PDA

View Full Version : I have to laugh at......



ChatterRed
10-07-2006, 09:26 PM
I was listening to the Two Angry Guys, Lance McAllister, Jim Rome, etc........after the Yankees won the first game of that series. They were all pretty much talking about how the Yankees play the game right and how Detroit was the "JV". I was laughing then and I'm laughing now. Everyone of them was talking arrogantly too like it was a done deal that the Yankees would sweep Detroit, as if Detroit was pathetic because they stumbled down the finish line.......and New York was the almighty because they nearly everyone on their roster had been an All-Star at one time.

One game does not make a series and I tried and tried to call in earlier in the week when the arrogant comments were being made, but to no avail.

I am laughing hysterically at all of them now. There is nothing better than to see the $250 billion dollar Yankees falter year after year. They are everything that is wrong with MLB. No wonder the NFL, with it's salary cap and growing parity are heads above MLB.

Maybe if other teams could compete financially, MLB would be more interesting for fans of all teams that could honestly hope their team could win it all.

Is Pujols and all those young Detroit phenoms and the Twins and White Sox best players destined to be signed by the money tree known as the Yankees?

I think what amazes me even more is that Steinbrenner spends far more than everyone else BUT STILL CAN'T PUT A ROSTER TOGETHER THAT CAN WIN IT ALL. It should be a gimme but even he can't do it.

That is hilarious.

guttle11
10-07-2006, 09:59 PM
You know, I've never thought of it like that...

Redsfan08
10-08-2006, 12:48 AM
:)

dman
10-08-2006, 02:42 AM
I'm just thankful we don't have a New York "Subway Series" this year for them to talk about.
I really like the point of your post though, great point of view.

camisadelgolf
10-08-2006, 11:56 AM
A personal theory I have on why the Yankees can't win is because most salaries are based on what the players have already accomplished, and that can cause players to subconsiously think, "Why should I give it my all? I received my high salary because of the 50 homeruns I hit last season--not the 50 I'm supposed to hit this season."

If you'll notice, generally, the players putting out the most effort are the younger ones trying to earn a big contract--not the ones who are already getting paid tens of millions.

UC_Ken
10-08-2006, 12:16 PM
The Yankees lose because their expensive pitching is old. Their offense didn't play well either but good pitching beats good hitting in the playoffs. Mussina and Johnson are slightly above average pitchers making $36 mil. Most teams that win have pitchers in the prime of their careers, not upper 30s, early 40s type pitchers.

Cashman is to blame, assuming he made the calls on their free agent starting pitching. If these are Steinbrenner's calls then its his fault. None of this is Torre's fault.

mth123
10-08-2006, 12:43 PM
A personal theory I have on why the Yankees can't win is because most salaries are based on what the players have already accomplished, and that can cause players to subconsiously think, "Why should I give it my all? I received my high salary because of the 50 homeruns I hit last season--not the 50 I'm supposed to hit this season."

If you'll notice, generally, the players putting out the most effort are the younger ones trying to earn a big contract--not the ones who are already getting paid tens of millions.

This is a generalization and is not always true by any means. But there is some truth to this.

mth123
10-08-2006, 12:44 PM
The Yankees lose because their expensive pitching is old. Their offense didn't play well either but good pitching beats good hitting in the playoffs. Mussina and Johnson are slightly above average pitchers making $36 mil. Most teams that win have pitchers in the prime of their careers, not upper 30s, early 40s type pitchers.

Cashman is to blame, assuming he made the calls on their free agent starting pitching. If these are Steinbrenner's calls then its his fault. None of this is Torre's fault.

This actually is much more true.

Slyder
10-08-2006, 01:03 PM
This actually is much more true.


A personal theory I have on why the Yankees can't win is because most salaries are based on what the players have already accomplished, and that can cause players to subconsiously think, "Why should I give it my all? I received my high salary because of the 50 homeruns I hit last season--not the 50 I'm supposed to hit this season."

If you'll notice, generally, the players putting out the most effort are the younger ones trying to earn a big contract--not the ones who are already getting paid tens of millions.

Kenny Rogers= 41
Tom Glavine= 40

Dodgers had Greg Maddux who was one of the reasons they were even in it.

You can't tell me that Kenny Rogers wasnt out there giving it his all. Its about the person not their contract status.

mth123
10-08-2006, 01:12 PM
Kenny Rogers= 41
Tom Glavine= 40

Dodgers had Greg Maddux who was one of the reasons they were even in it.

You can't tell me that Kenny Rogers wasnt out there giving it his all. Its about the person not their contract status.

If your point is that there are some good older pitchers, I agree. But Maddux was the #3 or #4 in LA, Glavine somewhere in the middle in NY and same for Rogers in Detroit. Johnson and Mussina were counted upon to be #'s 1 & 2 in NY from the outset. If Wang would not have developed beyond expectations, they may have missed the play-offs completely. (Probably not, Boston had too many injuries and Toronto disappointed.)

kbrake
10-08-2006, 01:29 PM
MLB does not need a salary cap. The NFL does so much better because it has a product that is much more exciting. I find the NFL to be much more predictable than MLB anyways. As for the Yankees they lose because they dont ever have pitching that is all that great. That and they always seem to get guys too late and while they are on the decline.

Slyder
10-08-2006, 01:35 PM
If your point is that there are some good older pitchers, I agree. But Maddux was the #3 or #4 in LA, Glavine somewhere in the middle in NY and same for Rogers in Detroit. Johnson and Mussina were counted upon to be #'s 1 & 2 in NY from the outset. If Wang would not have developed beyond expectations, they may have missed the play-offs completely. (Probably not, Boston had too many injuries and Toronto disappointed.)

My point is it depends on the player not their contract status. If you have a hard worker its not going to matter if they are in a contract year or set for the rest of their GREAT GRANDKIDS lives they are going to go out there and perform. My other point was with Harang and Arroyo we wouldnt neccessarily require someone to come in and be #1, but I'd rather pay an extra few mil for a guy with a history of being very good (like Rogers this past offseason) rather than throwing less (but still significant amount) at a crap shoot like Vincente Padilla. We saw what B-C level shopping gets you in pitchers (Eric Milton).

UC_Ken
10-08-2006, 01:35 PM
I'm wasn't saying that these players can't be succesful. I was saying you shouldn't build your rotation around them. Schilling was a huge part of the Red Sox winning two years ago. But you need to build your rotation around guys in their prime not the old guys. Rogers is playing the Schilling role in Detroit right now.

New York would be much better with guys like Arroyo and Harang as the meat of their rotation. I'd imagine if we're in the ARod sweepstakes they'll demand one of these guys.

Slyder
10-08-2006, 01:36 PM
I'm wasn't saying that these players can't be succesful. I was saying you shouldn't build your rotation around them. Schilling was a huge part of the Red Sox winning two years ago. But you need to build your rotation around guys in their prime not the old guys. Rogers is playing the Schilling role in Detroit right now.

New York would be much better with guys like Arroyo and Harang as the meat of their rotation. I'd imagine if we're in the ARod sweepstakes they'll demand one of these guys.

They are big fans of the long ball and working counts maybe ARod plus Cash for Dunn and Milton (Heck Milton would probably do decent in Yankee Stadium).

mth123
10-08-2006, 01:52 PM
They are big fans of the long ball and working counts maybe ARod plus Cash for Dunn and Milton (Heck Milton would probably do decent in Yankee Stadium).

I can't see the Yankees being interested in Dunn. Even if Sheffield goes, they have Cabrera, Matsui, Damon and Abreau in OF/DH and Giambi at 1B and DH. They'd want Harang or Arroyo and probably Bailey. They may want EdE to play 3B with A-Rod gone.

I think Milton would be better in Yankee stadium as well. Maybe we could pawn him off for payflex and maybe a bullpen arm. I won't hold my breath.

MrCinatit
10-08-2006, 02:50 PM
George is more impressed with a "name" than anything else. I believe he is more apt to go after a name such as a Dunn or an Arroyo than Aaron Harang, who I believe does not get the national respect he should.

mth123
10-08-2006, 02:58 PM
George is more impressed with a "name" than anything else. I believe he is more apt to go after a name such as a Dunn or an Arroyo than Aaron Harang, who I believe does not get the national respect he should.

Outside of Cincy and the fantasy baseball types, I'm not sure that Dunn is such a big name. If its a name he wants, we have one in CF. He'd fit with the other monuments in CF in NY.

flyer85
10-08-2006, 03:51 PM
The reason the Yanks have been losing in the postseason is rather simple, their pithcing isn't very good. Detroit had the far superior starters and relievers.

jimbo
10-08-2006, 03:57 PM
The reason the Yanks have been losing in the postseason is rather simple, their pithcing isn't very good. Detroit had the far superior starters and relievers.


Bingo. This is where the Yankees have not been able to get it right. They've been able to shell out the money for some of the most superstar heavy lineups the game has ever seen, but they've struggled assembling any kind of solid rotations. They've signed too many mediocre or broken down old starters to high dollar contracts and it always comes back to bite them in the postseason.

flyer85
10-08-2006, 03:58 PM
Bingo. This is where the Yankees have not been able to get it right. They've been able to shell out the money for some of the most superstar heavy lineups the game has ever seen, but they've struggled assembling any kind of solid rotations. They've signed too many mediocre or broken down old starters to high dollar contracts and it always comes back to bite them in the postseason.... and their relievers not named Rivera are worth much either.

mth123
10-08-2006, 04:17 PM
The reason the Yanks have been losing in the postseason is rather simple, their pithcing isn't very good. Detroit had the far superior starters and relievers.

Exactly. If A-Rod is traded (highly doubtful IMO) it will be for pitching.

ChatterRed
10-08-2006, 04:28 PM
Again, this thread backs up everything I said. Steinbrenner does a very poor job of spending his $200 million. For $200 million, there should not even be a question of winning the World Series.

And yes, MLB DOES NEED A SALARY CAP. I'd say around $80 million would be good. I also think they need a minimum amount you could spend as a team. Say $50 million. That would spread the wealth of good players around and really make management have to think how to spend their money. I think it would be very interesting.

flyer85
10-08-2006, 04:38 PM
And yes, MLB DOES NEED A SALARY CAP. ... and it won't be getting one anytime soon.

TeamBoone
10-09-2006, 12:45 AM
They are big fans of the long ball and working counts maybe ARod plus Cash for Dunn and Milton (Heck Milton would probably do decent in Yankee Stadium).

Good grief! This board harps constantly about the $ amount of Dunn and Griffey contracts but yet you support taking on A-Rod's?????

ChatterRed
10-09-2006, 07:33 AM
Only take A-Rod's if the Yanks pony up some money to help pay for his contract.

BuckWoody
10-09-2006, 09:13 AM
The reason the Yanks have been losing in the postseason is rather simple, their pithcing isn't very good. Detroit had the far superior starters and relievers.
The Tigers pen is very impressive. Combine the flame throwers they have out there (Todd Jones not withstanding) with the adrenaline pumping atmosphere of post-season ball and they've got a good shot at having a playoff run like the '90 Reds bullpen had.

REDREAD
10-09-2006, 01:50 PM
George is more impressed with a "name" than anything else. I believe he is more apt to go after a name such as a Dunn or an Arroyo than Aaron Harang, who I believe does not get the national respect he should.

There is some truth in that. Reportedly, Steinbrenner wanted Sheffield instead of Vlad when they were both FAs. That's one example.

Although some of their moves, I can't fault. If you have a chance to pick up Mussina and Randy J, and money is no problem, why not do it? Those guys are past their prime, but they did get the Yanks to the playoffs which is better than sitting on your hands and not making the playoffs.

The Yanks really don't have the option of doing a Marlins blowup and building a young core. They got that sweet cable deal in part to being in the playoff race every year.