Roger Clemens > Julian Tavarez

Luxury tax (I’m sorry, competitive-balance tax) bills were sent to Major League Baseball teams this holiday weekend — all two of them, the Red Sox and the Yankees. The Sox will have to pay by Jan. 31 $6.06 million in luxury tax. The Yankees will pay $23.88 million.

The AP story written about the tax notes that Roger Clemens alone cost the Yankees $6.98 million in additional tax, bringing his total cost to just short of $24.5 million.

This reminded me that after Clemens’ first start, I facetiously noted that he posted roughly the same line as Julian Tavarez, so Tavarez logically must be worth $20 million. Unfortunately for Tavarez, he ultimately finished much worse than Clemens. From June 9, when Clemens made his 2007 debut, Tavarez went 3-7 with a 5.13 ERA as a starter. Also, in fairness, Clemens’ final ERA — though among the worst of his career when adjusted for league average — was an improvement over the Yankee starters’ season average and much better than the scrubs he was replacing.

So, considering the tumult that surrounded Clemens’ signing and the fact that the Rocket ultimately crashed (making only two starts in September and failing to make it out of the third in his only October appearance), I just wanted — in the interests of spreading holiday cheer — to let Yankee fans know that it still isn’t so bad.

At least Roger Clemens was worth more than Julian Tavarez.

46 comments… add one

  • Seriously and you accuse other people of flame-throwing?
    I suppose when your team spent the most in American sports history on a world championship, you have to find other ways to spin the story.

    Mike YF December 26, 2007, 4:32 pm
  • “when your team spent the most in American sports history on a world championship”
    I expect you’ll be noting how much this remark is worth when the Yankees win their next championship…absolutely nothing.

    Devine December 26, 2007, 5:08 pm
  • Mike:
    You might want to take note of that humor tag Paul put on this post.

    SF December 26, 2007, 5:14 pm
  • It doesn’t really concern me how much the Sox spent to get their championship.
    I’d be far more concerned if my team spent $60 million more than that to lose in the first round of the playoffs… again.

    Paul SF December 26, 2007, 5:23 pm
  • Thanks, Paul.. I’m glad for a bit of tongue-in-cheek cheer about the Clemens signing. It’s been a sore spot for me since September and your dry humor gave me a chuckle. Come to think of it, I suppose I would so much rather spend the most of any winner (which was ..quick check..~$143M) and, well, um, you know, actually WIN, rather than have my favorite team spend MORE than that amount every season for the last five years in a row and well, um, er, NOT WIN it?
    Salaries, 2003-2007 according to Cot’s:
    First, I’ll calculate the Yankees. Using my trusty solar-powered TI-35, it turns out the Yankees spent E million E hundred EEty E thousand EEfty E dollars and EEty E blinking cents.
    Hrmph. Damned new math. Let’s try again.
    Yankees: $929,552,705
    Boston: $613,876,163
    Let’s throw in St. Louis. They got to the big dance twice since 2004, the only team besides Boston to do so: $438,300,026
    Whoop de doo Basil..what does it all mean? Not a damned thing except I’m glad it ain’t my money. And that 1,000 years ago when I was 18 I sure wish I knew how to time a fastball while being able to hit a curve ball the other way.

    attackgerbil December 26, 2007, 5:29 pm
  • Right cause I’m the only one who didn’t see the “humor”.
    http://www.riveraveblues.com/
    Meanwhile, after all the years of crap, it’s a bit too convenient for SF’s to say it’s not about the money when they just bought a championship. And then I have to read this post finding a way to spin that story back onto the Clemens bs these days.
    No doubt when the Yanks win again, it will be about the money again.

    Mike YF December 26, 2007, 6:12 pm
  • Gerbil –
    You may think it’s about the money, but to me thirteen straight years of October baseball is priceless. Four rings and six pennants too.

    Mike YF December 26, 2007, 6:17 pm
  • deleted for inappropriate content – ag

    Realsit December 26, 2007, 6:18 pm
  • Realsit – next time just stick to the facts. And the status of homegrown players is certainly a relevant one. Indeed, when’s the last time the Sox farm produced a HOFer? The Yankees have three of those on their team right now.

    Mike YF December 26, 2007, 6:40 pm
  • Nah, Mike, I love the stretch of success too. I really do, and don’t evaluate championships as the sole arbiter of success. I just can see the dry, funny nature of Paul’s post without trying to turn it into something beyond some fun at the expense of numbers and situations that transcend any realistic comparison.

    attackgerbil December 26, 2007, 6:41 pm
  • I thought you had to be retired for five years before you could be inducted into the Hall of Fame?

    Paul SF December 26, 2007, 6:43 pm
  • See, and I read the post as an opportunity to spin an otherwise negative story about the Yanks and Sox into “fun” at the expense of the Yanks. Obviously I’m not the only one that read it that way. It’s the very definition of “flame-throwing”.

    Mike YF December 26, 2007, 6:53 pm
  • Following the humor tag: (although not very funny)
    Mike-YF
    You may think it’s about the money, but to me thirteen* straight years of October baseball is priceless. Four rings* and six pennants* too.

    Pocono Sox December 26, 2007, 6:58 pm
  • > when they just bought a championship
    The Sox won a championship. They did not “buy” one. Nothing anyone says about what the Yankees did during their stretch of victories (_and losses_) will make me think otherwise.

    attackgerbil December 26, 2007, 7:07 pm
  • > retired for five years
    Except in the event of life-threatening or ending tragic circumstance.

    attackgerbil December 26, 2007, 7:16 pm
  • PoconoSox – wow adding an asterisk to the yankees past successes. Ive been waiting for someone to do something like that. Im sure that the sox havent had a single PED user over the past decade who played an important roll.
    The money arguement – zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
    Solid discussion ongoing here. Perhaps this what happens when the original post is confrontational against one of the two teams here even if it is “humor” I still dont see the point of this post, if its not to take a dig at the yankees.

    sam-YF December 26, 2007, 7:28 pm
  • Mike, give it a rest. Paul tagged it forthrightly, and you missed, ignored, or didn’t care for the joke. If you think it a bad joke, that’s your prerogative, but don’t turn this into something it isn’t. Calling it flamethrowing is off-base, considering the categorization with which Paul qualified his writing.
    Just stop this, please.

    SF December 26, 2007, 7:31 pm
  • This post might have been tagged as humor, but there was an undercurrent of needling involved.
    No problem. I just consider it warming up for the upcoming regular reason. Players work out in the offseason, and fans need to do the same and keep their ribbing skillz sharp. ;)

    yf2k December 26, 2007, 7:54 pm
  • LOL! my post is the truth …yet deleted??????????? Real fair , I guess in your turd’s minds. The point missed and dismissed as if it didn’t hold a bit of truth?
    I guess you simpletons can’t accept the truth????????????????

    Realist December 26, 2007, 9:35 pm
  • realist, i am in search of the “truth”. maybe you could make your point without defaming, loutish, or slanderous remarks? i’m guessing your “point” was with regards to homegrown players. my counterpoint would be……..who cares? pedroia’s ring would fit the same whether he came up with the royals or the sox. if you are implying that the yanks are superior talent evaluators based on farm system players making it to the bigs, you are living in the 70’s. the way the draft works today has more to do with signability than a scouts eye. gm’s and organization’s are judged by W-L records versus W-L expectations at the major league level. the sox expectations are to advance deep into the playoffs every year. by that metric, the sox system has succeeded more so than any other team in the last half decade.

    sf rod December 26, 2007, 10:25 pm
  • // your team spent the most in American sports history on a world championship //
    I’ve heard this line from YFs a few times now, and there’s no other way to say this — it’s possibly the dumbest sports insult ever.
    Since the Yankees’ payroll has been higher than the Red Sox’s payroll in every year of the 21st Century (with no rings to satisfy Steinbrenner) this supposed “insult” only makes New York look worse.
    In other words: The Yankees have spent more than any team in history to *not* win a World Series… over a billion dollars in the past five years alone, including the luxury tax.

    Anonymous December 27, 2007, 1:06 am
  • (That was me dressing down Mike.)

    Hudson December 27, 2007, 1:07 am
  • Hudson, it’s just a misguided attempt to ‘dress down’ the Red Sox fans who screamed for years and years about the ‘money’, and suddenly the Red Sox go out and actually spend money, and they’re fine with it. I think we all agreed that the ‘salary’ and ‘money’ issue between the two teams was completely null and void when Henry spotted the Sox $50 million for Dice-K.
    Honestly, the Sox and the Yankees are the two most expensive teams in baseball. Goliath 1a and 1b. No Davids here. Hasn’t really been for a while, now.

    AndrewYF December 27, 2007, 1:41 am
  • “// your team spent the most in American sports history on a world championship //
    I’ve heard this line from YFs a few times now, and there’s no other way to say this — it’s possibly the dumbest sports insult ever.”
    Hudson if you find this an insult it show that you clearly have some insecurities about the sox spending over the last few years. Like it or not its a statement of fact. It has nothing whatsoever to do with what the Yankees have done over the “21st century”. The Sox spend a ton of money, the yankees spend more. All of the other teams in baseball are in another league. There should be no more debate about it.
    Great job “dressing down” someone on this site and congratulating yourself for doing so. Its very hard for me to understand why all of your posts have so much spite directed towards YFs and the yankee organization.

    sam-YF December 27, 2007, 1:58 am
  • I think the post is funny. I’d much rather spend the money and win. That is all. Does the championship(s) mean more if you spend 80 million instead of 140? I doubt it. Money spent wisely if you ask me.

    Brad December 27, 2007, 8:35 am
  • “I’d much rather spend the money and win.”
    This statement is true for the yankees as well. Im glad they spend money to give us the chance to win each year. When we do win it, it will mean the same thing…

    sam-YF December 27, 2007, 9:18 am
  • Andrew and Sam:
    Other teams’ fans can complain about the Red Sox payroll all they want and I wouldn’t disagree.
    But when Yankee fans raise the money argument, it’s a hollow and hypocritical observation — because New York’s payroll has been 20-40% higher than Boston’ every year of the 21st Century century.

    Anonymous December 27, 2007, 9:33 am
  • Andrew and Sam:
    Other teams’ fans can complain about the Red Sox payroll all they want and I wouldn’t disagree.
    But when Yankee fans raise the money argument, it’s a hollow and hypocritical observation — because New York’s payroll has been 20-40% higher than Boston’ every year of the 21st Century century.

    Hudson December 27, 2007, 9:34 am
  • And I’ll just add that the difference between what some call “1a and 1b” in 2007 was larger than the entire payrolls of any of the following teams: the Padres, the Rockies, the D-backs, the Pirates, the Marlins and the Rays.
    So don’t tell me $200 million and $150 million are the same amount of money.
    If you really believe that, I have a deal for Yanksfans: Give me two hundred dollar bills and I’ll give you a hundred and a fifty back. Fair deal?

    Hudson December 27, 2007, 9:39 am
  • Uh…
    “New York’s payroll was $207.7 million and Boston was second at $163.1 million for luxury tax purposes, which uses the average annual values of contracts for 40-man rosters and adds benefits.”
    Add in the 50 million (you know more than the payrolls for “the Padres, the Rockies, the D-backs, the Pirates, the Marlins and the Rays”) they ponied up for Matsuzaka and the Sox actually spent more.
    I understand some Sox fans are hypersensitive to the fact that their team bought their rings. But hey, that’s life /joke.

    Mike YF December 27, 2007, 9:58 am
  • Every team that has won a championship has bought their rings.
    Balfour charges quite a bit, I hear.

    SF December 27, 2007, 10:06 am
  • Touche. But I’m willing to bet that one enterprising jeweler, some where some time, has given a team the rings.

    Mike YF December 27, 2007, 10:28 am
  • apparently Rudy Giuliani never had to pay for any of his world series rings, which should drive home the point that it’s honorable to actually pay for your ring.

    Nick-YF December 27, 2007, 10:34 am
  • Think George Mitchell paid for his ring this year?

    Mike YF December 27, 2007, 10:41 am
  • Since Mitchell took a leave of absence from the club, I wonder if he would qualify. An interestig question…

    Paul SF December 27, 2007, 10:51 am
  • Think George Mitchell paid for his ring this year?
    Not as much as Clemens has paid for his..
    I kid.

    Brad December 27, 2007, 11:47 am
  • A note to Realist (and any others) who choose to use offensive language such as the insults used in the comment that I deleted earlier in this thread; any such comment or portion of a comment that makes grossly insulting, degrading statements that are in clear violation of the code of conduct will result in that comment being deleted immediately. Offenses do not need to be repeated to result in an IP ban without warning. Refer to the Code of Conduct for further clarification.

    attackgerbil December 27, 2007, 12:28 pm
  • > Right cause I’m the only one who didn’t see the “humor”.
    > http://www.riveraveblues.com/
    Yup, looks like you are right.

    attackgerbil December 27, 2007, 3:59 pm
  • Why are you trying to restart an argument from yesterday?
    Not the least of which, you’re wrong:
    Sam: “Perhaps this what happens when the original post is confrontational against one of the two teams here even if it is “humor” I still dont see the point of this post, if its not to take a dig at the yankees.”
    yf2K: “This post might have been tagged as humor, but there was an undercurrent of needling involved.”
    Maybe if the author was actually funny we wouldn’t have these problems… /joke

    Mike YF December 27, 2007, 4:29 pm
  • > Why are you trying to restart an argument from yesterday?
    Second part first .. “from yesterday”:
    So all comments have a shelf life of one day .. I see. I missed that in Internet 101. I sure am glad to have your correction. However, (first part) I just got around to following the link you provided without context and saw that there was more to it than a simplistic disagreement.
    > Maybe if the author was actually funny we wouldn’t have these problems.
    I don’t have a problem. The author was actually funny.

    attackgerbil December 27, 2007, 4:44 pm
  • The moment had passed, but as a moron, I’m up for a dumb argument anytime…
    At the time I posted that link, there was no associated discussion. The fact that another Yankee blogger took offense said everything.
    Meanwhile, the discussion there shows Andy (SF) had to pop over to smooth things over. That’s funny to me! The Paul-Andy tag team isn’t just contained to this site. It’s all over the interpipes! /joke.

    Mike YF December 27, 2007, 4:52 pm
  • Uh, I didn’t go to “smooth things over”, I went over because you posted a link and I thought a little tit-for-tat might be, um, funny. Or did you not see that icon I put up at the end of my own post?
    RAB was kind enough and honest enough to clarify that they did, in fact, get the humor inherent in the post, even if they didn’t make that clear at the outset.

    SF December 27, 2007, 5:18 pm
  • Sure, SF, whatever you say. But we all know you had to defend Paul’s honor.
    Heh.

    Mike YF December 27, 2007, 5:36 pm
  • I’m obviously late to this discussion, but JEEZ the Red Sox were right in the hunt for Clemens as I recall.
    Obviously, in hindsight most every Sox fan, including myself, is ecstatic that the Yankees “WON” the battle for his services. As a Sox fan I got a chuckle out of Paul’s post, and if any Yankee fan took offense at it, well I’m sorry but honestly, paying THAT amount… the highest paid pitcher in Baseball money?
    For 6 wins… and 6 losses to go along with it, and a 4.18 ERA, that’s pretty darn funny.
    I think Yankee fans missed the boat for a little payback here, I mean seriously, all the Yankees paid was money for Clemens whereas Eric %^^$%% Gagne was a two month rental that cost them Kason Gabbard, David Murphy, Engle Beltre and 2.1 Million… Gagne brought the Sox responsibility for 4 F###ing Red Sox losses, and I believe, ONE clean inning of relief, in garbage time no less, and an era of 6.75 in 18 miserable innings.
    Y’know as a Sox fan I think THAT’S pretty damn funny too, but probably because we won, otherwise I’d want to kill anyone who mentioned it…
    Oh, yeah…
    sorry about that Clemens thing.

    Brian December 27, 2007, 10:41 pm
  • Yeah, but Gagne has the lowest World Series ERA of any member of the Sox in history. ;-)
    Anyway, the Sox were in the hunt, sure, but were they “right in the hunt?” I don’t know. Their offer as I recall was apparently quite a bit lower. Some YFs even labeled it an “insult.”

    Paul SF December 28, 2007, 5:44 pm
  • Despite Eric Gagne’s stellar record-tying World Series performance (grin), he may in fact rank as one of the WORST trade deadline rental acquisitions an eventual World Champion has ever made. SOOOO much anticipation… becomes, so much angst!
    In a Yankees season that went from just plain miserable, at 21W-29L and 14 1/2 games out(tied for last with the Devil Rays), to one of possibilities, with the Yanks breathing down the Red Sox collective necks in September winning the season series against the Sox and incredibly (after that horrible start) taking the wild-card, that ultimately lead to the disappointment against the Indians, Roger Clemens merely ends up as a tragicomic footnote.
    On the other hand… I suppose you could say that Roger Clemens is emblematic of the 2007 Yankees.
    So there’s that.

    Brian December 28, 2007, 11:46 pm

Leave a Comment

Next post:

Previous post: