling that "right behind"
Dan, You're doing it again. This seems very familiar to the spat we had some time ago. You have trouble interpreting information sometimes and get defensive to the point of fault. Admittedly, this is not my argument--I think you're a Yankee fan and to be proud of that great franchise is certainly understandable--but I do feel you should evaluate your arguments sometimes and pick your battles more carefully. The icon should be used when something is actually funny. You are typically not.
<< <i>The Atlanta Braves for all they have acheived the last 15 years, won't be remembered much 50 years from now. >>
True fans--not the casual observer--will vehemently disagree with this obviously poorly thought out statement. If baseball as we know it exists in a half-century the Braves will be remembered and APPRECIATED more than they are now. What they have accomplished is truly fantastic in today's climate. We place so much emphasis on championships that we lose sight of everyday greatness. Bobby Cox said it best after the Braves won the World Series in 1995. He was asked "Do you feel this gets the post-season monkey off your backs and validates this team as the Team of the 90's?"
He replied, "Hey, we coulda lost this one. We coulda won the other ones. You gotta be good for sure, but in October, you gotta get a little lucky, too. We found some breaks and this year we were the hot club. Next year, I could be in that other locker room if one of our guys boots a ball or hangs a slider--I'm not sure that has anything to do with monkeys, does it? Not to real baseball people, anyway. "
Ironically, the following year, the Braves were in COMPLETE command of the Series against the Yankees when Mark Wohlers hung a slider to Jimmy Leyritz and the Braves were never in it again. It's been a decade and I still remember it like yesterday. The fact is, the Yankees were a better team for five days. They play it again a week later and the result could be different. Great teams, like the Yankees seem to take advantage of breaks.
Perhaps my point of view is skewed because I make my living in the game and know how hard it is to have success and even harder to maintain it. It is a daily grind of meticulous preparation, focus, and unshakeable confidence. It is about trust in your staff and people above you and below you on the club's chain of command. It is about finding the same page and resisting the temptation to undermine each-other and stick to what you believe in against the media's wishes as well as the fans' or booster club. People in the game understand this, the casual fan does not--nor does he have to. My point is that remembering the Braves 50 years from now--God willing--will depend more on who you are than what they've accomplished. They are a fantastic organization and a benchmark of consistency in the game's rich history. Anyone that would call them out for only winning one World title is just not in tune with the realities of the game.
Ive always thought of the Atlanta Braves a little like the Brooklyn Dodgers of 1947-1956. They were always good, but just only won 1 World Series. But they have been remembered as a great team. The Braves may not be as beloved, but I would guess they would be remembered positively similar to the Dodgers.
<< <i>Ive always thought of the Atlanta Braves a little like the Brooklyn Dodgers of 1947-1956. They were always good, but just only won 1 World Series. But they have been remembered as a great team. The Braves may not be as beloved, but I would guess they would be remembered positively similar to the Dodgers. >>
The Braves of the early to mid nineties were in fact great teams through '96. The remaining teams have been well coached/managed, but they have dramatically benifitted from being in a division with the incompetent Mets, Phils, Expos and Marlins. Obviously excepting the '00 Mets and WS champion Marlins as that is three great teams they beat out in 10+ years of competition.
The Braves are experts at cultivating pitching which has given them an edge in probaby 75% of the games they have played for the last decade. Unfortunately when they get to the playoffs the other teams have good pitching as well and their lineup or bullpen gets exposed. Year after year this happens.
<< <i>The remaining teams have been well coached/managed, but they have dramatically benifitted from being in a division with the incompetent Mets, Phils, Expos and Marlins. Obviously excepting the '00 Mets and WS champion Marlins as that is three great teams they beat out in 10+ years of competition. >>
I think this statement is too general. They have multiple 100+ win seasons after 1996. The division the Braves come from has yielded multiple World Champions and perennially the top wild-card contender if not the wild card. I would hardly say the Braves have benefitted in any way, shape, or form from an easy division. The AL East, NL Central, each have two legitimate contenders each year--little else. The NL West sends mediocrity more often than not to October. The AL Central is baseball's weakest over the time span from 1996-2005. The most interesting division has been the AL West. They have had numerous powers emerge since the mid-90's and none have finished the job. The Rangers were contenders, the Mariners have been all-world at times, the A's have been consistently strong and the Angels have fielded a strong club more times than not. Still, with little excpetion, the Atlanta Braves have been baseball's best team during the 162-game grind year-in and year-out regardless of their division. True, the post-season recently (since 2003) has exposed well managed teams that lacked the offense and star-power to compete in a short series. To say that they are the product of a particularily weak division is false.
<< <i>The Atlanta Braves for all they have acheived the last 15 years, won't be remembered much 50 years from now. >>
True fans--not the casual observer--will vehemently disagree with this obviously poorly thought out statement.
dgf >>
Phil, what the Braves have done in the last 15 years is just an incredible exhibit of consistent great work by both the front office and the coaching staff of the Braves. I would never argue this, nor, would I "call them out". IMO, the Braves of this generation wil be looked at as a very good team year in and year out. Plenty of things to point out during the span. The great pitching, ability to produce players from the farm system, and some very good hitters over the span of 15 years. What the Braves have never had, is a rock solid bullpen. This is the biggest reason IMO that they have not been able to win more than the one World Series. A very good team over a very long period of time, but certainly a flawed and vunerable team over the entire span of 15 or so years.
Comments
????? An $84,000,000 difference is right behind? The DIFFERENCE in spending between the Yankees and Sox is more than the total payroll of 20 other teams and you consider that "Right behind". Absolute dillusional Yankee nonesense. If you need a lesson in finance, just ask your buddy frolico.
Also, please come up with something better than deep down inside I think it's wrong and have a problem with MLB or whatever. We've already had this conversation. At length. In another thread. Where I made it pretty clear, to your satisfaction, that I have no problems at all with the Yankee spending. I've never complained, or said it's wrong. They've got the money, they spend the money. And that's why it's so rewarding for me and the rest of the world when they underachieve and lose.
So teams may underachieve by not winning the series, but once the playoffs start, it is as much luck as skill.
<< <i>Text book definition of underachieving based on payroll? Ok, your Red Sox are right behind the Yankees in that case
????? An $84,000,000 difference is right behind? The DIFFERENCE in spending between the Yankees and Sox is more than the total payroll of 20 other teams and you consider that "Right behind". Absolute dillusional Yankee nonesense. If you need a lesson in finance, just ask your buddy frolico.
Also, please come up with something better than deep down inside I think it's wrong and have a problem with MLB or whatever. We've already had this conversation. At length. In another thread. Where I made it pretty clear, to your satisfaction, that I have no problems at all with the Yankee spending. I've never complained, or said it's wrong. They've got the money, they spend the money. And that's why it's so rewarding for me and the rest of the world when they underachieve and lose. >>
I don't care how much more loot the Yankees spend than the Red Sox. The fact is, the Red SOx spent more than EVERY TEAM in the game except the Yankees. The disparity between the two teams does not change that FACT. Which is fine, they are ALLOWED to buy their playoff appearances too. You can't sit there are moan about the Yankees payroll when almost every team in the game CAN NOT spend what the Red SOx are spending either!.
ISO 1978 Topps Baseball in NM-MT High Grade Raw 3, 100, 103, 302, 347, 376, 416, 466, 481, 487, 509, 534, 540, 554, 579, 580, 622, 642, 673, 724__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ISO 1978 O-Pee-Chee in NM-MT High Grade Raw12, 21, 29, 38, 49, 65, 69, 73, 74, 81, 95, 100, 104, 110, 115, 122, 132, 133, 135, 140, 142, 151, 153, 155, 160, 161, 167, 168, 172, 179, 181, 196, 200, 204, 210, 224, 231, 240
I'm moaning about the Yankee payroll? This is ridiculous. I give up. You win.
<< <i>
????? An $84,000,000 difference is right behind? The DIFFERENCE in spending between the Yankees and Sox is more than the total payroll of 20 other teams and you consider that "Right behind". Absolute dillusional Yankee nonesense. If you need a lesson in finance, just ask your buddy frolico.
Also, please come up with something better than deep down inside I think it's wrong and have a problem with MLB or whatever. We've already had this conversation. At length. In another thread. Where I made it pretty clear, to your satisfaction, that I have no problems at all with the Yankee spending. I've never complained, or said it's wrong. They've got the money, they spend the money. And that's why it's so rewarding for me and the rest of the world when they underachieve and lose. >>
yep, I would say there is some maoning going on. It is rewarding to you when the Yankees season ends early becuase they have a gigantic payroll. You have a problem with that. That is fine, take it up with MLB, you know , the ones that are too weak kneed to seriously try and defeat the players union!.
ISO 1978 Topps Baseball in NM-MT High Grade Raw 3, 100, 103, 302, 347, 376, 416, 466, 481, 487, 509, 534, 540, 554, 579, 580, 622, 642, 673, 724__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ISO 1978 O-Pee-Chee in NM-MT High Grade Raw12, 21, 29, 38, 49, 65, 69, 73, 74, 81, 95, 100, 104, 110, 115, 122, 132, 133, 135, 140, 142, 151, 153, 155, 160, 161, 167, 168, 172, 179, 181, 196, 200, 204, 210, 224, 231, 240
Are you saying that 20 teams have payrolls of 4 million each?
Please clarify that statement DG
SD
There are 20 teams in baseball than spent less than the difference between the Yankees and Red Sox payrolls.
The Yankees spent $84 million more than the Red Sox, and there were 20 teams that did not spend $84 on their own team salaries.
The Yankee payroll was $205 million, vs $121 million for the Red Sox. That DIFFERENCE in spending ($84 million) is more than 20 other teams spent.
The LA Dodgers Houston Chicago Sox Baltimore Detroit Arizona San Diego Florida Cincinnati Minnesota Oakland Texas Washington Colorado Toronto Cleveland Milwaukee Pittsburgh Tampa Bay Kansas City all spent less than $84 million on salaries, which is the difference between the Sox and Yankees
Softparade was ridiculous in calling that "right behind"
Crystal?
You're doing it again. This seems very familiar to the spat we had some time ago. You have trouble interpreting information sometimes and get defensive to the point of fault. Admittedly, this is not my argument--I think you're a Yankee fan and to be proud of that great franchise is certainly understandable--but I do feel you should evaluate your arguments sometimes and pick your battles more carefully.
The
<< <i>The Atlanta Braves for all they have acheived the last 15 years, won't be remembered much 50 years from now. >>
True fans--not the casual observer--will vehemently disagree with this obviously poorly thought out statement. If baseball as we know it exists in a half-century the Braves will be remembered and APPRECIATED more than they are now. What they have accomplished is truly fantastic in today's climate. We place so much emphasis on championships that we lose sight of everyday greatness. Bobby Cox said it best after the Braves won the World Series in 1995. He was asked "Do you feel this gets the post-season monkey off your backs and validates this team as the Team of the 90's?"
He replied, "Hey, we coulda lost this one. We coulda won the other ones. You gotta be good for sure, but in October, you gotta get a little lucky, too. We found some breaks and this year we were the hot club. Next year, I could be in that other locker room if one of our guys boots a ball or hangs a slider--I'm not sure that has anything to do with monkeys, does it? Not to real baseball people, anyway. "
Ironically, the following year, the Braves were in COMPLETE command of the Series against the Yankees when Mark Wohlers hung a slider to Jimmy Leyritz and the Braves were never in it again. It's been a decade and I still remember it like yesterday. The fact is, the Yankees were a better team for five days. They play it again a week later and the result could be different. Great teams, like the Yankees seem to take advantage of breaks.
Perhaps my point of view is skewed because I make my living in the game and know how hard it is to have success and even harder to maintain it. It is a daily grind of meticulous preparation, focus, and unshakeable confidence. It is about trust in your staff and people above you and below you on the club's chain of command. It is about finding the same page and resisting the temptation to undermine each-other and stick to what you believe in against the media's wishes as well as the fans' or booster club. People in the game understand this, the casual fan does not--nor does he have to. My point is that remembering the Braves 50 years from now--God willing--will depend more on who you are than what they've accomplished. They are a fantastic organization and a benchmark of consistency in the game's rich history. Anyone that would call them out for only winning one World title is just not in tune with the realities of the game.
dgf
<< <i>Ive always thought of the Atlanta Braves a little like the Brooklyn Dodgers of 1947-1956. They were always good, but just only won 1 World Series. But they have been remembered as a great team. The Braves may not be as beloved, but I would guess they would be remembered positively similar to the Dodgers. >>
The Braves of the early to mid nineties were in fact great teams through '96. The remaining teams have been well coached/managed, but they have dramatically benifitted from being in a division with the incompetent Mets, Phils, Expos and Marlins. Obviously excepting the '00 Mets and WS champion Marlins as that is three great teams they beat out in 10+ years of competition.
The Braves are experts at cultivating pitching which has given them an edge in probaby 75% of the games they have played for the last decade. Unfortunately when they get to the playoffs the other teams have good pitching as well and their lineup or bullpen gets exposed. Year after year this happens.
<< <i>The remaining teams have been well coached/managed, but they have dramatically benifitted from being in a division with the incompetent Mets, Phils, Expos and Marlins. Obviously excepting the '00 Mets and WS champion Marlins as that is three great teams they beat out in 10+ years of competition. >>
I think this statement is too general. They have multiple 100+ win seasons after 1996. The division the Braves come from has yielded multiple World Champions and perennially the top wild-card contender if not the wild card. I would hardly say the Braves have benefitted in any way, shape, or form from an easy division. The AL East, NL Central, each have two legitimate contenders each year--little else. The NL West sends mediocrity more often than not to October. The AL Central is baseball's weakest over the time span from 1996-2005. The most interesting division has been the AL West. They have had numerous powers emerge since the mid-90's and none have finished the job. The Rangers were contenders, the Mariners have been all-world at times, the A's have been consistently strong and the Angels have fielded a strong club more times than not. Still, with little excpetion, the Atlanta Braves have been baseball's best team during the 162-game grind year-in and year-out regardless of their division.
True, the post-season recently (since 2003) has exposed well managed teams that lacked the offense and star-power to compete in a short series. To say that they are the product of a particularily weak division is false.
dgf
<< <i>
<< <i>The Atlanta Braves for all they have acheived the last 15 years, won't be remembered much 50 years from now. >>
True fans--not the casual observer--will vehemently disagree with this obviously poorly thought out statement.
dgf >>
Phil, what the Braves have done in the last 15 years is just an incredible exhibit of consistent great work by both the front office and the coaching staff of the Braves. I would never argue this, nor, would I "call them out". IMO, the Braves of this generation wil be looked at as a very good team year in and year out. Plenty of things to point out during the span. The great pitching, ability to produce players from the farm system, and some very good hitters over the span of 15 years. What the Braves have never had, is a rock solid bullpen. This is the biggest reason IMO that they have not been able to win more than the one World Series. A very good team over a very long period of time, but certainly a flawed and vunerable team over the entire span of 15 or so years.
ISO 1978 Topps Baseball in NM-MT High Grade Raw 3, 100, 103, 302, 347, 376, 416, 466, 481, 487, 509, 534, 540, 554, 579, 580, 622, 642, 673, 724__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ISO 1978 O-Pee-Chee in NM-MT High Grade Raw12, 21, 29, 38, 49, 65, 69, 73, 74, 81, 95, 100, 104, 110, 115, 122, 132, 133, 135, 140, 142, 151, 153, 155, 160, 161, 167, 168, 172, 179, 181, 196, 200, 204, 210, 224, 231, 240