The Best Team Money Can Buy

A lot to think about with the Yankees spending some $400 million on three players as the nation heads into the worst period of economic stagnation since the Great Depression. The team has an enormous amount invested in its new ballpark (nevermind the taxpayer contribution), and can't afford to display an inferior product in that showplace, given the prices it's charging for admission. I'm sure there will be some legitimate upset among fans of other teams about the Yankees simply being purchased so ruthlessly, the product of greed and unfair economic advantage. Attendance is likely to be a problem throughout MLB, given the economy. Will the new Yankees exacerbate this problem, leaving fans disgusted, or will the team actually be good for the league, as the traveling Yankee road-show/circus will almost certainly fill stadiums when it comes to town. Baseball prospered for many years with the Yankees as a juggernaut. One thing's for sure: this team had better win, and there's no guarantee that it will, even with all those millions spent on its construction, including the four highest paid players in the sport. Baseball is a fickle game, and these are difficult times.

46 comments… add one
  • can’t afford to display an inferior product in that showplace, given the prices it’s charging for admission.
    One could argue the opposite: Givenm the prices they’re charging for admission and the deepending recession, the Yankees can’t afford to count on the same revenue streams that have previously financed their expenditures.
    No one really knows if either statement is accurate.

    Paul SF December 23, 2008, 4:41 pm
  • I’m not a NY city or state taxpayer, but the public contribution to the stadium while the team goes out and makes these incredible deals does make me angry. (actually, even if the team wasn’t spending profligately, the idea of taxpayers contributing to building a stadium that turns a private profit makes me angry. I’m also against the car manufacturer bailout(s), for the record.)
    I do think many teams will have to reconsider their ticket prices this year. Or have some really kick ass promotional nights (free all-you-can-eat nachos and El Guapo bobbleguts, anyone?)

    Jackie (SF) December 23, 2008, 4:45 pm
  • Paul: I’m not sure what expenditures they can and cannot afford. But a lousy product will not fill the seats, and will not allow them to sell playoff tickets, which are clearly part of the economic plan. So not spending is clearly not an option. Whether they can be profitable spending as much as they are is another question, but it seems to me they’re telling us that they can be—if they can win.

    YF December 23, 2008, 4:47 pm
  • New York will always have people who can buy tickets. People buy scalped tickets everyday at 2x+ face value.
    I’m sure the front office of the yanks have done the math and figured out that selling out the stadium and having high viewership on YES will cover their expenses. In a business and winning aspect, everything they’ve done is reasonable.

    tells-yf December 23, 2008, 4:51 pm
  • Cities do all kinds of things to support private enterprise. I’m not opposed to the city spending on a ball team. It may not be fiscally responsible, but it’s good for the city, as far as I’m concerned, to have a team to rally around and support. A city deserves some luxuries, and a baseball team is one of them.
    What I detest–and we have it with the Yanks–is when taxpayers are deceived in the way stadium funds are allocated, or when they are not given voice in the way those funds are spent. Then the situation becomes fundamentally undemocratic and iniquitous.

    YF December 23, 2008, 4:52 pm
  • Good post, YF. My sentiments exactly.

    Bostondreamer December 23, 2008, 4:54 pm
  • But a lousy product will not fill the seats
    Do the Yankees ever have a “lousy product?” Did they have trouble filling seats last year when their product was the lousiest it had been in 15 years (and even then was less than 10 games from a playoff spot). Would the Yankees have had a lousy product with Sabathia and Burnett and cheaper additions?
    I agree that the Yankees are certainly indicating they have no concerns about their profitability, so maybe my questions are irrelevant anyway.

    Paul SF December 23, 2008, 5:07 pm
  • YF- I am mostly with you. But the Yankees are freshly requesting tax-exempt bonds to cover new overages, all while showering players with cash. As a NYC resident (and not as a SF) I find this somewhat offensive.

    SF December 23, 2008, 5:07 pm
  • Paul: The Yanks have had problems filling seats in the past, and I think they’ve gotten some intimations that there is trouble on the horizon (ie with slow ticket sales and the loss of sponsorship from GM). For that reason, I suspect they have put a special premium on making sure the product is top notch, so they can leverage maximum value, and especially get the extra paydays from playoff baseball. The marginal cost of not making the playoffs or having a mediocre year (very real) was deemed greater than the cost of signing Teixeira. The folks at BP have done a lot of work on this kind of marginal value calculation. For a team close to the playoff bubble, a big spluge is often worth the risk.
    SF: I don’t disagree with your point. The Yankee Stadium financials are egregious.

    YF December 23, 2008, 5:21 pm
  • I was hoping, but still shocked if this is true..

    Lar December 23, 2008, 5:27 pm
  • One only has to look at the Knicks to see what happens. Surely, they still “sell out” but people don’t really go. Yanks fans probably can excuse a year (or maybe two) but without a good product on the field, they already have a huge sunk cost that they can make back by dominating one way or another..
    On the flip side, at least they aren’t pocketing the money and sit on it. It’ll take many years of playoffs to make back that money for the city of NY, I think, but maybe worthwhile in the long term.
    For that reason, one of my pet peeves is that teams keep building new stadiums, when the older ones are probably good for another decade or two..

    Lar December 23, 2008, 5:31 pm
  • “The Red Sox’s final bid for Mark Teixeira last week was eight years at $168 million, Hardball has learned.
    That means the YanksNew York Yankees — with a winning offer of eight years at $180 million — outdistanced the Red Sox by $12 million to land the switch-hitting first baseman.
    Red Sox owner John Henry and GM Theo Epstein met in Dallas last week with Teixeira and agent Scott Boras. After the meeting, Henry announced that the Red Sox were being told by Teixeira that there were larger offers out there for his services.
    Boston stayed in the competition, but according to sources, never raised its offer beyond the $168 million”
    Source: Post
    Three cheers for Theo and the Partners. Gawd, I love this new Sox organization. Smart, efficient, determined.

    Dirty Water December 23, 2008, 6:05 pm
  • DW you are assuming that the sox had the highest bid other than the yankees. There were more than 2 teams interested in tex. Reports say that the nationals offered in the $180/9 year range themselves.
    Its pretty hard to say who “won” this one 3 hours after the signing. If the sox have problems at the corner IF positions in the next 5 years, not going a bit higher will look bad, if they are fine they did the right thing. If Tex lives up to his potential, the yanks look smart, if he doesnt they look dumb. Its way to early to laud or decry this move for either the sox or the yankees.

    sam-YF December 23, 2008, 6:24 pm
  • and a no-trade, too, perhaps.
    If there was 12m and a no-trade difference, that’s a vastly different offer.

    SF December 23, 2008, 6:30 pm
  • The point, Sam, is that Theo and the partners placed a value on Teix and then stuck to that bid. They did not waiver; they were not so desperate to move their bid, they were not willing to outbid the field by 25%, as the Yanks often do.
    That is commendable and portends a bright future for the good guys, in that they have enough confidance in their system that they would allow a seemingly vital cog (not that I’m convinced of that) to escape, which would not have happened 10 years ago.
    I’ve seen this Yank $ crap before – Giambi, Pavano, et el (actually, every Yank signing in this century). It does not work.

    Dirty Water December 23, 2008, 6:49 pm
  • “Theo and the partners placed a value on Teix and then stuck to that bid. ”
    You assume that the value they placed is the correct one. I think the jury remains out on this for a few years. Plus how do you know the yankees, didnt place a value on him and stick to it themselves? Value to each team is different…
    “they were not willing to outbid the field by 25%, as the Yanks often do.”
    $12 mil is hardly 25% and again, you really dont know what “the field” was bidding. Also coming from a fan of a team that almost doubled the closest bid for DiceK, this sentiment rings hallow.
    ” It does not work.”
    Making the playoffs every year but one in this century seems to be pretty good. Also, its not like the sox havent made their share of mistakes in free agency over the years too.
    Believe it or not the yankees have had a plan the last 2 years and seemed to have executed it. Yes, its a plan that only they could have but its still part of an overall framework. The results remain to be seen.

    sam-YF December 23, 2008, 7:12 pm
  • “Believe it or not the yankees have had a plan the last 2 years and seemed to have executed it”
    Beyond comical. A total rationalization of the last month by a FANATIC.

    Dirty Water December 23, 2008, 7:32 pm
  • My apologies. That was an inappropriate comment on my part.
    Sam, knowing the Yanks have not earned any draft picks (in fact, have lost all) with all their lost type A’s, have not yet fired Cashboy, have not hired (that I know of) any person to better evaluate talent, and are blocking positions by the day with $200m contracts, please explain how the Yankees have not deviated from their reported strategy of rebuilding their farm system.
    I don’t see it. Actually, I think it’s most obvious that they have completely given up after a decade of failures.

    Dirty Water December 23, 2008, 7:43 pm
  • yf, in the past the yanks have filled seats in opposing ballparks simply because those fans wanted to see the home team beat the ‘hated’ yanks…that and the yanks do have a lot of fans in other cities besides ny…you may be correct in assuming that a guy like me with marginal resources will need to think harder about buying a ticket than i did in the good old days [2008], but do you think for a minute that there aren’t 1000 yuppie types making 200 grand a year wouldn’t line up for than same ticket?…let’s see what happens…
    jackie, for you, sf, and any others with that same sentiment, let’s be careful about throwing those stones without all the facts…the ny press may be more adept and less fearful of speculating about odd deals involving taxpayer money, than those in other cites, but there are other examples: [couple of notes about the sox]…ooops…dated, and arguably small potatoes maybe, but potatoes nonetheless…
    does anyone realize the yanks payroll for 2009 is right now lower than 2008?…hmmm

    dc December 23, 2008, 8:16 pm
  • dc (and SF) – you’re right, I went a bit too far in my criticism… obviously a city does get something out of having a professional baseball team, and it’s appropriate for the taxpayers to contribute a bit to keeping them there (see also: Fremont Athletics).
    I still feel that the New Yankee Stadium situation is a little bit offensive – I don’t know how much additional revenue the city will get from the new stadium, but it doesn’t seem like anyone was having a problem making money in the old one. :P And going back to my previous analogy, making these three giant FA signings while asking for stadium building money is a bit like the auto CEOs flying to DC in their private jets to beg for a bailout: tin-eared at best. But of course, I’m a Sox fan, so take that with a grain of salt. ;)
    I don’t think the Yankees will have a problem filling the seats/luxury boxes at the new stadium, but I don’t think that’s what these signings are about – sure, they have to make sure they don’t languish around .500 for years, but you don’t have to sign $440m of FAs to do that. I think it’s more a matter of “win now or else” – their pride (and reputation?) has been damaged from finishing 3rd in the AL last year, and having failed to win a WS for eight whole years, so they’re doing “whatever it takes” to get back on top for 2009. JMHO, of course.

    Jackie (SF) December 23, 2008, 9:10 pm
  • DW. I am going to disengage from talking to you. You can feel how you wish, I simply dont agree with you and dont believe I can have a constructive conversation with you on this topic. Happy holidays.

    sam-YF December 23, 2008, 9:12 pm
  • Tony Massarotti at the globe had an interesting take on this:
    Instead, the Sox lost Teixeira for what amounted to about $10 million-$15 million over eight years, which is chump change for a franchise with an estimated value (including NESN and Fenway Park) of somewhere in the range of $1 billion.
    I understand Theo et al put a price tag on Tex but for close to the amount they are likely gonna pay Varitek next season they may have had him.

    sam-YF December 23, 2008, 9:20 pm
  • All this stuff about “it was only 1-2M a year for the duration of the contract” fails to account for contract creep. Where does a team draw the line? “What’s another $15M”? people ask? But then what if the Sox had gone to $175m, and then the Yankees went to $185m and the Sox didn’t pony up? Then we’d be having the same BS discussion about “why didn’t the Sox pony up that extra $10M?”.
    At some point a team has to draw a line. The Sox, rightly or wrongly, drew their line. I can’t say I know yet if it was the smart decision, but I also respect and understand that a team, a business, has to set limits. I don’t think offering a guy like Teixeira the largest contract in franchise history and one of the largest in baseball history, as the Sox just did, even in failure, to be all that egregious a sin. It wasn’t for show: you don’t offer someone nearly $170M just for appearance. I think it is wrong of SFs to vilify the team for not spending “whatever it takes” and I think it even worse for YFs, whose team clearly occupies a financial stratosphere of enviable heights, to hold that against the Red Sox, to demean their rivals because they have limits their own team may not. I find the former attitude simplistic and uninformed, the latter pompous and brazenly obnoxious.

    SF December 23, 2008, 9:40 pm
  • “…the latter pompous and brazenly obnoxious…”
    sf, you’re better than that…insulting us isn’t cool, especially when you sf’s behave the same way at times…
    “…a business, has to set limits…” “…worse for YFs, whose team clearly occupies a financial stratosphere of enviable heights…”
    really?…what happened to competing on the same level as the evil empire?…like you guys did with dice-k v. the yanks, we got the better of you on this one…you all said money was no object with dice-k…some of it would be recouped via “marketing” money, but part of the bravado was that the new ownership had gobs of money from other resources to invest, and this would be a new red sox era…you went hot and heavy for santana last year…did you plan to sign him after trading for him or not?…i guess we’ll never know, but i assume that was the plan…what about the philosophy changed for this year about a player that most accounts said was the sox “top priority”, “coveted” even, or will the spin ultimately be that theo and henry cleverly drove up the price on those yankee fools?…i should let it go…i’m getting way too much pleasure out of seeing sox fans get po’d over losing this one, like we yank fans did over losing out on dice-k, even though the sox had to nearly double the next highest bid [yes, i know they were secret bids, so they didn’t know what they were doing]…suddenly, one club spends too freely, the player’s not that good after all…blah, blah…sour grapes make good whine, not good wine…we won the battle, not the war…let’s play some games before we assess who got the better of this…

    dc December 23, 2008, 10:25 pm
  • dc:
    You ought to be a little more careful about taking a critique of mine about subsets of our two fanbases and turning that into something more expansive. That is how these discussions devolve and degenerate.
    I may be perhaps one of the only Sox fans who predicted and defended this signing before it happened. Ask John.

    SF December 23, 2008, 11:39 pm
  • DW –
    Until you can show us how the Yankees’ farm system has appreciably declined, you have no case that the Yankees are somehow destroying their farm system.
    In fact, by not trading top talent for top players with expensive contracts, and instead signing multiple free agents all in one year (thereby costing them not 3 first-round picks, but a 1st, 2nd, and 3rd-round pick), the Yankees have continued to stick to that plan.
    Further lessening your point and relevance on this board is your continued use of the term ‘Cashboy’. It’s not clever or funny, and resorting to those childish and silly antics only goes to show how little you really have to say.
    As an aside, I really don’t see the difference between a no-trade and a non-no-trade in these situations. You really think the Yankees were planning on trading Mark Teixeira during the last two years of his contract? If he were at a level where he was not even an above-average first baseman, who would take on that player with 2 years and $45 million left on his contract? That seems like a pretty silly thing to quibble over, given the amount of money and years attached to a deal.
    I am extremely happy with this deal, in that a.) the Yankees significantly upgraded one of their weakest positions of the past decade, and b.) the Red Sox did not seriously upgrade their offense for the next several years, at seemingly little opportunity or flexibility cost to them. The Yankees just got better, and the Red Sox didn’t. And as Theo Epstein aptly put it: if you’re not getting better, you’re getting worse.

    AndrewYF December 24, 2008, 12:03 am
  • The Yanks only had to match the highest bid (by the Nationals…between $178 million and $184 million according to the Wash Post) because turns out the Yanks were Teix’s preferred team the whole time (according to numerous sources). So this talk about the Yanks overbidding vs. other teams or outbidding themselves is not applicable here…w/ C.C. most definitely yes…but not here.
    But recourse for Sox fans is that they DID NOT need Teix. They have a great 1st baseman w/ another big 1B prospect on the way and a very good-to-great 3B who doctors have said will be ready in time for ST. It would have been excessive and overkill…they would have solidified their role as evil empire II.
    Yanks, on the other hand, have needed an all around 1B (not just a big steroidy bat too slow for any other position) since Tino. Teix was too obvious a fit.

    J (yf) December 24, 2008, 1:16 am
  • Luck or clutch or whatever, sure, as a YF, we all want them to win the series every year, but just making the playoffs every year except for last already shows what spending the cash did. That’s what money bought – consistency.

    Lar December 24, 2008, 1:30 am
  • The City of New York should demand its money back, but they were so happily taken for a ride on the new and unnecessary Yankee Stadium, they don’t really deserve the chance. (Although the citizens of New York do. Fuck hiking my MetroCard fees and fuck you, Mayor Bloomberg. Enjoy the luxury suite free parking spaces paid for, and enjoy rich man’s heaven. Y’know, hell.)
    Justify this as you will, the combined weight of the three signings put together is still a massive fuck you to fans of every other team, especially those whose whole payrolls don’t come close to the combination of what these three will be (over)paid next year. So fuck me, New York Yankees? Fuck you. Fuck your soulless franchise, fuck your all-names team, fuck your vapid new stadium that will be free of your real fans, just as you planned, but also with a lot less Wall Street money in the boxes, not at all as you planned. Fuck Major League Baseball for believing an income tax is a solution. Fuck George Steinbrenner, who I hope is in fact dying, as the desperation of these moves put together cries out to me. Fuck Brian Cashman, who is no longer a general manager who makes moves, but one who offers more, more, much more than the other guy. That is not strategy, that is SPENDING, effectively making him a Hilton as GM. And go Tampa and Boston. In fact, most of all, go Tampa. Prove this whole wrongheaded strategy wrong before it buries us all.

    Hit Dog December 24, 2008, 3:01 am
  • Andrew nails it.
    1) The Yanks lose only three picks for three Type-A’s. And they still have a first and second rounder (roll over from 2008 failed signings).
    2) They’ve lost none of their farm talent. None.
    J too.
    3) Teixeira wanted to be Yankee since the money was around the same elsewhere. If he had wanted to go elsewhere, no doubt a deal could have gotten done. I have little doubt this is what Henry quickly surmised – Teixeira wasn’t interested.
    4) The Sox didn’t need him.
    HitDog – I laugh in the face of your bitterness. That last team to “buy” a world championship? The Boston Red Sox in 2007 (after $200 million “invested” in Dice-K, Drew, and Lugo). Good luck doing that again with the shithole that is Fenway.

    Juan YF December 24, 2008, 3:42 am
  • I’m joining this party late, but I’m a few times zones behind and just found this out a couple hours ago.
    I’m confused by the sense of outrage that these signings seemed to have renewed. I’m not going to touch the ramifications of them with regards to the new stadium or the international credit crisis, so just in Baseball terms, aren’t the Yankees replacing one set of OMG contracts with a new set? It’s just that they happened so quickly this time instead of being spread between 2002-2005ish. Are we surprised by this? Is this surprising to us? My utter lack of outrage is so intense that I can’t tell if I’m too naive or too jaded.
    12/23 may be the date I officially began to fear the 2009 Yankees (not for the Tex signing alone, but the aggregate of the three), but I start every season assuming the worst, so my forecast hasn’t changed much. The Yankees payroll next year may not be higher than last in absolute dollars, but the expectations most certainly will be. If the Sox can improve at all this off-season (and may I remind everyone that it is not yet the New Year and there are still unsigned and potentially useful free agents out there?), I think 2009 has an excellent chance to be a lot of fun, and for those not of the YF persuasion too.

    FenSheaParkway December 24, 2008, 5:13 am
  • Replying to no one in particular, Yanks got to be the favorites in 2009 – just signed a few players in their prime, who probably won’t be significantly better later on, so if not 2009, when? =P Don’t mean it arrogantly, just saying, haha..

    Lar December 24, 2008, 8:03 am
  • i thought i was commenting about the same subsets as you sf…i wasn’t trying to start anything, despite the sour grapes reference…but let’s face it, some of the comments [maybe not yours] are bad grapes…i’m just frustrated about the ‘attitude of convenience’ that suggests on one hand the sox have the resources to compete with the yankees, until they don’t…and the inevitable spin that suggests, you didn’t really want/need that guy…you were just being shrewd and driving up the price for the other team[s], and your guys are brilliant business strategists, unlike the crazy free-spending goons from ny…i think you said in one of your comments that you personally didn’t believe the sox were driving up the price…they were in it to win it…so again, not picking on you…i was just reminded again how annoying the rationalization and spin doctoring is…it also annoys me that the spending is so inaccurately protrayed, even by the so called professionals: “the yankees just spend a half billion [or whatever it is] dollars on 3 players”, without mentioning that it will be spread out over the life of the contracts, and that at this point 09’s payroll will be less than 08’s…facts are too convenient when they have a cost to the dramatic effect of the ‘news’ i guess…
    maybe guys like you “get it” better than i do, but i’m having a hard time coming to grips with the value assessment of these players…a guy is worth 175m, but not 185m [or whatever the number]…i realize that a bidding war has to end somewhere…someone has to blink…but, if a player is described as “a cornerstone for the next 10 years”, “coveted”, “a top priority”, “protection in the lineup for ortiz, like manny used to give”…i just expected the ceiling to be a bit higher, that’s all, especially considering that tex could have been had for almost the same per year as manny was getting for dogging it…again, that’s why i responded the way i did…sorry, but with the mood i was in, your explanation sounded more like an excuse…
    finally, fans of both teams can be “pompous and obnoxious”…as well as “simplistic and uninformed”…all of these subsets are annoying…i’m sure you agree, but i thought i’d state it for the record…i’m just glad you and i are members of the “thoughful and enlightened” subset ;)

    dc December 24, 2008, 8:05 am
  • I don’t think money is the real issue here. From what I know, the money for the stadium was in the form of bonds and will be repaid back to the city.
    Also, if you could trade the players coming off the books (Pettite, Giambi, Abreu, Mussina, and Pavano) for CC, Burnett, Teixiera and $26.5M/year, would you? I would take that in a heartbeat and I would also add Manny for about $45M/2yrs.
    We also have more money coming off the books next year (Damon @ $13M, Matsui @ $13M, Wang @ $5M, and Molina @ $2M) with Wang (and Molina?) as player(s) the yanks probably want to hang on to.

    tells-yf December 24, 2008, 9:27 am
  • From the Post:
    “Teixeira really didn’t want to be a Red Sox,” a baseball official familiar with the negotiations said. “He wanted to be a Yankee, and [Cashman] got a deal done.”
    Looks like he wanted to play in the Bronx…that’s cool.

    krueg December 24, 2008, 10:31 am
  • One common theme I keep seeing on other sites is the fact that now Nick Swisher is a bench player and trade bait. That makes ZERO sense. Swisher is young, cheap and signed through 2011, with 2012 option. Nady and Matsui on the other hand are both older than Swisher and will be FA’s in 2010. Both Matsui and Nady are far less versatile as well. Sure the Yankees really don’t need a 1Bman (barring an injury) but wouldn’t it be nice to have one just in case OR to give Tex a rest here or there? Swisher can play all 3 OF positions as well. Why not let him be the everyday CF’r, his defense is enough to get you by. I love the idea of Gardner starting, but that was before with obtained Tex. The Yankees have options here and trading Swisher should not be one of them. Matsui has a full no trade, but I would still see if there is interest. Nady could be a steal for a team in need of a corner OF’r. Give the Mets a call, they don’t have much I’d want, but you never know. The point though is that Swisher is far more valuable to this team past 2009 than Nady or Matsui.

    John - YF December 24, 2008, 11:24 am
  • ‘Fuck George Steinbrenner, who I hope is in fact dying’
    All I’ve got left to say is with the aging Posada, Jeter, Matsui, Damon and Mo; team defense best described now as only slightly less horrid, and a pitching staff still needing hefty contributions from unproven kids, the Yanks have fielded far better teams in the recent past (think 2005, for starters. No, not in hindsight) yet won nothing.
    I’m not impressed nor intimidated, and I’m sure the Sox are not either. Let the games begin.

    Dirty Water December 24, 2008, 12:13 pm
  • if Tex wanted to be a Yankee, then what could the Sox have done? Keep raising the offer until he no longer wanted to be a Yankee? What number would THAT have been? It certainly wouldn’t have been what Tony Masarotti and others are crapping on the Sox for not offering.
    If the sentiments of Tex are accurately reported, then good for the Sox for sticking to their guns. If true, the Yankees should be thanking the Sox for capping their offer and keeping Boras from prizing another 10 or 15m out of them.
    And once again it is impossible to know the truth about whether a Boras client went “where they wanted” or “where the most money came from”, since they are, as per the usual, one and the same.

    SF December 24, 2008, 12:23 pm
  • Oh, blah. I’m not buying that Teix necessarily wanted to be a Yank. All reports were of him wanting to play for the most money in a NE city that competes regularly. That’s the Sox or Yanks. So I have no doubt he would be a Sox if they chose to make his contract the 2nd richest, which -no doubt- Borass was angling for. And, really, that would have been a retahded decision by the Sox.

    Dirty Water December 24, 2008, 12:49 pm
  • Wang @ 5 million isn’t really money coming off the books, unless he pulls a Pavano and gets hurt carrying Christmas gifts..

    Lar December 24, 2008, 1:54 pm
  • Some thoughts–first, I love this place. A rivalry-inflating contract was just announced and yet I can still come here and read smart takes on the deal and not just internet finger-vomit.
    Second point: I’m not sure why there’s this level of “buying the team” rage out there. What would you have them do with their money? Stick it in their ears? It’s money! Spend it! Now, let’s take an uncharitable view of the Yankees fanbase–they’re people who pay money to see their team win. If you put together a team that wins consistently, you can recoup that investment on increased peripherals: attendance, advertising deals, etc. We don’t know the numbers, but I think Hal has a firm grip on reality and wouldn’t approve this deal if it was a loser for the Yankees organization.
    I’m pretty happy with the ’09 Yankees. They’re betting that there’s less variance in the market for Yankees tickets than there is for other teams, and leveraging that in an intelligent fashion. They’re getting younger. They’re not really blocking any prospects. Fame is as fame does. The Yankees wouldn’t be the Yankees if they made decisions like a small-market team. Also let’s not forget that they’re competing against 2 rivals now, as the Rays are a bona fide playoff threat.
    Finally, baseball games are played on fields and not on spreadsheets. I have every confidence that we’ll see some memorable games at Fenway and the new Yankee Stadium. And my team will lose some. And your team will lose some.
    And when that happens, we should all remember the dirty secret that’s at the heart of the Rivalry and, indeed, this site: it’s good for all of us and for the game as a whole. See you in April.
    (Now, someone please push Pedroia off the Harvard Bridge)

    Statler [YF] December 24, 2008, 2:59 pm
  • 2007 was a purchased World Series now? Do the math, and see how many cheap contracts brought the Sox there. Now count the number of Yankees making less than ONE, yes ONE, million dollars a year.
    I’ve had it. Goodbye perspective, Yankees and all too many of their fans, hello World Series. (Of Poker, that is. I expect to see multiple new Yankees blowing their new contracts going for a HORSE championship.)

    Hit Dog December 24, 2008, 5:15 pm
  • 1) The ‘place’ is alright, and would be better if more all-out wars occured. Too tame, I’ve said. I’d like to call a Skank fan a fuckface on occasion because it’s typically well-earned but that is frowned upon here.
    2) I have a suggestion: Instead of overpaying for players why don’t they instead lower tickets prices or Cablevision costs for carrying Yes? Seeing that the taxfree bonds which built their new monstrocity have taken from NY residents why not give some back?
    3) I’m pretty happy with the 2009 Yanks, as well. I still think their roster is too dominated with has-beens and never-yets, but with CC/Wang/AJ at least this version has the potential to compete.

    Dirty Water December 24, 2008, 5:29 pm
  • I had a figment. That Manny ended up on the Yanks as well, in a one year high AAV deal that somehow makes him look good because he left money on the table and went against Boras MO.

    SF December 24, 2008, 7:15 pm
  • Wow, crazy few days! Baseball and weather-wise.
    I’m still not a fan of this deal for this player. I still think his best comparable is Will Clark. That might be fine on a three or four year deal. But not at eight years and not at the dollars spent. I have little doubt that the Yanks will be significantly overpaying beginning in year 5. An above average, but not HOF great, 1B is just not worth that kind of money, not when decent 1Bs are very abundant. Piss poor planning leads to contracts of this type. Even worse when they just got out from under Giambi’s contract.
    That said, I can see where the Yankees are coming from. Teixeira is the most well-rounded free agent available this year and next year. That’s worth a premium. Still, that’s not an extra three or four years. Why not offer him $100-120 million over four years?
    I know I would have preferred Manny or even Dunn. Of course, I’ll root hard for Teixeira. But I expect his twilight to begin at the mid-way point. Just a hunch, but he’s doesn’t have that far to fall.
    I also think it’s obvious that Teixeira wound up exactly where he wanted to. If he wanted to go somewhere else, he could have. The money was very close ($170 mil in the last offer). If he had told Henry he wanted to be a Red Sock, he would have been. He didn’t and so he isn’t.

    Rob December 24, 2008, 9:00 pm
  • The Yankees still have a guaranteed 1st and 2nd round compensation picks in 2009 for not signing Gerrit Cole and Scott Bittle. These are picks #28A and #75A, respectively.
    So to anyone who thought the Yankees have conceded the 2009 draft with signing CC and Tex, you are misinformed.

    doug YF December 24, 2008, 10:19 pm

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.