Good news for Mets fans
stevek
Posts: 29,037 ✭✭✭✭✭
in Sports Talk
Mayor Bloomberg has announced that all NY bars will stay open all night to accommodate Mets fans who want to drown their sorrows knowing already that they have no hope, no chance whatsoever, to win the NL East in 2010.
Before heading over to your local tavern, Mets fans may want to practise saying, "Thank you Bartender, may I have another"
Before heading over to your local tavern, Mets fans may want to practise saying, "Thank you Bartender, may I have another"
0
Comments
<< <i>Mayor Bloomberg has announced that all NY bars will stay open all night to accommodate Mets fans who want to drown their sorrows knowing already that they have no hope, no chance whatsoever, to win the NL East in 2010. Before heading over to your local tavern, Mets fans may want to practise saying, "Thank you Bartender, may I have another" >>
First of all, we did not have to wait for the Mayor to make this announcement, as all of us good NEW YAWKAS have ALWAYS had a local we could go to at any hour of the day.
Second, we don't need any practice ... We have had enough!
Yeah, things do not look very good for the Mets.
Doug
Liquidating my collection for the 3rd and final time. Time for others to enjoy what I have enjoyed over the last several decades. Money could be put to better use.
1994 Pro Line Live
TheDallasCowboyBackfieldProject
or signed them to Yankee size contracts.
Baseball needs a return to the reserve clause and a salary cap so teams like the Phillies
can't buy pennants like they did in 09.
Steve
<< <i>We know what would have happened had they been playing today, the Phillies would have stolen them
or signed them to Yankee size contracts.
Baseball needs a return to the reserve clause and a salary cap so teams like the Phillies
can't buy pennants like they did in 09.
Steve >>
oh I luvs it when Mets fans are hissed.
WinPitcher, question for ya...how many games will the Mets be out of first place in 2010? Ten, twenty, thirty? forty? fifty?.........ah ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.........................
Sounds ridiculous right?
Steve
spend like the Yankees.
Steve
<< <i>Practice? We talkin bout practice. Practice? >>
I didn't know Iverson was a two sport athelete. What position does he play for the lowly mets?
<< <i>lol I'm not 'hissed' I'm simply showing you how YOU have sounded all these years.
Sounds ridiculous right?
Steve >>
Nope, because I am still in favor of a salary cap. MLB would be better, much better in my opinion, if all teams had an equal chance to compete. To me the game is about entertainment, and MLB would be much more entertaining and interesting when on a level playing field for ALL teams.
Fortunately the Phillies are now in a position to compete which is great. However I remember the days when they couldn't compete and it wasn't right then, and it's not right now for teams that can't in reality compete for free agents.
Wow - to root for a team with the second highest payroll in MLB and they finished over 20 games out...that must really, REALLY suck. LOL
You may still be in favor of a cap, (which could never work) but I don't hear you complaining that YOUR team is now spending like the Yankees.
I guess if it is YOUR team it's ok. If it's a NY, LA or Boston team it's not. Is that the way it is? You keep bringing up last year, who cares? I don't.
What I care about is your obvious flip flop regarding how much teams spend on payroll. When your team was in the middle of the pack you couldn't
wait to post how it was so bad for baseball. Or how it was so unfair to the small market teams.
YOUR team now spends more than 85% of all teams how is that fair? How is it fair that teams like Pittsburgh and KC can't compete with the Phillies?
It's easy to say 'I'm in favor of a salary cap' then giggle while your team hands out multi million dollar contracts and approaches 150 million in payroll.
It's even easier to say 'I'm in favor of salary caps' And never ever say exactly how much the cap should be. I guess it should be whatever the Phillies spend now?
Steve
<< <i>The world would be a better place if everyone had the same things too Steve, ain't gonna happen.
You may still be in favor of a cap, (which could never work) but I don't hear you complaining that YOUR team is now spending like the Yankees.
I guess if it is YOUR team it's ok. If it's a NY, LA or Boston team it's not. Is that the way it is? You keep bringing up last year, who cares? I don't.
What I care about is your obvious flip flop regarding how much teams spend on payroll. When your team was in the middle of the pack you couldn't
wait to post how it was so bad for baseball. Or how it was so unfair to the small market teams.
YOUR team now spends more than 85% of all teams how is that fair? How is it fair that teams like Pittsburgh and KC can't compete with the Phillies?
It's easy to say 'I'm in favor of a salary cap' then giggle while your team hands out multi million dollar contracts and approaches 150 million in payroll.
It's even easier to say 'I'm in favor of salary caps' And never ever say exactly how much the cap should be. I guess it should be whatever the Phillies spend now?
Steve >>
There was no "flip flop" from me Steve and you know it - The excessive spending by ALL teams is bad for baseball...but the Yankees started all this crap and they and the Mets perpetuated it, and continue to perpetuate it - the other teams you mentioned had to try to compete or get trampled on year after year. Yes, of course I'm happy that the Phillies are competing and winning, I'm VERY happy, but in reality, excessive spending like this overall is not good for MLB, in my opinion.
Unfortunately, if a salary cap hasn't happened by now, it's unlikely to happen at this point until teams such as the Yankees begin filing for Chapter 11...then it would happen.
I think the Phillies would file for chapter 11 before the Yanks ever do.
One other point, you do know what is next don't you? Soon YOU will be priced out of seeing your Phillies
in person and will have to either pay up or watch em on TV.
The silence is deafening.
Steve
Yanks about to sign Nick Johnson.
I'll bet Damon goes to the Mets.
<< <i>So now the Phillies are perpetuating it and you are silent.
I think the Phillies would file for chapter 11 before the Yanks ever do.
One other point, you do know what is next don't you? Soon YOU will be priced out of seeing your Phillies
in person and will have to either pay up or watch em on TV.
The silence is deafening.
Steve >>
I have no idea what "silence" you are talking about? The Yankees and Mets have spent money like it grows on trees...so the Phillies and some other teams with a desire to win had to respond as necessary because of that. Case closed.
1994 Pro Line Live
TheDallasCowboyBackfieldProject
Hold on, one one side of your mouth you make the claim the Mets will be in last place 30 games out.
So why do the Phillies have to spend so much money?
lol I just love how you put all the blame on the NY teams. Guess you have no idea who signed Arod to that 1/4 billion dollar contract.
LA and Chicago and Detroit have all done the very same thing, get off the anti NY bandwagon Steve, come up with something original.
The bottom line is the Phillies will end up with probably the 2nd highest payroll in the bigs next year and you haven't said a peep
about it.
Case is far from closed.
If the Mets are going to be so bad next year why are the Phillies spending like drunken sailors? What are they afraid of?
The Marlins?
Steve
Join the club, been that way in NY for a few years now.
Steve
<< <i>Oh yeah? I bet ya Mr Met could beat up the Phillie Phanatic with his eyes closed. Take that! >>
I just never seen this emotion used before.
<< <i>The Yankees and Mets have spent money like it grows on trees...so the Phillies and some other teams with a desire to win had to respond as necessary because of that. Case closed. >>
Actually, for the Yankees, the money does grow on trees. The desire to win does NOT require spending like a drunken sailor on shore leave, but spending wisely and making sound business decisions.
One only need look at the difference between the Oakland A's and Minnesota Twins versus the likes of the Pittsburgh Pirates and Kansas City Royals to draw a reasonable comparison and work on an apples-to-apples basis. The A's and Twins have spent their monies on scouting and minor league development and have been rather consistent in producing quality talent and a quality on-field product while being in the bottom tier of revenue production. Relatively equal revenue producing squads like the Pirates and Royals have been abysmal in their on-field performance despite superior facilities and higher draft positions.
A quick glance around the league will show that all of the four teams have produced some quality talent only to have it leave when the players approached arbitration. Sadly, only the A's and Twins have made reasonable decisions on what to get in return (albeit, the Santana deal was a complete travesty). The Pirates have shipped off the likes of Nyjer Morgan, Nate McClouth, Jason Bay, Adam LaRoche and others while getting little in return. In the meantime, they're pocketing millions upon millions in profits.
Baseball's inequity is in the differing revenue streams and what teams choose to do with their revenue. Owners are not losing money. They're choosing whether to profit less to put a winning team on the field or profit more and sell off their assets and then cry the "uneven playing field" mantra while cashing their revenue sharing checks from the teams that they're pointing their fingers at.
John Hart made a shrewd decision when he was the GM of the Indians in signing longer contracts for his younger players. He locked up the likes of Albert Belle, Manny Ramirez, Carlos Baerga, Kenny Lofton and Jim Thome prior to them being arbitration eligible and saved the team huge money AND making the players easily tradeable near the end of their contracts because they still had prime years left and were below market in salary. This only works if you have quality talent that is accurately assessed and are committed to the team's future. Could the Pirates have locked up the likes of Jason Bay, Nyjer Morgan, Nate McClouth and others? Sure! Could the Twins have done the same with Morneau, Santana, Mauer and Liriano? Absolutely.
The only difference between the Yankees and most other clubs is that the Yankees can "afford" to make a mistake and bury a $10-30 million dollar contract on someone that doesn't pan out (Jaret Wright, Carl Pavano, Drew Henson, Steve Karsay, etc...).
<< <i>
<< <i>The Yankees and Mets have spent money like it grows on trees...so the Phillies and some other teams with a desire to win had to respond as necessary because of that. Case closed. >>
Actually, for the Yankees, the money does grow on trees. The desire to win does NOT require spending like a drunken sailor on shore leave, but spending wisely and making sound business decisions.
One only need look at the difference between the Oakland A's and Minnesota Twins versus the likes of the Pittsburgh Pirates and Kansas City Royals to draw a reasonable comparison and work on an apples-to-apples basis. The A's and Twins have spent their monies on scouting and minor league development and have been rather consistent in producing quality talent and a quality on-field product while being in the bottom tier of revenue production. Relatively equal revenue producing squads like the Pirates and Royals have been abysmal in their on-field performance despite superior facilities and higher draft positions.
A quick glance around the league will show that all of the four teams have produced some quality talent only to have it leave when the players approached arbitration. Sadly, only the A's and Twins have made reasonable decisions on what to get in return (albeit, the Santana deal was a complete travesty). The Pirates have shipped off the likes of Nyjer Morgan, Nate McClouth, Jason Bay, Adam LaRoche and others while getting little in return. In the meantime, they're pocketing millions upon millions in profits.
Baseball's inequity is in the differing revenue streams and what teams choose to do with their revenue. Owners are not losing money. They're choosing whether to profit less to put a winning team on the field or profit more and sell off their assets and then cry the "uneven playing field" mantra while cashing their revenue sharing checks from the teams that they're pointing their fingers at.
John Hart made a shrewd decision when he was the GM of the Indians in signing longer contracts for his younger players. He locked up the likes of Albert Belle, Manny Ramirez, Carlos Baerga, Kenny Lofton and Jim Thome prior to them being arbitration eligible and saved the team huge money AND making the players easily tradeable near the end of their contracts because they still had prime years left and were below market in salary. This only works if you have quality talent that is accurately assessed and are committed to the team's future. Could the Pirates have locked up the likes of Jason Bay, Nyjer Morgan, Nate McClouth and others? Sure! Could the Twins have done the same with Morneau, Santana, Mauer and Liriano? Absolutely.
The only difference between the Yankees and most other clubs is that the Yankees can "afford" to make a mistake and bury a $10-30 million dollar contract on someone that doesn't pan out (Jaret Wright, Carl Pavano, Drew Henson, Steve Karsay, etc...). >>
<<< The only difference between the Yankees and most other clubs is that the Yankees can "afford" to make a mistake and bury a $10-30 million dollar contract on someone that doesn't pan out (Jaret Wright, Carl Pavano, Drew Henson, Steve Karsay, etc...). >>>
You just contradicted your own point with this paragraph. It's humorous to me how some NY fans will spin the obvious facts to justify their silly position towards free agency and a discussed salary cap. I have more respect for NY fans who just state something such as, "Yea, I'm a greedy bastige, I luv when my Yankees walk all over teams and steal their players anytime and everytime they can" - Go ahead OTW, admit that you luv the way the Yankees steal players from other teams...you'll feel better.
Sounds like what Philly fans ought to be saying these days, too...
It's amusing to me how Steve can criticize NY fans in one breath and then defend the Phillies for "just trying to keep up" in the next. Talk about hypocrisy, LOL!!
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
<< <i>Yea, I'm a greedy bastige, I luv when my Yankees walk all over teams and steal their players anytime and everytime they can"
Sounds like what Philly fans ought to be saying these days, too...
It's amusing to me how Steve can criticize NY fans in one breath and then defend the Phillies for "just trying to keep up" in the next. Talk about hypocrisy, LOL!! >>
No hyprocrisy from me...New York teams started it...other teams had to do the same or windup perennial also rans. The spin comes from some NY fans who want to maintain the status quo without having any form of salary cap...and these fans simply not admitting it that they luv it that way...now that's hypocrisy.
<< <i>
<<< The only difference between the Yankees and most other clubs is that the Yankees can "afford" to make a mistake and bury a $10-30 million dollar contract on someone that doesn't pan out (Jaret Wright, Carl Pavano, Drew Henson, Steve Karsay, etc...). >>>
You just contradicted your own point with this paragraph. It's humorous to me how some NY fans will spin the obvious facts to justify their silly position towards free agency and a discussed salary cap. I have more respect for NY fans who just state something such as, "Yea, I'm a greedy bastige, I luv when my Yankees walk all over teams and steal their players anytime and everytime they can" - Go ahead OTW, admit that you luv the way the Yankees steal players from other teams...you'll feel better. >>
Steve:
I'm not sure if you're biologically challenged or what, but there's NOTHING contradictory about what I said. Perhaps you should consider taking notes when you read or using a dictionary so you can understand the polysyllabic words.
My first sentence: "Actually, for the Yankees, the money does grow on trees." And my last sentence: "The only difference between the Yankees and most other clubs is that the Yankees can "afford" to make a mistake and bury a $10-30 million dollar contract on someone that doesn't pan out (Jaret Wright, Carl Pavano, Drew Henson, Steve Karsay, etc...). "
I really don't care what you think about much of anything. You've demonstrated that you think on one track and one track only. YOUR'S! And there is NEVER anything wrong when it's your opinion.
You want to shout about parity, salary caps, controlled spending and the like? Go right ahead. You want to troll and bait and try to sucker someone in? Keep at it. But when you want to have a discussion based upon facts rather than spewing out rhetoric and false assumptions, then perhaps I'll give pause to engage. Until such time, I will refrain from any engagement as talking with you is like trying to convince a Mets fan that Daniel Murphy is nothing more than a bench player.
lol Yep. Somehow with a straight face he puts the blame on NY.
Steve
LOL, that's about as accurate an assessment as I've seen, and it's not even debatable, LOL!!
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
He did? I think you misunderstood him.
All he was simply saying was that the Yanks can afford to make a mistake. (Which they can) exactly where did he contradict himself?
The only person that has been contradicting himself has been YOU.
On one side of your mouth for the last 4 years you been crying about how much certain teams pay. Now YOUR tean is doing the exact thing and instead of
manning up you blame it on what NY has been doing. Steve you lose credibility when you spin.
Steve
Really? Guess you missed my post where I said that I have been priced out of going to a game, Love it this way? Hardly.
Accept it? Well I can't do anything about except not spend my money on them.
So that is what I do, You assume that I love it this way, you are dead wrong!
Being a realist, and understanding that a cap would never work, let alone ever be approved by the players I have accepted
the reality of what baseball has become. I could whine and shout about caps too, I choose to be more informed I guess.
Steve
<< <i>
<< <i>
<<< The only difference between the Yankees and most other clubs is that the Yankees can "afford" to make a mistake and bury a $10-30 million dollar contract on someone that doesn't pan out (Jaret Wright, Carl Pavano, Drew Henson, Steve Karsay, etc...). >>>
You just contradicted your own point with this paragraph. It's humorous to me how some NY fans will spin the obvious facts to justify their silly position towards free agency and a discussed salary cap. I have more respect for NY fans who just state something such as, "Yea, I'm a greedy bastige, I luv when my Yankees walk all over teams and steal their players anytime and everytime they can" - Go ahead OTW, admit that you luv the way the Yankees steal players from other teams...you'll feel better. >>
Steve:
I'm not sure if you're biologically challenged or what, but there's NOTHING contradictory about what I said. Perhaps you should consider taking notes when you read or using a dictionary so you can understand the polysyllabic words.
My first sentence: "Actually, for the Yankees, the money does grow on trees." And my last sentence: "The only difference between the Yankees and most other clubs is that the Yankees can "afford" to make a mistake and bury a $10-30 million dollar contract on someone that doesn't pan out (Jaret Wright, Carl Pavano, Drew Henson, Steve Karsay, etc...). "
I really don't care what you think about much of anything. You've demonstrated that you think on one track and one track only. YOUR'S! And there is NEVER anything wrong when it's your opinion.
You want to shout about parity, salary caps, controlled spending and the like? Go right ahead. You want to troll and bait and try to sucker someone in? Keep at it. But when you want to have a discussion based upon facts rather than spewing out rhetoric and false assumptions, then perhaps I'll give pause to engage. Until such time, I will refrain from any engagement as talking with you is like trying to convince a Mets fan that Daniel Murphy is nothing more than a bench player. >>
OTW - I'll try to explain your own comment to you because, based on that comment, you seem to have no business acumen whatsoever.
<<< The only difference between the Yankees and most other clubs is that the Yankees can "afford" to make a mistake and bury a $10-30 million dollar contract on someone that doesn't pan out (Jaret Wright, Carl Pavano, Drew Henson, Steve Karsay, etc...). >>>
This is probably one of the most ignorant statements I've read in this forum from someone who is trying to make a case with his own point - you contradicted yourself and you don't even understand why? LOL
The fact that you mention the Yankees can afford to make a mistake actually reinforces and solidifies the obvious, clearly obvious, point I've been trying to make to some "see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil" Yankees fans who like the "wise monkeys" don't want to admit that under Steinbrenner he was "stealing" players from other teams - this isn't even debatable...not even remotely debatable, but you and those like WinPitcher don't want to acknowledge how other fans suffered because of that.
How would you like it if your hero Mickey Mantle or Derek Jeter would have been lost to another team because the Yankees couldn't afford to sign them? You wouldn't have liked that very much now would you? Just admit that you enjoy being a Yankees fan, that you enjoy being a fan of a bully owner and organization who has for years through various methods stolen other players from other teams, and stop acting like a wise monkey.
Back to your ignorant comment - The fact that the Yankees "can afford to make a mistake" as you put it and I completely agree with that...and that other teams CAN'T afford it...gives the Yankees a huge financial business advantage over other teams in which a salary cap would negate that advantage. Thanks for making my point with your own contradictory statement. LOL
The Mets tried to copy the Yankees business model, but for a variety of reasons they couldn't do it as well...for one big reason they didn't have as much money. But at least the Yankees won a championship this past season...the Mets are now in my opinion, given all the factors involved, truly the most pathetic team in MLB.
<< <i>.and these fans simply not admitting it that they luv it that way..
Really? Guess you missed my post where I said that I have been priced out of going to a game, Love it this way? Hardly.
Accept it? Well I can't do anything about except not spend my money on them.
So that is what I do, You assume that I love it this way, you are dead wrong!
Being a realist, and understanding that a cap would never work, let alone ever be approved by the players I have accepted
the reality of what baseball has become. I could whine and shout about caps too, I choose to be more informed I guess.
Steve >>
Steve - Of course I didn't miss your point about being priced out of attending the games...because that is a valid point - completely valid.
I was basically referring to the majority of fans in any city who attend very few or maybe no games throughout the season, but just watch their team on TV so technically it's not costing them anything other than perhaps a few bucks a month on their cable bill. To these fans, the majority of fans in any city, why wouldn't they luv it when their team signs expensive free agents? The Yankees could spend a half billion dollars or more on player's salaries and it really wouldn't tangibly affect most fans monetarily.
Yes, MLB is a business, and the fact is that a company like Walmart put a lot of smaller businesses, out of business, and that's what happens in capitalism and a free society, and in my opinion that's healthy for society. Smaller businesses that have adjusted their business model to offer newer or different or better items than Walmart have and can prosper against them, and then overall consumers can receive a better selection of goods and services. Some would call Walmart a "bully" because of their financial advantage over the competition, but I've got no problem with any of that, and in fact I am a conservative and strongly believe in the capitalist system. But MLB is different and I don't think I have to explain to YOU why that is...so in my view it would be a fairer game to most ALL teams, and I believe a better and more entertaining game to ALL fans, including Yankees fans, if there were a salary cap in place and teams would not have to "automatically" lose their star players.
PS: To OTW...if you're confused about my comments regarding the capitalist system since you seem to have little clue about how the world of business works, PM your buddy Grote15 and perhaps he could explain the capitalist system to you.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<<< The only difference between the Yankees and most other clubs is that the Yankees can "afford" to make a mistake and bury a $10-30 million dollar contract on someone that doesn't pan out (Jaret Wright, Carl Pavano, Drew Henson, Steve Karsay, etc...). >>>
You just contradicted your own point with this paragraph. It's humorous to me how some NY fans will spin the obvious facts to justify their silly position towards free agency and a discussed salary cap. I have more respect for NY fans who just state something such as, "Yea, I'm a greedy bastige, I luv when my Yankees walk all over teams and steal their players anytime and everytime they can" - Go ahead OTW, admit that you luv the way the Yankees steal players from other teams...you'll feel better. >>
Steve:
I'm not sure if you're biologically challenged or what, but there's NOTHING contradictory about what I said. Perhaps you should consider taking notes when you read or using a dictionary so you can understand the polysyllabic words.
My first sentence: "Actually, for the Yankees, the money does grow on trees." And my last sentence: "The only difference between the Yankees and most other clubs is that the Yankees can "afford" to make a mistake and bury a $10-30 million dollar contract on someone that doesn't pan out (Jaret Wright, Carl Pavano, Drew Henson, Steve Karsay, etc...). "
I really don't care what you think about much of anything. You've demonstrated that you think on one track and one track only. YOUR'S! And there is NEVER anything wrong when it's your opinion.
You want to shout about parity, salary caps, controlled spending and the like? Go right ahead. You want to troll and bait and try to sucker someone in? Keep at it. But when you want to have a discussion based upon facts rather than spewing out rhetoric and false assumptions, then perhaps I'll give pause to engage. Until such time, I will refrain from any engagement as talking with you is like trying to convince a Mets fan that Daniel Murphy is nothing more than a bench player. >>
Maybe we didn't have much success with number 10 on the list huh?
Snow Day To Do List
For the village idiot that is too busy screaming at the top of his lungs about a salary cap and New York fans being blind and ignorant, perhaps he should give up his one track mantra and address the points being made rather than wasting his time trying to put words into others' mouths and argue a point that no one else is making.
As I HAVE stated previously, a salary cap will NEVER happen in baseball. Rather than crying the same tired story, why not address what needs to be addressed and that is ownership that prefers bottom line profit over fielding a competitive team. I understand that many owners are in the business to make money. That's what businessmen do. But as I cited, teams like Minnesota and Oakland have proven that they can be consistently competitive even in a small market without spending inordinate sums of money. Likewise, teams like Pittsburgh, Kansas City have demonstrated that they cannot win even when they are on the same playing field as the Twins and A's.
The Oaklands and Minnesotas of the league will always struggle to compete and have to work even harder to even stay in the race with the likes of Boston, New York and Los Angeles who can spend more AND sign or trade and extend players that the small market teams can no longer afford or choose not to pay.
On the flip side, there are teams like the Cubs, Orioles and to a lesser extent, the Mets that have significant revenue, spend that revenue and still cannot consistently field a team that measures up to the volume of dollars that they've spent. Luckily, the Orioles have finally seen the light and have taken notes on the Twins playbook and are developing young pitching and trading off players that do not fit into their long term plans for quality young talent.
Baseball is NOT like normal business where the weak go bankrupt. It is a league that is dependent upon all teams to provide competition and to generate revenue through gate receipts, concessions, marketing and many other avenues. There is also a revenue sharing plan, albeit nothing like the NFL, that provides stipends to the smaller market teams. This is another aspect that doesn't exist in the "real" business world. You don't see WalMart giving revenue to the small stores in the area.
When some will learn that baseball isn't like the real world and that real world rules can't be applied like a blanket, then perhaps we can get past the big bad large market teams screwing it up for everyone else. I don't see ownership for the Pirates or Royals crying about turning a profit! I just hear their fans pining for a team that is can play meaningful baseball until at least the All-Star break.
Jason Bay Rumors: Sunday
By Luke Adams [December 20 at 9:42am CST]
Bill Madden of the New York Daily News writes that Jason Bay can thank his agent, Joe Urbon, for pricing him out of a good situation in Boston. With no obvious bidders remaining for Bay besides the New York Mets, Madden says that Urbon returned to the Red Sox to see if they would revisit negotiations with Bay. The Sox, however, having signed Mike Cameron, no longer appear interested.
Madden thinks that Bay's reluctance to accept the Mets' four-year, $64MM offer suggests the outfielder is wary of playing in Citi Field for a team that "even with him, looks to be no better than a third-place club." Newsday's Ken Davidoff agrees that Citi Field could be a factor, as the Mets pursue Bay and other free agents. Davidoff points out that, statistically, the park doesn't seem all that bad for hitters, but it's hard to shake that perception.
<< <i>Jason Bay is a very smart man -
Jason Bay Rumors: Sunday
By Luke Adams [December 20 at 9:42am CST]
Bill Madden of the New York Daily News writes that Jason Bay can thank his agent, Joe Urbon, for pricing him out of a good situation in Boston. With no obvious bidders remaining for Bay besides the New York Mets, Madden says that Urbon returned to the Red Sox to see if they would revisit negotiations with Bay. The Sox, however, having signed Mike Cameron, no longer appear interested.
Madden thinks that Bay's reluctance to accept the Mets' four-year, $64MM offer suggests the outfielder is wary of playing in Citi Field for a team that "even with him, looks to be no better than a third-place club." Newsday's Ken Davidoff agrees that Citi Field could be a factor, as the Mets pursue Bay and other free agents. Davidoff points out that, statistically, the park doesn't seem all that bad for hitters, but it's hard to shake that perception. >>
Think the Mets are actually Mets are actually making the right move here. There doesn't seem to be any other teams interested in Bay, so why bid against themselves? Hopefully that doesn't hurt them in the end. As far as Citi Field, it seems the Mets opponents were hitting more home runs then the Mets, so maybe its not the park? Really can't tell for sure from a 1 year sample.
Save on ebay with Big Crumbs
<< <i>Think the Mets are actually Mets are actually making the right move here. There doesn't seem to be any other teams interested in Bay, so why bid against themselves? Hopefully that doesn't hurt them in the end. As far as Citi Field, it seems the Mets opponents were hitting more home runs then the Mets, so maybe its not the park? Really can't tell for sure from a 1 year sample. >>
If the Mets play it smart and wait Bay out, they shouldn't have to give him anything more than their original offer. The only other teams that had expressed interest, Angels, Mariners, Red Sox and Orioles have all signed or traded for someone or pulled out. The only hope that Bay has is giving the Yankees a call and hoping that if he lowers his price, they'll pick him up to play leftfield and move Melky Cabrera to the fourth OFer.
As far as CitiField, it didn't seem like the Yankees, Phillies or Marlins had any problems hitting the long ball there... It's more hype and propaganda than anything else (probably because of the Metropolitan's lack of offensive prowess).
<< <i>For the comprehension challenged, I have NEVER said the Yankees do not have an advantage. I have NEVER said the Yankees can't or don't sign players to contracts that no one else can afford. I have NEVER said that the Yankees do not have an advantage because of their revenue streams.
For the village idiot that is too busy screaming at the top of his lungs about a salary cap and New York fans being blind and ignorant, perhaps he should give up his one track mantra and address the points being made rather than wasting his time trying to put words into others' mouths and argue a point that no one else is making.
As I HAVE stated previously, a salary cap will NEVER happen in baseball. Rather than crying the same tired story, why not address what needs to be addressed and that is ownership that prefers bottom line profit over fielding a competitive team. I understand that many owners are in the business to make money. That's what businessmen do. But as I cited, teams like Minnesota and Oakland have proven that they can be consistently competitive even in a small market without spending inordinate sums of money. Likewise, teams like Pittsburgh, Kansas City have demonstrated that they cannot win even when they are on the same playing field as the Twins and A's.
The Oaklands and Minnesotas of the league will always struggle to compete and have to work even harder to even stay in the race with the likes of Boston, New York and Los Angeles who can spend more AND sign or trade and extend players that the small market teams can no longer afford or choose not to pay.
On the flip side, there are teams like the Cubs, Orioles and to a lesser extent, the Mets that have significant revenue, spend that revenue and still cannot consistently field a team that measures up to the volume of dollars that they've spent. Luckily, the Orioles have finally seen the light and have taken notes on the Twins playbook and are developing young pitching and trading off players that do not fit into their long term plans for quality young talent.
Baseball is NOT like normal business where the weak go bankrupt. It is a league that is dependent upon all teams to provide competition and to generate revenue through gate receipts, concessions, marketing and many other avenues. There is also a revenue sharing plan, albeit nothing like the NFL, that provides stipends to the smaller market teams. This is another aspect that doesn't exist in the "real" business world. You don't see WalMart giving revenue to the small stores in the area.
When some will learn that baseball isn't like the real world and that real world rules can't be applied like a blanket, then perhaps we can get past the big bad large market teams screwing it up for everyone else. I don't see ownership for the Pirates or Royals crying about turning a profit! I just hear their fans pining for a team that is can play meaningful baseball until at least the All-Star break. >>
OTW - Well "wise monkey" you almost admitted it and I guess your first paragraph here is about as close as you're gonna get. But you still don't comprehend the overall point do you? You still don't want to see things from the point of view of other fans do you? You fail to address the question of how would you like it if your Yankees would have been unable to sign say a Mickey Mantle or a Derek Jeter. Because that's what the bottom line conversation is all about. Understand it a little better now? Nah...you don't want to understand it - your ignorance is bliss, right OTW? And your narcissism is obvious - you don't really give a chit about the "game" although you probably think you do...your main concern is just making sure the game is rigged in the favor of the Yankees so they can continue to steal players, so the Yankees can be in the World Series every season...no matter how that affects other teams or other fans.
Elitist snob fans like OTW want to remain a wise monkey - they want to think that the Yankees are the center of the baseball universe, and that the game is better when the Yankees are capable of stealing much of the top talent. Well in my view that is BS. Remember when MLB was the "national pastime"? The NFL passed MLB as the national pastime many years ago, and in fact for awhile the NBA was about to pass MLB for second place before the NBA basically shot itself in the foot. There are other reasons why the NFL has far surpassed MLB as the national pastime as far as professional sports, but not having a salary cap, or at least something to ensure the playing field is level and that teams aren't forced to lose their star players, in my opinion is certainly one reason why MLB is not as strong as it should be.
MLB is a great sport, but it could be made even better, more fun & entertaining, and more competitive with a salary cap. Case closed,
What am I supposed to admit to? What am I supposed to cop a plea to?
I don't have a problem with baseball. If the Yankees let someone go because they couldn't afford them or didn't want them and another team had more money to buy them, I'd be mad at the Yankees. I wouldn't blame it on baseball or the team that had the money to buy them. I've stated this before, but you are to friggin' ignorant to remember it or to accept it. I think the last time I stated such, you said I was lying. If I were a Pirates fan, I would be angry with management, not the Braves or Red Sox or Nationals for getting McClouth, Bay and Morgan for a bag of baseballs. But you insist that you know what I think. What the rest of us think.
This is the simple concept that you are unable to grasp. I don't see the world as you see it. Should I be subject to your analysis and convoluted thought process?
You see things your way. That's fine. But STOP telling the rest of us how WE see it, because you're not smart enough to keep your own thoughts straight and have far less chance of getting our thoughts right, too.
You go on crying about a salary cap for baseball and comparing it to football (you have a better chance of being President that seeing a salary cap in MLB). When baseball has a TV contract and a revenue sharing program that is like the NFL, then you can compare the two.
How come you fail to address the contrast between the A's and Twins versus the Pirates and Royals? They're four teams that are equal footing and completely disprove your contention with regard to a salary cap creating parity. I'm sure that you conveniently ignore it because it doesn't help your position.
Are the Cleveland Browns, Kansas City Chiefs or St. Louis Rams any better because of a salary cap in the NFL? Mismanagement isn't exclusive to baseball. It isn't exclusive to team that play in a league without a salary cap.
There's nothing wrong with being a wise monkey, narcissistic, elitist snob. It certainly beats the hell out of being an ill-informed blow hard.
Until such time as you pause to consider the points and opinions of others instead of interjecting your opinion over them, your'e right . . . case closed -- end of discussion!
You see things your way. That's fine. But STOP telling the rest of us how WE see it, because you're not smart enough to keep your own thoughts straight and have far less chance of getting our thoughts right, too.
Amen to that.
Steve
Let's say MLB does have a cap and the most anyone player can get is 10 million a year.
Each team gets 150 million dollars for payroll and has to use it.
YOU are the best player in all of baseball. YOU can get 10 million per year from Pittsburgh, KC, Cleveland or NY Yanks.
Only those 4 teams can pay YOU the 10 million, the others are all capped out.
Just where would YOU choose to play? If you chose NY YOU can make millions extra in endorsements, you can live and work in
the NY area which means you have museums, fine restaurants, woman (YOU are single) the theater etc. Are you really gonna tell us that you would
rather play in Cleveland? (No offense to Cleveland) Unless of course you are a rock and roll fanatic anyone would choose NY IMO.
Please tell us where you would choose to play under the circumstances I mentioned.
When Reggie signed with the Yanks back in 77 he was offered more by at least one other team yet he chose NY.
Steve
I think the above is the most ignorant statement I've ever read here. The Yanks have not been in a WS in 7 years and had not won one in 10.
Just what would you propose MLB do? You keep insisting the Yanks 'steal' players from other teams.
lol those players are 'free agents' Steve, that means they are FREE to sign where ever they want. So just because a team HAS money you feel that they are 'ruining baseball'
I think YOU need to get a grip and think things through before you type them out. If it wasn't the Yanks it would be some other team. Someone has to be the richest
team. Geez Steve it has been like that since day one of baseball. I can just see you 140 years ago whining about the Reds.
Steve
I'm nominating this for post of the day.
<< <i>Ok Steve how about this and this is at the least the 3rd time I've mentioned it.
Let's say MLB does have a cap and the most anyone player can get is 10 million a year.
Each team gets 150 million dollars for payroll and has to use it.
YOU are the best player in all of baseball. YOU can get 10 million per year from Pittsburgh, KC, Cleveland or NY Yanks.
Only those 4 teams can pay YOU the 10 million, the others are all capped out.
Just where would YOU choose to play? If you chose NY YOU can make millions extra in endorsements, you can live and work in
the NY area which means you have museums, fine restaurants, woman (YOU are single) the theater etc. Are you really gonna tell us that you would
rather play in Cleveland? (No offense to Cleveland) Unless of course you are a rock and roll fanatic anyone would choose NY IMO.
Please tell us where you would choose to play under the circumstances I mentioned.
When Reggie signed with the Yanks back in 77 he was offered more by at least one other team yet he chose NY.
Steve >>
Philadelphia
Remember, Jackson grew up in the Philly area, he went to Cheltenham High School, and NY isn't that far from Philly and that may have weighed in on his decision - he could play there and always be somewhat close to his family. Admittedly, the NY Yankees do have a "mystique" about them and that may have been part of the attraction for Jackson. Perhaps other reasons as well such as potential bigger money from NYC area business commercials, etc.
<<< the NY area which means you have museums, fine restaurants, woman (YOU are single) the theater etc >>>
Sorry Steve but there are museums, fine restaurants, women, the theater, etc, available in any city area able to support a MLB team, and if for whatever reason ya would want to visit New York City and experience say a certain play on Broadway, or a specific museum, or whatever there...and I have done that a number of times...then ya can simply visit there anytime. But the answer to your question is "Yes" I would choose the Yankees over those three listed teams, but the reasons would be similar to Reggie Jackson's reasons...and I for sure wouldn't live in NYC...it would be somewhere outside the city...just my personal preference.
<< <i>making sure the game is rigged in the favor of the Yankees so they can continue to steal players, so the Yankees can be in the World Series every season...no matter how that affects other teams or other fans
I think the above is the most ignorant statement I've ever read here. The Yanks have not been in a WS in 7 years and had not won one in 10.
Just what would you propose MLB do? You keep insisting the Yanks 'steal' players from other teams.
lol those players are 'free agents' Steve, that means they are FREE to sign where ever they want. So just because a team HAS money you feel that they are 'ruining baseball'
I think YOU need to get a grip and think things through before you type them out. If it wasn't the Yanks it would be some other team. Someone has to be the richest
team. Geez Steve it has been like that since day one of baseball. I can just see you 140 years ago whining about the Reds.
Steve >>
Steve - It is you who aren't quite getting it. Lemme please explain further, and OTW please read, maybe you can learn something here because it's obvious you have many brain cells not being used...In my humble opinion and I believe it to basically be fact...the extreme money paid out to these players, and the Yankees started it and perpetuate it, also hurts the game, and it gets to the point in my view that a player gets paid so much money for signing a long term contract, that suddenly he turns into a lackadasical player who figures he no longer has to take much batting practice, he no longer has to practice bunting, he no longer has to shag flies, he no longer has to take infield practice, etc, etc, etc...and when he does do these things he does so half heartedly not paying full attention to it like a hungry player would. IE: he begins paying more attention to his stock and real estate portfolio than keeping on top of his game and trying to get better - I refer to these players as mercenaries.
Yes, not all players are like that...not all free agents are mercenaries. A Pete Rose yes wanted the most money he could get, but he woulda played hard regardless...I think Derek Jeter is the same way...there are others...Chase Utley is like that...but nobody is going to tell me that the "quality" of MLB is the same as it was say around 30 years ago because it isn't. However that being said, winning a World Series is simply about beating the current players of today, not the players of 30 years ago...and the bottom line is signing players who as a GM you believe will still have relatively good motivation to play the game after signing a contract which will make them rich for life, and that's not easy to do - the Mets have showed their ineptitude at doing that while the Phillies have showed remarkable skill in signing the right players at the right time. As for the Yankees, to me it's clear that many of their players weren't as motivated in recent years as they should be, but this season it did click for them and especially a guy like Arod finally for whatever reason became motivated and played better baseball than he had been playing...just my luck it had to be against the Phillies.
I could go on with a dissertation but OTW would get too confused and possibly have a heart attack and I don't wanna be responsible for that.
<< <i>
<< <i>making sure the game is rigged in the favor of the Yankees so they can continue to steal players, so the Yankees can be in the World Series every season...no matter how that affects other teams or other fans
I think the above is the most ignorant statement I've ever read here. The Yanks have not been in a WS in 7 years and had not won one in 10.
Just what would you propose MLB do? You keep insisting the Yanks 'steal' players from other teams.
lol those players are 'free agents' Steve, that means they are FREE to sign where ever they want. So just because a team HAS money you feel that they are 'ruining baseball'
I think YOU need to get a grip and think things through before you type them out. If it wasn't the Yanks it would be some other team. Someone has to be the richest
team. Geez Steve it has been like that since day one of baseball. I can just see you 140 years ago whining about the Reds.
Steve >>
Steve - It is you who aren't quite getting it. Lemme please explain further, and OTW please read, maybe you can learn something here because it's obvious you have many brain cells not being used...In my humble opinion and I believe it to basically be fact...the extreme money paid out to these players, and the Yankees started it and perpetuate it, also hurts the game, and it gets to the point in my view that a player gets paid so much money for signing a long term contract, that suddenly he turns into a lackadasical player who figures he no longer has to take much batting practice, he no longer has to practice bunting, he no longer has to shag flies, he no longer has to take infield practice, etc, etc, etc...and when he does do these things he does so half heartedly not paying full attention to it like a hungry player would. IE: he begins paying more attention to his stock and real estate portfolio than keeping on top of his game and trying to get better - I refer to these players as mercenaries.
Yes, not all players are like that...not all free agents are mercenaries. A Pete Rose yes wanted the most money he could get, but he woulda played hard regardless...I think Derek Jeter is the same way...there are others...Chase Utley is like that...but nobody is going to tell me that the "quality" of MLB is the same as it was say around 30 years ago because it isn't. However that being said, winning a World Series is simply about beating the current players of today, not the players of 30 years ago...and the bottom line is signing players who as a GM you believe will still have relatively good motivation to play the game after signing a contract which will make them rich for life, and that's not easy to do - the Mets have showed their ineptitude at doing that while the Phillies have showed remarkable skill in signing the right players at the right time. As for the Yankees, to me it's clear that many of their players weren't as motivated in recent years as they should be, but this season it did click for them and especially a guy like Arod finally for whatever reason became motivated and played better baseball than he had been playing...just my luck it had to be against the Phillies.
I could go on with a dissertation but OTW would get too confused and possibly have a heart attack and I don't wanna be responsible for that.
That was relatively civil and well thought out and as such, I'll reply...
Please, Steve, pick a point and stay with it. Motivation? 30 years ago? Players of today aren't like players of yesterday? ARod finally got motivated to play?
What do those have to do with what we've been talking about? Again, you've made it a point to make your point about something totally off point.
So, NOW you're suggesting that players signed to long term deals are mostly worthless? And a salary cap would cure that? How? And how would you get rid of these "mercenaries" even if you had a salary cap? What's next, getting rid of free agency?
What happens when the Minnesota Twins are stuck with a choice of paying Justin Morneau and Joe Mauer and their salaries eat up more than half of their cap room or letting them go to free agency?
Charley Finley suggested decades ago that all players be on one year contracts. A great idea. I would have no problem with that. You should get paid on performance, but that's not going to happen anytime in the near future.
As far as getting confused and having a heart attack . . . don't worry. I'm able to keep up and the heart's just fine. I just wish I could get this image of you sitting alone sharing a can of tuna with the cats and wondering why Mauch blew that lead in '64. Those were the good ol' days, weren't they? Before Curt Flood and Marvin Miller fighting the reserve clause. Before Andy Messersmith fought for free agency. Before Catfish Hunter and Reggie Jackson. Oh yes, those were the days. When gasoline was $0.54/gal and the cars had the muscle, not the ball players. When Coke was a drink that came in a small bottle at the corner five and dime and not something the ball players were snorting. Oh, those were the days, eh Meathead?
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>making sure the game is rigged in the favor of the Yankees so they can continue to steal players, so the Yankees can be in the World Series every season...no matter how that affects other teams or other fans
I think the above is the most ignorant statement I've ever read here. The Yanks have not been in a WS in 7 years and had not won one in 10.
Just what would you propose MLB do? You keep insisting the Yanks 'steal' players from other teams.
lol those players are 'free agents' Steve, that means they are FREE to sign where ever they want. So just because a team HAS money you feel that they are 'ruining baseball'
I think YOU need to get a grip and think things through before you type them out. If it wasn't the Yanks it would be some other team. Someone has to be the richest
team. Geez Steve it has been like that since day one of baseball. I can just see you 140 years ago whining about the Reds.
Steve >>
Steve - It is you who aren't quite getting it. Lemme please explain further, and OTW please read, maybe you can learn something here because it's obvious you have many brain cells not being used...In my humble opinion and I believe it to basically be fact...the extreme money paid out to these players, and the Yankees started it and perpetuate it, also hurts the game, and it gets to the point in my view that a player gets paid so much money for signing a long term contract, that suddenly he turns into a lackadasical player who figures he no longer has to take much batting practice, he no longer has to practice bunting, he no longer has to shag flies, he no longer has to take infield practice, etc, etc, etc...and when he does do these things he does so half heartedly not paying full attention to it like a hungry player would. IE: he begins paying more attention to his stock and real estate portfolio than keeping on top of his game and trying to get better - I refer to these players as mercenaries.
Yes, not all players are like that...not all free agents are mercenaries. A Pete Rose yes wanted the most money he could get, but he woulda played hard regardless...I think Derek Jeter is the same way...there are others...Chase Utley is like that...but nobody is going to tell me that the "quality" of MLB is the same as it was say around 30 years ago because it isn't. However that being said, winning a World Series is simply about beating the current players of today, not the players of 30 years ago...and the bottom line is signing players who as a GM you believe will still have relatively good motivation to play the game after signing a contract which will make them rich for life, and that's not easy to do - the Mets have showed their ineptitude at doing that while the Phillies have showed remarkable skill in signing the right players at the right time. As for the Yankees, to me it's clear that many of their players weren't as motivated in recent years as they should be, but this season it did click for them and especially a guy like Arod finally for whatever reason became motivated and played better baseball than he had been playing...just my luck it had to be against the Phillies.
I could go on with a dissertation but OTW would get too confused and possibly have a heart attack and I don't wanna be responsible for that.
That was relatively civil and well thought out and as such, I'll reply...
Please, Steve, pick a point and stay with it. Motivation? 30 years ago? Players of today aren't like players of yesterday? ARod finally got motivated to play?
What do those have to do with what we've been talking about? Again, you've made it a point to make your point about something totally off point.
So, NOW you're suggesting that players signed to long term deals are mostly worthless? And a salary cap would cure that? How? And how would you get rid of these "mercenaries" even if you had a salary cap? What's next, getting rid of free agency?
What happens when the Minnesota Twins are stuck with a choice of paying Justin Morneau and Joe Mauer and their salaries eat up more than half of their cap room or letting them go to free agency?
Charley Finley suggested decades ago that all players be on one year contracts. A great idea. I would have no problem with that. You should get paid on performance, but that's not going to happen anytime in the near future.
As far as getting confused and having a heart attack . . . don't worry. I'm able to keep up and the heart's just fine. I just wish I could get this image of you sitting alone sharing a can of tuna with the cats and wondering why Mauch blew that lead in '64. Those were the good ol' days, weren't they? Before Curt Flood and Marvin Miller fighting the reserve clause. Before Andy Messersmith fought for free agency. Before Catfish Hunter and Reggie Jackson. Oh yes, those were the days. When gasoline was $0.54/gal and the cars had the muscle, not the ball players. When Coke was a drink that came in a small bottle at the corner five and dime and not something the ball players were snorting. Oh, those were the days, eh Meathead? >>
Whatever you say Archie Bunker...you certainly love to spew the inane insults don't you...just like Archie.
Lemme guess...your favorite president is Herbert Hoover. LOL
Went back and read a few other threads you were active in. One thing strikes me...
Either:
a) Your a completely clueless idiot (which I doubt because you can form sentences and express an opinion)
or
b) You get you jollies trolling for arguments and/or responses to your inane theories and get wood while finding fault with everything other than your favorite things.
<< <i>Seems you've never met a question mark that you couldn't ignore.
Went back and read a few other threads you were active in. One thing strikes me...
Either:
a) Your a completely clueless idiot (which I doubt because you can form sentences and express an opinion)
or
b) You get you jollies trolling for arguments and/or responses to your inane theories and get wood while finding fault with everything other than your favorite things. >>
Hey OTW...grow a pair and lighten up - it's sports talk you silly fool. Enjoy it for what it is and don't give yourself a heart attack over any posts here. And if you wanna act like a punk with the name calling, that's your problem.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
<< <i>I'm pretty sure the upcoming issue of JAMA features an article written by a prominent neurologist that debating SteveK invariably concludes with the same result as ramming your head against a concrete wall..
Now that's a good zinger. OTW...learn from that. LOL