PDA

View Full Version : Theo Epstein complains!!! about payroll!!!



dabvu2498
08-21-2006, 09:38 AM
:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Rich in natural resources
Epstein playing futures market
By Nick Cafardo | August 21, 2006

He didn't bring a white flag to wave in surrender, or say the Red Sox can't compete with the Yankees. What Theo Epstein said last night in a long on-field interview before the Sox-Yankees game is that the Red Sox never will be able to compete with the Yankees' financial resources and therefore they always will need to have a longer view than a New York organization that can play for the ``right now."

In the past when Sox ownership or management brought up the great disparity between the payrolls of the Yankees and Red Sox, you always rolled your eyes and countered that 1) the Red Sox won the World Series with the highest payroll in history for a Series winner ($128 million); and 2) teams with lesser payrolls have won championships and contended for titles (Marlins, Angels, Twins, A's) with half of Boston's payroll.

After listening to Epstein last night, it was clearer than ever that the $74 million that currently separates the Yankees' payroll ($194 million) from the Sox' ($120 million) finally has caught up to the home team.

Epstein said the Sox never could be an uberteam, code for a team with no weaknesses, the type of team that if any player goes down, there's a great player to replace him.

In other words, the Yankees.

``I think they achieve it sometimes," Epstein said. ``They do. Look around the diamond, they have some of the best players in the game, some of the highest-paid players in the game. They've also done a good job of producing a couple of good young players for no money, so I don't think they're a one-trick pony by any stretch of the imagination.

``I don't think we do things exactly the same way, and that's by design. [GM Brian Cashman] has got a great plan, and we have a plan. For instance, I do think we're in a position competing directly with them with less resources to have to keep one eye on the future. We can't do certain things that on paper would look good without thinking about the ramifications on future payroll, on future construction, etc. That's the reality. We've operated the same way since Day 1 of the offseason following the 2002 season," he said.

The Sox were unable to absorb the $27 million it would have taken to bring Bobby Abreu aboard. The Yankees were able to secure the player without blinking an eye.

``Yeah, conceivably that's an example where we didn't have the resources to take on his salary this year or next year, but we have tremendous resources, don't get me wrong," Epstein said. ``We have fantastic resources; that's just not something we can do with a [luxury tax hit] of $20 million-plus dollars. That's not something we can do. To upgrade in right field is not worth it to us because we have to spread that money around to execute our plan and build the '07 team."

The last time the teams were even close in payroll was 2001, when the Yankees had one just under $3 million less than Boston's.

The Yankees' budget is as close to unlimited as one can get, while the Red Sox seem to draw the line at what they're spending at right now -- a shade over $120 million and the willingness to pay about a $25 million luxury tax.

Before you feel too sorry for Boston, consider the A's probably couldn't have picked up either Eric Hinske or Javy Lopez had Jason Kendall or Jay Payton been lost to injury. But the difference is the Red Sox are spending $74 million less than their biggest rival.

To put that in some perspective, consider the Sox outspend the Royals by almost $73 million. Throwing out the recent three-game sweep the Royals handed Boston, consider what a $73 million bump in payroll could do for the Royals.

While the Sox don't get off the hook for not making a trade at the deadline, one can understand what Epstein faces in trying to balance the present with the future while knowing the Yankees are going to have the best roster money can buy.

Epstein got into the subtle and not-so-subtle differences between the superpowers.

``Since I've been GM, we've never focused exclusively on the now, and we never will," Epstein said. ``We're not going to change because of a tough month. We are not the Yankees. We admire the Yankees. I admire the Yankees. I respect them. We have to do things different.

``Our approach is a little bit different, given our resources relative to the Yankees; we feel our best way to compete with them year in and year out is to keep one eye on now and one eye on the future and to build something that can sustain success.

``They're also very good at that," Epstein continued. ``We've gone toe-to-toe with those guys taking that approach. I think we're, what, one or two games under .500 against them, and since '03 have won one more World Series than they have taking that approach. We've been in the playoffs every year, just like they have.

``We're not going to change our approach and all of a sudden try to build an uberteam, and all of a sudden win now at the expense of the future. That's not an excuse. I'm not trying to throw some sort of a cloak over the clear holes that are on this team by sort of talking instantly about the future. I'm not. Our goals are now and our goals are to put ourselves in a position to win every single year."

When the Yankees open their $1 billion stadium in 2009, their reservoir of cash might seem like a runaway river.

``That's the reality," Epstein said. ``It's going to occasionally leave us short, it's going to leave us short every time there's a player who's available in a bidding war, taking on a contract, getting the best free agent. We're never going to sell ourselves out just to get that one guy because we have to take a long-term view given our resources relative to the Yankees. That's the only way to do it.

``I think we're good at it and I think it's going to prove successful in the long run."

Epstein was as honest about the Red Sox and their plight as he's ever been. While the Yankees certainly have done well recently in developing Robinson Cano, Melky Cabrera, and Chien-Ming Wang, the Sox need to be better in player development than New York.

When you decide not to sacrifice the future, there will be seasons when you don't make the playoffs and seasons in which everything will come together. Will the Sox' fan base accept it? That's the question.

While it sounds as if the Sox have thrown up the white flag when it comes to competing with the Yankees on a payroll basis, they are now on record with the fans about what they are.

They are a team with excellent resources, but one that has a bottom line they will not go over.

http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/articles/2006/08/21/rich_in_natural_resources?mode=PF

registerthis
08-21-2006, 09:48 AM
As ridiculously high as the Sox payroll is, it doesn't begin to approach the Yankees, who have about $75 million on the Sox right now.

ChatterRed
08-21-2006, 10:08 AM
All the more reason that baseball has fallen behind the NFL in fan favoritism.

Parity, giving every team a chance to succeed with equal finances is only fair.

What the Yankees do is the one of the most unfair practices in sports, even if it is within the rules.

joshnky
08-21-2006, 10:11 AM
I think Reds fans wouldn't mind having the Red Sox payroll. This is the reason I now hate the Red Sox even more than the Yankees. Their fans and now their management complain about the Yankees buying the pennant but the Red Sox do exactly the same thing. I think we've seen over the past few years that there is a threshold of spending that you reach where it does little to further the team. The Red Sox offense is every bit as good as the Yankees with all the guys NY has on the DL and the pitching is similar as well. The Yankees just waste money on washed up players the Red Sox don't need. All we hear is how the poor Red Sox can't compete because they only have $120 million to spend. Thats ridiculous.

VR
08-21-2006, 10:30 AM
Who's got the Sox address...I'd like to send some money in.

flyer85
08-21-2006, 10:38 AM
and somehow,year after year, Billy Beane manages to put together a winner on a shoestring budget(and he doesn't even have Mulder/Hudson anymore).

TRF
08-21-2006, 10:40 AM
Parity, schmarity.

Name the last 5 superbowl winners.

Now name the last 5 WS winners.

Which one has more teams repeat. Now go back 10 years. 15. 20.

Baseball does get the occasional dynasty, but overall the parity IS there. No matter how much George spends.

registerthis
08-21-2006, 10:42 AM
Parity, schmarity.

Name the last 5 superbowl winners.

Now name the last 5 WS winners.

Which one has more teams repeat. Now go back 10 years. 15. 20.

Baseball does get the occasional dynasty, but overall the parity IS there. No matter how much George spends.

The fact that the lowly Florida Marlins have won the WS twice in nine years speaks to that.

Jr's Boy
08-21-2006, 10:45 AM
It seems espn has a constant love affair with the Redsox.I won't even say Redsox, Yankees feud anymore,it's all about the Redsox now.So I enjoy watching the them lose.

HumnHilghtFreel
08-21-2006, 11:11 AM
All the more reason that baseball has fallen behind the NFL in fan favoritism.

Parity, giving every team a chance to succeed with equal finances is only fair.

What the Yankees do is the one of the most unfair practices in sports, even if it is within the rules.

Why shouldn't the American pastime have a capitalistic setup? lol

terminator
08-21-2006, 12:18 PM
The WS champion may show "parity" the last few years, but a more relevant fact is that the last time the Yankees didn't make the playoffs was 1993. :eek: The Red Sox, while not that dominant, have made it five of the last eight years (keeping in mind that thanks to the Yankees they are usually competing with ten other teams for one last playoff spot). That isn't the result of them being smarter than the rest of baseball -- it's the $$$, pure and simple.

I've always hated the Yankees and over the last few years the Red Sox have morphed into the Yankees-lite, so I'm not a fan of them either.

MaineRed
08-21-2006, 12:29 PM
I hate the Red Sox. How do they think the D-Rays like competing with them?

Steinbrenner voted against the current system that is used in MLB. I believe he was one of the only ones.

He didn't make the rules, he just takes advantage of them.

All the Sox do is complain. Huge TV deal, full ballpark every night and huge fanbase that stretches through 5 states.

Shut up.

TRF
08-21-2006, 12:33 PM
And yet For all that they spend on payroll, since 2001 the Yankees have how many titles?

The Marlins look close to being a WS contender again... maybe as soon as next year, but probably 2008.

The Yankees look old and expensive. Aquiring players with skills that are declining. I'm not worried about the Yankees.

I worry about the Tigers. and the Marlins, and especially TB if they can ever put it all together. Tons of talent there. I worry that Milwaukee might someday develop some pitching, and that Toronto just finds the last ingredient needed to field a winner. And what if the Twins added a bopper or two? And a third starter? ouch.

The Yankees? pheh. big payroll teams have always been a part of the game. but they don't always win. The Yankees likely won't make it to the WS this year. In fact, they will probably lose in the first round, prompting another silly spending spree by King George.

flyer85
08-21-2006, 12:38 PM
And yet For all that they spend on payroll, since 2001 the Yankees have how many titles?there is a lot of luck involved in winning the WS title once you get to the playoffs. Having said that the Yankees are rather clueless about how to build a team to be successful in the playoffs. They make a bunch of mistakes but are just able to spend there way out of them in-season. What team wouldn't have liked to have added Abreu. The Yankees were the only team willing to fork over the millions to make it happen.

blumj
08-21-2006, 12:39 PM
I've always hated the Yankees and over the last few years the Red Sox have morphed into the Yankees-lite, so I'm not a fan of them either.
Well, I actually think that's what Epstein's trying to do, stop the Red Sox from being "Yankees-lite" anymore. But it remains to be seen whether or not he can get away with it.

flyer85
08-21-2006, 12:43 PM
Well, I actually think that's what Epstein's trying to do, stop the Red Sox from being "Yankees-lite" anymore. But it remains to be seen whether or not he can get away with it.The Reds Sox have a number of talented young players, however, they lack the pitching to get over the top at the moment.

At least Epstein has resisted the urge to trade his young talent for marginal gains up to this point. DId it likely doom this seasons playoff chances? Yes but it will more than likely pay dividends in the future.

joshnky
08-21-2006, 12:45 PM
It seems to me that money can by an offense but it can't buy pitching. The way free agency and the trade market has gone the past few years there are usually some bats available and the Yankees pick up the best of those. However, pitching is at such a premium that true ace pitchers never hit the open market and are seldom traded. This has left the Yankees to swoop in and pick up good pitchers at the tail end of their careers. This strategy worked with Clemens and Mussina a few year back but has backfired recently with Johnson. The Yankees problem (and the Reds for that matter) is that the best way to obtain top of the line pitching is to develop it and they can't do that. Pitching is the great equalizer in basball between the small and large markets.

Yachtzee
08-21-2006, 12:47 PM
Why shouldn't the American pastime have a capitalistic setup? lol

Well, for one thing, there's no free entry into and out of the market. Imagine if some wealthy financier simply decided that New York could support another team, met the financial requirements for team ownership and obtained a place to put in a ballpark. Or what if Loria decided that the Marlins would do just fine with a Manhattan ballpark and got the financing together to build one? I don't think the Mets and Yankees would be too happy about either situation, and I think those teams would use everything in their power to prevent it. The value of the Yankees franchise is partially a result of MLB protecting the Yankees from other teams wanting to move into their market.

dougdirt
08-21-2006, 12:48 PM
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA


Ok, I feel a lot better now. Theo can go whine all he wants, he has spent more than any team in baseball that is not the Yankees, so if he thinks thats bad, tell him next season he can only spend 80 million and see what kind of team he puts together then.

dabvu2498
08-21-2006, 12:48 PM
And what if the Twins added a bopper or two? And a third starter?
Justin Morneau, Carlos Silva and Matt Garza say hi. :wave:

TOBTTReds
08-21-2006, 12:50 PM
I agree with Theo, but, you have to beat the Royals before you can talk about payroll issues. You just got swept by the ROYALS.

oregonred
08-21-2006, 02:02 PM
Classic. Love it.

From what I've heard in comments the Red Sox strategy under Theo has recently been to assume the Yankees will win 100 games and make the playoffs so for the Red Sox the idea is to build a team that can get to 100-wins and get into the postseason (WC). (I really feel bad for them :))

Unfortunately for Boston two much bigger AL market sleeping giants have awoken from their multi-decade slumber (ChiSox and LAAoA) and a third market about the size of Boston (Detroit) is on a major upswing. Of course the low payroll Twins/As have better records but that can't be possible. Now that he can't vastly outspend all others but the NYY and has to actually compete for the AL WC in the forseeable future he's in major CYA mode with the media storm/panic coming from New England...

After giving up 48 runs in 4 days, it's too bad the Sox couldn't find a low-payroll inning eating starter whose a fan favorite in Boston to toss out there every five days -- but hey they've got a guy that can hit some long BP homeruns once or twice a week when he's healthy :)

TRF
08-21-2006, 02:36 PM
Justin Morneau, Carlos Silva and Matt Garza say hi. :wave:

Matt Garza?

Are you kidding me?

Carlos Silva is making Dave Williams look good.

That offense is weak, And the Twins are winning because of three pitchers: Santana, Liriano and to a lesser extent Radke.

flyer85
08-21-2006, 02:42 PM
And the Twins are winning because of three pitchers: Santana, Liriano and to a lesser extent Radke.twins have an excellent pen anchored by Nathan and Rincon with help recent from Neshek and his funky delivery.

dabvu2498
08-21-2006, 02:44 PM
Matt Garza?

Are you kidding me?

Carlos Silva is making Dave Williams look good.

That offense is weak, And the Twins are winning because of three pitchers: Santana, Liriano and to a lesser extent Radke.
Garza's 23. Silva's 27. They will be the 3-4 pitchers that you have them looking for.

TRF
08-21-2006, 02:44 PM
twins have an excellent pen anchored by Nathan and Rincon with help recent from Neshek and his funky delivery.

Not saying the Twins aren't good, but that offense is pretty weak.

Imagine Thome or Tejada in the middle of their lineup. They need some thump.

TRF
08-21-2006, 02:45 PM
Garza's 23. Silva's 27. They will be the 3-4 pitchers that you have them looking for.

Garza maybe, Silva I doubt it. And Radke is getting old.

dabvu2498
08-21-2006, 02:49 PM
Not saying the Twins aren't good, but that offense is pretty weak.

Imagine Thome or Tejada in the middle of their lineup. They need some thump.
They're 8th in the league in runs and OPS. 4 guys with 10+ homeruns but very few HRs from their complimentary players.

Mauer, Morneau, Cuddyer, Hunter in the middle is not bad.

flyer85
08-21-2006, 02:49 PM
Not saying the Twins aren't good, but that offense is pretty weak.

Imagine Thome or Tejada in the middle of their lineup. They need some thump.they have some decent thump with Cuddyer and especially Morneau. What they need is two guys at the top of the order who do a better job of getting on base. Their offense has been good once they finally got it right on who should be having the ABs(Bartlett, Cuddyer, etc) and who shouldn't (Castro, Batista, White, etc).

dabvu2498
08-21-2006, 02:50 PM
Garza maybe, Silva I doubt it. And Radke is getting old.
Radke has all but announced his retirement at the end of this year.

CrackerJack
08-21-2006, 02:56 PM
The fact that the lowly Florida Marlins have won the WS twice in nine years speaks to that.


Err didn't the lowly Florida Marlins sell-off their entire talent pool after winning one so they could stay afloat? I remember them having quite a few high priced players.

If you are in Pittsburgh, KC, Tampa Bay, or several other cities in baseball, you can safely say before a season starts, that your team has zero chance of making a postseason appearance...none. And when one does, it's a fluke - like the Reds' this year (because the NL stinks as a whole basically).

I mean is someone seriously trying to make the argument that the Yankees don't make the World Series at least every other year and have for a long time?

That there's no relationship between higher payrolls and WS success?

cmon.

flyer85
08-21-2006, 03:02 PM
That there's no relationship between higher payrolls and WS success? There is definitely correlation between high payroll and making the playoffs.

Jpup
08-21-2006, 03:07 PM
Until MLB changes the rules, which isn't going to happen, I don't see anything wrong with what the Yankees do or the Red Sox for that matter. It is kind of silly for Theo to complain about it. I find it funny that Theo is made into some kind of genuis. He has a 120 million dollar payroll, you don't have to be too smart. Give Billy Beane a payroll that high and see what happens. I think he would make the playoffs every single year.

If you want to blame someone, blame Major League Baseball and the MLBPA.

TRF
08-21-2006, 03:11 PM
There is definitely correlation between high payroll and making the playoffs.

Tell that to the Dodgers. They've had some pretty high payrolls and have barely sniffed the post season the last 10 years.

flyer85
08-21-2006, 03:12 PM
Until MLB changes the rules, which isn't going to happen, I don't see anything wrong with what the Yankees do or the Red Sox for that matter. It is kind of silly for Theo to complain about it. I find it funny that Theo is made into some kind of genuis. He has a 120 million dollar payroll, you don't have to be too smart. Give Billy Beane a payroll that high and see what happens. I think he would make the playoffs every single year.

If you want to blame someone, blame Major League Baseball and the MLBPA.Beane just about does it anyway even though the players have almost completely turned over.

For Theo it is simply whining. They are 2nd on the list of being able to spend their way out of mistakes.

It isn't going to change because too much of the value of the franchises is tied up in their revenue streams and there will never be enough consensus to level the playing field. The only way to ever change it would be too allow more teams into the larger markets to divide up the revenue streams(as someone mentioned earlier).

flyer85
08-21-2006, 03:16 PM
Tell that to the Dodgers. They've had some pretty high payrolls and have barely sniffed the post season the last 10 years.there are always outliers. The Orioles are another example.

However, if you have a huge supply of bucks and a decent GM you can spend your way out of mistakes and make the playoffs almost continually.

I still think the biggest key is having a good GM, because as guys like Beane and Ryan have shown, you can win consistently with a limited payroll. If doesn't mean you make the playoffs every year or even win once you get there but you can field a solid team every year.

WMR
08-21-2006, 03:18 PM
http://www.glassmusic.com/images/Dean%20Shostak%20and%20Glass%20Violin.jpg

TRF
08-21-2006, 03:23 PM
there are always outliers. The Orioles are another example.

However, if you have a huge supply of bucks and a decent GM you can spend your way out of mistakes and make the playoffs almost continually.

I still think the biggest key is having a good GM, because as guys like Beane and Ryan have shown, you can win consistently with a limited payroll. If doesn't mean you make the playoffs every year or even win once you get there but you can field a solid team every year.

Agreed. Payroll is a huge boost. But a smart GM can trump that. Not every time, but as a fan it makes the team more interesting to follow.

registerthis
08-21-2006, 03:44 PM
Err didn't the lowly Florida Marlins sell-off their entire talent pool after winning one so they could stay afloat? I remember them having quite a few high priced players.

Yep, and the Reds have some high-priced talent in Junior, Dunn, Milton, etc. Every team will have some high priced players, it's inevitable. The 2004 Marlins won the WS with a payroll of less than $50 million. "Economic parity" wasn't an issue for them--good scouting and drafting certainly was, tough.

registerthis
08-21-2006, 03:46 PM
there are always outliers. The Orioles are another example.

...and the Rangers, Mets, Cubs, Phillies, Mariners and Tigers.

Having a high payroll makes it easier to sign the players you want. It doesn't mean those players will translate into anything meaningful, though.

IslandRed
08-21-2006, 04:06 PM
As for me, I didn't see anything to rip Epstein about. I highly doubt he sought out reporters to complain about the Yankees spending more money. The Yankees are in town, they're beating the Red Sox, reporters are no doubt asking him if being outspent by $75 million is a factor. You expect him to say "no, it isn't?"

Sure, the Sox have the same advantage over other teams. But Epstein didn't say they didn't, and it's not the point of the article anyway. The subject of the article... weekend... entire viewpoint of Red Sox fans is Red Sox vs. Yankees. That's the measuring stick. No one up there gives a rip about they stack up against the Twins.

Boston Red
08-21-2006, 05:06 PM
No one up there gives a rip about they stack up against the Twins.


That's not exactly true right now!

cinredsfan2000
08-21-2006, 07:18 PM
It seems espn has a constant love affair with the Redsox/Yankees. I won't even say Redsox, Yankees feud anymore,it's all about the Redsox now.So I enjoy watching the them lose.

Fixed that for ya;)

mth123
08-21-2006, 09:34 PM
[QUOTE=Having a high payroll makes it easier to sign the players you want. It doesn't mean those players will translate into anything meaningful, though.[/QUOTE]

What it means most is that you can spend more money to correct your mistakes. The Reds sign Eric Milton and KGJ and they have to live with the mistakes or injuries and hope for the best. The Yankees just pull out some more dough and get some one else to make up for it.

MWM
08-22-2006, 12:05 AM
I just read the article and skimmed it a second time and I couldn't find anything where Theo Epstein whined about anything. He simply said they don't have the resources the Yankess have, which is true. And he said it in response to a question as to why he didn't pursue Bobby Abreu or some other options at the deadline. So they don't want to pay a $20MM luxury tax. What business owner would? I wonder how many people actually read the article as opposed to the title of the thread? FWIW, Theo did make a lot of seemingly odd moves this year.

Cicero
08-22-2006, 12:15 AM
Cry me a river. Baseball needs a salary cap. The small market teams simply cannot compete. Sure they do on occasion, but they mortgage their financial future to do so. Take the Marlins for instance, a couple of WS wins followed by a firesale. How many small market teams manage to succeed on a sustained basis? The NFL is so exciting because any team can win a championship with good management. This is not the case in baseball.

HumnHilghtFreel
08-22-2006, 12:27 AM
Cry me a river. Baseball needs a salary cap. The small market teams simply cannot compete. Sure they do on occasion, but they mortgage their financial future to do so. Take the Marlins for instance, a couple of WS wins followed by a firesale. How many small market teams manage to succeed on a sustained basis? The NFL is so exciting because any team can win a championship with good management. This is not the case in baseball.
That firesale turned them into a very affordable team that looks like it's going to make them very good in the very near future. Some small market teams seem to really know how to work with what they have, some just don't. I don't think baseball needs a cap, it needs more GMs who know how to rebuild the right way.

Billy_Bearcat
08-22-2006, 12:31 AM
It seems espn has a constant love affair with the Redsox.I won't even say Redsox, Yankees feud anymore,it's all about the Redsox now.So I enjoy watching the them lose.

So true. When I turn to ESPN anymore, there is a better than 50% chance that they will be talking about the Red Sox. It gets boring.

Cedric
08-22-2006, 12:31 AM
I just read the article and skimmed it a second time and I couldn't find anything where Theo Epstein whined about anything. He simply said they don't have the resources the Yankess have, which is true. And he said it in response to a question as to why he didn't pursue Bobby Abreu or some other options at the deadline. So they don't want to pay a $20MM luxury tax. What business owner would? I wonder how many people actually read the article as opposed to the title of the thread? FWIW, Theo did make a lot of seemingly odd moves this year.

He's been terrible lately, imo.

I don't really understand what happened.

Cicero
08-23-2006, 02:25 PM
That firesale turned them into a very affordable team that looks like it's going to make them very good in the very near future. Some small market teams seem to really know how to work with what they have, some just don't. I don't think baseball needs a cap, it needs more GMs who know how to rebuild the right way.

And after they win the World Series it will be time to gut the roster again. All they players they can't afford to keep head to Boston, New York et al. Repeat ad nauseum.

TRF
08-23-2006, 03:01 PM
And after they win the World Series it will be time to gut the roster again. All they players they can't afford to keep head to Boston, New York et al. Repeat ad nauseum.

If repeat means a WS ring every 6 years....


I'll take me some of that.

Handofdeath
08-23-2006, 03:24 PM
So true. When I turn to ESPN anymore, there is a better than 50% chance that they will be talking about the Red Sox. It gets boring.

Sports fans are notorious for jumping on and off bandwagons. ESPN viewers are not tuning in to see Royals highlights right now because they are terrible. ESPN is not going to show or highlight them. How often are you seeing the Braves on ESPN right now? Not much. Why? They're terrible. Most of America is not going to care right now. The Red Sox and the Yankees are flagship franchises. So are the Reds and Dodgers. Why are the Reds and Dodgers not being featured as much? They haven't done squat lately. When they start making those playoff appearances every year again (and they will) ESPN will start showing them more because America will be jumping on the bandwagon again.

Chip R
08-24-2006, 10:19 AM
From Red Sox fan Bill Simmons: "I just wish the Red Sox could spend as much money as them -- if we only had a billionaire owner, our own TV station, tons of merchandising money, tons of corporate sponsors and a team that sells out every home game. Hey, wait a second. ... "

blumj
08-24-2006, 02:39 PM
I know this has nothing to do with the Reds, and maybe there's not much reason for many Reds fans to care, but the Red Sox aren't looking much like a playoff team for the first time in several years, and their fans, Simmons included, are acting like a bunch of spoiled brats because management didn't try to buy their way in this time, and maybe that should be considered a good thing. Or, at least, it surely shouldn't be considered the wrong thing. If the Reds could afford to spend $120 million on payroll, and did, would you guys be whining because they wouldn't spend $140? The idea that current Red Sox management is cheap is totally ludicrous. There's all sorts of things they can be criticized for, but hardly for that.

Chip R
08-24-2006, 02:57 PM
I know this has nothing to do with the Reds, and maybe there's not much reason for many Reds fans to care, but the Red Sox aren't looking much like a playoff team for the first time in several years, and their fans, Simmons included, are acting like a bunch of spoiled brats because management didn't try to buy their way in this time, and maybe that should be considered a good thing. Or, at least, it surely shouldn't be considered the wrong thing. If the Reds could afford to spend $120 million on payroll, and did, would you guys be whining because they wouldn't spend $140? The idea that current Red Sox management is cheap is totally ludicrous. There's all sorts of things they can be criticized for, but hardly for that.

Call me a capitalist pig but I don't see anything wrong for spending as much as you are able to in order to win. I don't feel sorry for the Sox because they could raise ticket prices above the board $5 and they would still sell out every game. Just spending money hand over fist does not guarantee a winner but I don't blame the teams who can for doing it. Now sharing that revenue is another subject but that's not the point here. If you have the money, why spend less than what you are able to just to prove a point?

oregonred
08-24-2006, 03:00 PM
Sports fans are notorious for jumping on and off bandwagons. ESPN viewers are not tuning in to see Royals highlights right now because they are terrible. ESPN is not going to show or highlight them. How often are you seeing the Braves on ESPN right now? Not much. Why? They're terrible. Most of America is not going to care right now. The Red Sox and the Yankees are flagship franchises. So are the Reds and Dodgers. Why are the Reds and Dodgers not being featured as much? They haven't done squat lately. When they start making those playoff appearances every year again (and they will) ESPN will start showing them more because America will be jumping on the bandwagon again.

National baseball ratings continue to be pretty sluggish year after year -- it's almost entirely local driven and it's just not a national ratings generator like the NFL. I think ESPN is going for the obvious and flag waving the sports key rivalry and targeting the NEast metroplex -- in the long run they'll probably turn off quite a bit of people who hit the remote button instead of watching 15 minutes of Red Sox discussion de jour.