Why are the NY Yankees so good?

In My Humble Opinion
21

Snooopy-

If you read my replies, you can see that I was refering to the original post’s question as to how have the Yankees managed to maintain their level of play over the years.
And I’m certainly not trying to “convert” you. A fan follows their team for their own reasons. I certainly wouldn’t try to tell a Cubs fan to switch just because their team hasn’t won since 1903!

Why is spending money to improve your team dishonorable? This isn’t Little League, it’s a business! Why should it be different than any other American business?

Regarding the drafting of young talent: I’m apparently not as familiar with the details of the process as you are. But if I were the owner of a small market team trying to put some fannies in the seats, I’d be drafting good young players, generate some interest in the team, and then hopefully use the increased revenue to sign them at free agent time, or make a good trade with them.

22

And my point is this: Even though I have never argued this point, you keep bringing it up as if I had disputed it. Since I’m not disputing it, I just wondered who you were trying to convince by bringing it up again.

**

Well, gee, baseball IS a little different from most other businesses. People don’t jump on talk radio shows to brag about how incredibly awesome their insurance company is, now do they? People don’t get into lengthy debates about whose plumbing supply company is better, right?

Baseball is different because it is in the interest of all of the teams to have a chance to be competitive. If that’s not true, then – to paraphrase Bob Costas – Major League Baseball should be made up of the eight or so good teams and the rest of the cities can play exhibition games against each other, because it’s not like they’re going to win the World Series or anything.

It’s certainly dishonorable when the Pittsburgh Pirates have – oh, this is a wild estimate – one-fifth the payroll of the Yankees, but the Yankees still expect the Pirates to show up for a “competitive” ballgame.

**

And this is what the Oakland Athletics seem to be able to pull off at the moment. But their margin for error is less than it is for the Yankees and Braves.

23

I guess we’ve already answered the OP regarding the Yankees success through the years. Snooooopy and I seem to be spiraling into a debate on money matters, so let’s continue:

Baseball is a business. It’s an ENTERTAINMENT business, which is why people find it to be more interesting than plumbing or insurance, but it’s still a business.

I AGREE, it’s better for the business of baseball to have all the teams at the same competitive level. But there’s nothing “dishonorable” about spending money to improve your team. The Yankees take money for tickets and advertising. Don’t they owe those customers a good team in return?

Are the Cubs a more honorable team because the Tribune Company, which has a lot more money than George Steinbrenner, chooses not to spend money to improve the team? Are the Dodgers and Orioles still dishonorable because of the money they spent, now that we see the sorry results?

Free agency and out-of-control spending HAS hurt the ability of all teams to bid for players. But right now, thems the rules. Of course, if it continues along this path, many teams will fold, players won’t be able to command the huge salaries anymore, and baseball will go through a painful reorganization. That would be the free market way. Whether that’s good for the game is debateable.

24

Soup:

So we both agree that the rules of Major League Baseball are bad. And, you’re right, I suppose I can’t blame the Yankees for taking advantage of those bad rules. But every time I hear Yankees fans brag about their team, I think, what do they have to be so proud of? They made the World Series again? They should make the World Series every year, given their resources. They should be embarrassed if they don’t make the World Series every year and issue refunds. Making the World Series for them is no more gripping than shooting fish in a barrel.

I suppose I do feel that the Cubs are a little more honorable than the Yankees. They’re not going around to the other teams saying, “Hmm, even though we enjoy a huge competitive advantage because of the money we spend, let’s play a ‘fair’ game. I’ll throw my 10-million-a-year free agent pitcher whose salary is half the total of your ENTIRE TEAM, and you can throw the guy you picked up off the waiver wire. We’ll have great fun!” The Dodgers and the Orioles are just stupid.

I would probably be satisfied if the Yankees could suck for just one year, just so they could remember how the other half lives. And I would probably feel just as irritable about the Braves, who spend just a few bucks less than the Yankees, but I sorta feel sorry for them because of their repeated failures in the World Series.

25

Snoooopy,
You may be too young to remember, but it wasn’t so long ago that the Yankees were one of the worst teams in the American League. The 1989, '90 and '91 seasons were horrible. I remember listening to the announcers trying to generate excitement about the Yankees reaching a .500 winning percentage.

Salary does not a great pitcher make. The Yankees have been throwing their 12-million-dollar a year pitcher, David Cone, at opponents all year. He’ll be the first to admit he’s been awful. On the flip side, Doc Gooden was picked up off waivers and has been great. That’s the beauty of the game! And I think the Yanks can be very proud of nuturing talent like Jeter, Posada, Petitte, and Rivera.

I really don’t feel the Yankees have been as arrogant as you’re inferring. They usually carry themselves with a cool, professional air. You won’t find any John Rocker types on the Yankees. I’m sure the inevitable bad seasons are in the Yankees future, but it sure won’t be as fun to beat them then, will it?

26

I wasn’t much of a baseball fan even before the current financial structure. I love basketball and football and baseball, well, it’s okay to have on the television for a few innings.

I’ve got a real anti-dynastic streak, if you hadn’t already picked up on that. It’s even more irritating when a dynasty has an unfair advantage. But even a dynasty that doesn’t have any kind of unfair advantage, I get tired pretty quick. By the time Michael Jordan won his fifth ring, I was already in the “Couldn’t you go away?” frame of mind.

**

On a team like the San Diego Padres, for instance, having a 12-million-dollar-a-year pitcher flame out is absolute disaster. The Yankees? Pick up Denny Neagle, keep on truckin’. They have a greater margin for error.

I have to admit, I was rooting for Cone to just keep on losing. Ah hah hah hah. Now, I don’t mind if he comes back and throws two perfect games next year, but I think his 4-13 mark (last time I checked) will help keep him humble.

Glad to see Gooden dust himself off, too.

**

I’ve never felt like the Yankee players were jerks – well, any more jerky than players on any other team (I’ve interviewed pro athletes before, and they can give us press guys a load of attitude). I have read stories of Yankee players explaining why the current lopsided financial structure is a GOOD thing, and they just sound ridiculous.

27

Sounds like you have a real dislike for successful players. David Cone is a class act, who always gives 110% and never shies away from the press, no matter how poorly he’s played. Since you’ve interviewed athletes, I’m suprised that you think he’s the type that needs to be humbled.

Could the real problem be a resentment toward high-priced athletes? You seem pleased that Gooden has had some success lately. Where you as happy for him when he was making millions? Or is he better now that he’s been humbled?

And to get back to another point: You say the Cubs are a more honorable team than the Yankees because they don’t spend as much money. Honorable to whom? Their long-suffering fans? I’m sure their players want to win, but heck, they’ll get paid no matter what. Are the Cubs doing everything possible to field a great team for their customers?

28

Humility’s good for everyone. Except me, because I’m perfect.

**

Oh, come on. Almost everybody loves to see a hero get knocked down and get back up again. If you’re too perfect for that, way to go.

I will cheerfully admit that sometimes I am resentful that someone can get paid like that just for having a great fastball. Not the most uncommon feeling in the world. By the way, I’m well aware that players are paid whatever the market will bear, so you won’t have to bother with the economics lesson.

In this case, I think it has more to do with my short attention span than resentfulness. It’s BORING when the same team wins all the time. I can’t imagine what it was like in the 1960s to be an NBA fan rooting for any other team besides the Celtics. Hmm? What? Celtics won again? Yaaaawn. Wake me up in a few years.

Even if my beloved University of Kentucky Wildcat basketball team won 10 championships in a row, I’d be a little suspicious of possible cheating. It just doesn’t happen naturally.

**

So, if the Yankees and Braves (I’ll throw them in to show I’m not fixated on the Yankees) spend more for an unfair competitive advantage, then the Cubs ought to do it, too? I don’t see how this is a good thing.

29

That’s not the case in baseball. Rick Ankiel, the Cardinals future ace, wasn’t taken in the first round even though he was a premier, left handed, hard throwing pitcher.

Wasn’t Babe Ruth’s salary higher than the President’s?

I’m a long suffering Cubs fan, I love them and it doesn’t really matter to me if they win or not, I just like them. The problem is with ownership. Corporate ownership is not often a good thing. People keep going to Wrigley to see Sammy and take in the atmosphere, because it’s Wrigley. People keep coming and seeing the games even though they lose, so the Tribune Company is happy because they’re bottom line benefits and they know they don’t have to give it their best effort to spend money and put a good team on the field. It’s not honorable that they CHEAT the fans that want a winner.

30

There is no salary cap in baseball. Period.

If you don’t like it, don’t support baseball. Support football.

And if you think the salary cap did anything to help player loyalty to teams, team loyalty towards players, or help even the playing field (until just last year, the last two decades were essentially Cowboys and 49ers in the NFC and the Bills and Broncos in the AFC), yiou really haven’t watched much sports.

Oh, and anyone who roots against a classy stand-up guy like Cone is a total jerk-off.

Yer pal,
Satan - Commissioner, The Teeming Minions

*TIME ELAPSED SINCE I QUIT SMOKING:
Five months, three weeks, one day, 2 hours, 2 minutes and 15 seconds.
7003 cigarettes not smoked, saving $875.42.
Extra time with Drain Bead: 3 weeks, 3 days, 7 hours, 35 minutes.

*“I’m a big Genesis fan.”-David B. (Amen, brother!)

31

Do you not see that once you make the first statement, the problem is not with the ownership, but with you and people like you who are willing to line their pockets while they lose and the White Sox are kicking ass with empty seats?

Yer pal,
Satan - Commissioner, The Teeming Minions

*TIME ELAPSED SINCE I QUIT SMOKING:
Five months, three weeks, one day, 2 hours, 5 minutes and 4 seconds.
7003 cigarettes not smoked, saving $875.43.
Extra time with Drain Bead: 3 weeks, 3 days, 7 hours, 35 minutes.

*“I’m a big Genesis fan.”-David B. (Amen, brother!)

32

Of course the salary cap helped level the playing field. This is perfectly demonstrated by the San Francisco 49ers. They spent and spent and spent in defiance of the salary cap, mortgaging the future for the present. Guess what happened? They’re not any good now, and they probably won’t be for a couple of years because they’re still paying off those rich contracts from years past.

Maybe YOU should pay more attention.

**

But athletes who are jerks are open season, is that what you’re saying?

33

**

And the 49ers had over 15 years of almost complete dominance too.

Name a baseball team that can make a claim such as this in this era please…

**

Well,as much as the Albert Belle’s of the world deserve all the bad karma they get, that is not what I said. In fact, please tell my how the two schools of thought are somehow mutually inclusive of each other?

34

Well, most of those years of 49er dominance came BEFORE the NFL salary cap was introduced in 1994. The 49ers hung on for a while after the salary cap because, like I said, they mortgaged the future for the present – they deferred lots of money for expensive contracts to the future (which is now).

So your challenge to go back 15 years is invalid. Can I go back to 1994 and name a baseball team that can make such a claim? Did anybody say Atlanta Braves? They may not have all the rings, but their repeated appearances in the World Series, I think, would qualify.

Well, actually, I was asking an honest question because I didn’t want to misunderstand you. Even so, I can’t imagine you’ve never wished for an opposing team’s pitcher would hang a curveball over the plate. Maybe that opposing pitcher was even David Cone, paragon of wonderfulness.

35

I found this article on the Web which does a pretty good job of spelling out the dynasty-killing properties of the salary cap:

http://www.sacbee.com/sports/news/old/sports01_20000830.html

36

Uhhhh, no. I haven’t been to a game at Wrigley in years. I like the team because I’m from Chicago and I don’t jump on to a team’s bandwagon when they’re winning (like Cowboys fans in the early 90’s that became Packers fans and now like the Rams). The ownership have so far kept the players I like(d) with Sandberg, Grace, and now Wood. So would I like to see them win? Yes, but it’s not that big of a deal to me. When I do go to Wrigley I go because I want to see my favorite team in the best ballpark ever built. So you’re wrong. :slight_smile: Thanks for assuming.

37

First of all, what is it:

…or…

Secondly, if you, as you say, don’t care whether you win or lose, what motivation does this give ownership of going the extra mile (or spending an extra dollar) to become more competitive?

Now, don’t take all the blame yourself now. There are a ton of people who have no problem selling out Wrigley, reveling in the kitsch and not caring about winning.

But do know that this attitude - one where you all will pay money and not care whether the team is a winner or not - gives ownership exactly zero reasons to make the team better.

After all, if they are already guaranteed x-amount of income no matter how little they spend, what motivation do they have to get beter?

I’m sorry that you - and obviously Cubs fns the world around - fail to see this.

I am not saying that you should abandon your team by any stretch of the imagination. But blind support that I see in Chicago when they don’t do a damn thing to put a winner on the field is laughable.

I get the feeling that Cubs fans like losing sometimes. At least Red Sox fans want to win and they have ownership that is trying…

Yer pal,
Satan - Commissioner, The Teeming Minions

*TIME ELAPSED SINCE I QUIT SMOKING:
Five months, three weeks, one day, 23 hours, 11 minutes and 46 seconds.
7038 cigarettes not smoked, saving $879.83.
Extra time with Drain Bead: 3 weeks, 3 days, 10 hours, 30 minutes.

*“I’m a big Genesis fan.”-David B. (Amen, brother!)