PDA

View Full Version : Yanks get A.J. Burnett!! Geesh



redsfan4445
12-12-2008, 06:15 PM
Yankees Sign A.J. Burnett
By Tim Dierkes [December 12 at 3:56pm CST]

According to ESPN's Jerry Crasnick, the Yankees reached a preliminary agreement with A.J. Burnett on a five-year, $82.5MM deal ($16.5MM per year on average). The deal is pending a physical, and some final terms must be hammered out.

That's $243.5MM spent by the Yankees on starting pitching, unless C.C. Sabathia opts out. The Braves will have to figure out a Plan B.



and Bowie Kuhnn was worried in 1977 that the Reds would be a dynasty by getting Vida Blue.. Wonder what he would think of the teams that always out spend everybody else these days??

Benihana
12-12-2008, 06:16 PM
Great, now quickly trade Bronson Arroyo to Atlanta for Yunel Escobar

RedEye
12-12-2008, 06:20 PM
Great, now quickly trade Bronson Arroyo to Atlanta for Yunel Escobar

I think they already acquired their league-average innings eater from the White Sox.

Benihana
12-12-2008, 06:22 PM
I think they already acquired their league-average innings eater from the White Sox.

Then why were they offering AJ Burnett $80MM+?

My prediction: Peavy will be traded to the Braves

RedEye
12-12-2008, 06:23 PM
Then why were they offering AJ Burnett $80MM+?

My prediction: Peavy will be traded to the Braves

Because Burnett is more than a league-average innings eater in their eyes? (Vazquez = Arroyo)

Will M
12-12-2008, 06:23 PM
its all good. keeps these guys out of our league and in CC's case out of our division. CC, Burnett, Tex & Lowe will get paid this year. LOTS of other free agents are going to get less than comparable guys in recent years ( due to the recession).

KoryMac5
12-12-2008, 06:25 PM
Another terrible contract given out by the Yankees. Burnett may end up being Carl Pavano part II.

RedEye
12-12-2008, 06:26 PM
its all good. keeps these guys out of our league and in CC's case out of our division. CC, Burnett, Tex & Lowe will get paid this year. LOTS of other free agents are going to get less than comparable guys in recent years ( due to the recession).

Anyone think that the Yanks will sign five of the top FA's on the market? (CC, Burnett, Tex, Manny & Lowe)? The three pitchers seem to already be a certainty, and there have been rumors about the other two. I suppose the Red Sox could at least get Tex.

Strikes Out Looking
12-12-2008, 06:36 PM
Carl Pavano Jr.

He's started 30 games 2 times in his career and pitched 200 innings three times, none of these in consecutive seasons.

blumj
12-12-2008, 06:37 PM
Anyone think that the Yanks will sign five of the top FA's on the market? (CC, Burnett, Tex, Manny & Lowe)? The three pitchers seem to already be a certainty, and there have been rumors about the other two. I suppose the Red Sox could at least get Tex.

I think there's actually some sort of limit on how many Type A free agents a team can sign, depending on how many they lose. Or maybe I imagined that?

Raisor
12-12-2008, 06:40 PM
Great deal for every team not in the AL East.

Personally, I think it's great that the AL East beats each other's heads in.

Always Red
12-12-2008, 06:40 PM
...Meanwhile, earlier this week in Gotham City:

http://www.baltimoresun.com/sports/nationworld/wire/sns-ap-bbo-mets-yankees-ballparks,0,1558368.story


The Yankees and Mets are asking the city for $450 million more in public bonds to finance their new ballparks, on top of nearly $1.5 billion they were already granted, according to the city's Economic Development Corp.

The teams requested the additional financing in applications filed with the city ahead of a public hearing on the funding next month. The applications have not yet been made public, but the city shared details in response to questions from The Associated Press.

In the Yankees' application, the team is asking for another $259 million in tax-exempt bonds and $111 million in taxable bonds, on top of $940 million in tax-exempt bonds and $25 million in taxable bonds already granted for its $1.3 billion stadium.

The Mets are requesting an additional $83 million, on top of $615 million already approved for their $800 million park.

The whole world is upside down.

The Yankees are run like the Federal government; no one can compete with that.

cincrazy
12-12-2008, 07:03 PM
The Yankees are idiots. Throwing this much cash around isn't going to solve their problems. C.C. has never performed well in the playoffs, how do you think he'll do on New York's stage? A.J. has never been able to stay healthy, why would that change in his mid-30's? Derek Lowe is 36, Manny is MANNY, etc. etc. etc. They will never learn.

PuffyPig
12-12-2008, 07:05 PM
The Yankees are idiots. Throwing this much cash around isn't going to solve their problems. C.C. has never performed well in the playoffs, how do you think he'll do on New York's stage?

Small sample size.

I'd go into the playoffs with CC heading my staff everyday of the week, and twice on Sunday.

cincrazy
12-12-2008, 07:27 PM
Small sample size.

I'd go into the playoffs with CC heading my staff everyday of the week, and twice on Sunday.

Small sample size, yes. But something you ignore when he's heading into NYC? Not so much. I still sign the guy if I'm the Yankees, unquestionably. I'm just saying, I could see this being an A-Rod type situation for them. Tons of success, but the bottom line doesn't equal what they hoped.

BCubb2003
12-12-2008, 07:28 PM
Small sample size.

I'd go into the playoffs with CC heading my staff everyday of the week, and twice on Sunday.

I don't know, I think even C.C. might falter if asked to pitch both ends of a Sunday doubleheader.

flyer85
12-12-2008, 07:42 PM
They likely aren't done

RedlegJake
12-12-2008, 09:09 PM
There is a limit of two type A free agents, I believe. You can sign however many you lose, however without regard to the limit.

Jpup
12-12-2008, 09:14 PM
There is a limit of two type A free agents, I believe. You can sign however many you lose, however without regard to the limit.

I have never heard such a thing. The Yankees will probably be signing Sheets too so get ready. Personally, I love it. I like the Yankees, but maybe it will encourage MLB to finally do something in regards to a salary cap. I hope they win every game.

ramp101
12-12-2008, 09:15 PM
amazingly enough, I believe the Yankees payroll is still lower than 2008's because they cut $77mil this offseason

cincrazy
12-12-2008, 10:42 PM
I think, talent wise, Burnett is world's better than Pavano. And as far as character is concerned, anyone would rank ahead of Pavano. But this contract could be even more damaging to the Yanks. He's 32 years old, and realistically he's already experienced his best years. And even his best years weren't all that much to write home about. The chances of him magically staying healthly for the next five years are slim to none, IMO. I could see it being like the Pedro contract, where maybe for a year or two it's more than worth the money, then the end of the deal is a disaster.

hebroncougar
12-12-2008, 11:22 PM
I think, talent wise, Burnett is world's better than Pavano. And as far as character is concerned, anyone would rank ahead of Pavano. But this contract could be even more damaging to the Yanks. He's 32 years old, and realistically he's already experienced his best years. And even his best years weren't all that much to write home about. The chances of him magically staying healthly for the next five years are slim to none, IMO. I could see it being like the Pedro contract, where maybe for a year or two it's more than worth the money, then the end of the deal is a disaster.

What had Pavano done, before he went to NY and soured everyone's view of his character?

WMR
12-12-2008, 11:51 PM
I think the Yankees should buy EVERY free agent available from now on... wouldn't they eventually HAVE to win the World Series?

kaldaniels
12-13-2008, 02:33 AM
I know it seems the Yanks aren't having much sucesss winning the World Series with their spending ways...but could possibly the stars align one of these years and they win 125-130 games in a season?

KYRedsFan
12-13-2008, 02:37 AM
Just absolutely insane that any public official is allowed to exist if he is okay with this. There is no way even not in this economy that this greed should be allowed. How can anyone who has a chance to vote for these creeps let them stick around. I live in chicago and realize greed is often the first requirement for government, but this is nearly surpassing that


...Meanwhile, earlier this week in Gotham City:

http://www.baltimoresun.com/sports/nationworld/wire/sns-ap-bbo-mets-yankees-ballparks,0,1558368.story



The whole world is upside down.

The Yankees are run like the Federal government; no one can compete with that.

The Baumer
12-13-2008, 03:34 AM
Reds need to ask the city of Cincinnati for $250 million for "stadium stuff" and use it toward getting Lowe and Manny.

RedlegJake
12-13-2008, 05:37 AM
If there are 14 or fewer Type A or Type B free agents available, no team can sign more than one type A or B player. If there are between 15-38, no team can sign more than two. If there are between 39 and 62, there's a limit of three. However, teams can sign as many Type A or B free agents as they've lost, regardless of the limits above

http://baseball.about.com/od/majorleaguebasics/a/freeagentprimer.htm

Mario-Rijo
12-13-2008, 06:18 AM
If there are 14 or fewer Type A or Type B free agents available, no team can sign more than one type A or B player. If there are between 15-38, no team can sign more than two. If there are between 39 and 62, there's a limit of three. However, teams can sign as many Type A or B free agents as they've lost, regardless of the limits above

http://baseball.about.com/od/majorleaguebasics/a/freeagentprimer.htm

Which means they have reached their limit correct? I mean don't they have to offer arbitration to be eligible for that rule to kick in? If not then the rule hardly makes any sense. They had 2 Type A's Abreu & Pettite and Pudge was a B but they offered arb. to none of them. Furthermore neither of those type A's have signed with anyone yet. Ben Sheets is a type A so if this is true they can't make a run at him and I wonder if they can re-sign Pettite.

blumj
12-13-2008, 06:45 AM
They've only signed 2 so far, CC and Burnett. Wouldn't Mussina count, though? But, it brings up an interesting point, if they re-sign Pettitte, they obviously haven't lost him, but, if they sign their quota of replacements first, would they be prevented from re-signing Pettitte, and, if so, for how long? It wouldn't be shocking if he just didn't want to sign anywhere else.

Mario-Rijo
12-13-2008, 06:52 AM
They've only signed 2 so far, CC and Burnett. Wouldn't Mussina count, though? But, it brings up an interesting point, if they re-sign Pettitte, they obviously haven't lost him, but, if they sign their quota of replacements first, would they be prevented from re-signing Pettitte, and, if so, for how long? It wouldn't be shocking if he just didn't want to sign anywhere else.

Mussina retired I believe.

Jpup
12-13-2008, 07:10 AM
Which means they have reached their limit correct? I mean don't they have to offer arbitration to be eligible for that rule to kick in? If not then the rule hardly makes any sense. They had 2 Type A's Abreu & Pettite and Pudge was a B but they offered arb. to none of them. Furthermore neither of those type A's have signed with anyone yet. Ben Sheets is a type A so if this is true they can't make a run at him and I wonder if they can re-sign Pettite.

Giambi.

Mario-Rijo
12-13-2008, 07:19 AM
Giambi.

No Giambi according to the list I checked out was not a Type A or B.

Jpup
12-13-2008, 07:20 AM
No Giambi according to the list I checked out was not a Type A or B.

he has to be. How would he not?

Mario-Rijo
12-13-2008, 07:33 AM
he has to be. How would he not?

Well it covers the past 3 years and his '07 was atrocious (sub .800 OPS) plus he didn't play much that year either. It's the only assumption I can make.

Here's where I read the info.

'09 MLB Free Agents (http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2007/12/2009-mlb-free-a.html)

WMR
12-13-2008, 02:07 PM
The Yankees should just buy every other team in baseball and make sure they all have really crappy 40 man rosters. Guaranteed World Series. CHA CHING.

Johnny Footstool
12-13-2008, 11:41 PM
at least burnett has a good k/9 ratio--better than pavano. still, that's a ton of cash for a guy who is almost certain to land on the dl at least once a year.

remdog
12-14-2008, 05:18 AM
The Yankees should just buy every other team in baseball and make sure they all have really crappy 40 man rosters. Guaranteed World Series. CHA CHING.

Back in the 50's the Yankees simply created their own AAAA team. It as called the Kansas City A's. ;) Guaranteed World Series.

Rem

vaticanplum
12-14-2008, 02:04 PM
Just absolutely insane that any public official is allowed to exist if he is okay with this. There is no way even not in this economy that this greed should be allowed. How can anyone who has a chance to vote for these creeps let them stick around. I live in chicago and realize greed is often the first requirement for government, but this is nearly surpassing that

This is just really simplistic and ignorant of the same tax breaks that nearly every other team in baseball gets. Every team goes into debt when it builds a new stadium, and cities give them tax breaks because the money is expected to come back to them. MLB itself gives teams -- all teams -- a break on this too, by allowing them to deduct stadium costs from revenue to lessen revenue sharing.

Yankee Stadium will definitely funnel money into the city of New York. Period. It behooves the city greatly to give both teams tax breaks. And the Yankees are spending money -- money that was theirs to spend, easily, with the payroll that just came off the books -- on players good enough to ensure that they will produce a quality product and that people will come to the stadium, thus ensuring that money will exist.

This is cyclical and it's good economics. If anyone wants to argue that money gives Yankees an unfair advantage as far as the score of a game goes, that's one thing. But it's ludicrous to me to suggest that this is "greedy" of them and to chastise them for spending money in this economy -- particularly in the same world where my government officials, not to mention good economists, are begging me to spend money to keep things going. The Yankees are a for-profit business, and they're really really good at it. This is in no way comparable to Wall Street greed. The fall there has been due to money that didn't exist yet being poured into the pockets of a select few. The Yankees are producing a quality product and making smart business deals like the YES deal, and the reason they can continue to afford to do this is because people pay to enjoy it. Not to mention that the more successful they are, the more money gets poured back into ALL of baseball and its teams via revenue sharing. With the new stadium, even with the MLB new stadium shield, the Yankees will easily pay upwards of $100 million in revenue sharing next year.

A lot of our financial and automotive institutions, among others, are falling apart because of very poor business decisions, production of a sub-par product, and ignoring the consumers of this product in favor of benefitting a select few within the organization. The Yankees have done the exact opposite of all of these things and are thriving...and I'm supposed to look at this enterprise as an example of what's wrong with American business?

WebScorpion
12-15-2008, 04:49 PM
With the new stadium, even with the MLB new stadium shield, the Yankees will easily pay upwards of $100 million in revenue sharing next year.

Actually, that's not true. The last article I read stated that money used for new stadiums comes directly out of the team's revenue sharing fees. They're putting way more into the stadium than their usual revenue sharing fees, so the amount they're projected to pay is $0.00. In fact, I think the $450million figure usually attributed to be the Yankees share of the stadium cost is the price AFTER deducting ALL revenue sharing. Same goes for the Mets. I'll double check, but I'm pretty sure that's what I read.

red-in-la
12-15-2008, 05:36 PM
This is just really simplistic and ignorant of the same tax breaks that nearly every other team in baseball gets. Every team goes into debt when it builds a new stadium, and cities give them tax breaks because the money is expected to come back to them. MLB itself gives teams -- all teams -- a break on this too, by allowing them to deduct stadium costs from revenue to lessen revenue sharing.

Yankee Stadium will definitely funnel money into the city of New York. Period. It behooves the city greatly to give both teams tax breaks. And the Yankees are spending money -- money that was theirs to spend, easily, with the payroll that just came off the books -- on players good enough to ensure that they will produce a quality product and that people will come to the stadium, thus ensuring that money will exist.

This is cyclical and it's good economics. If anyone wants to argue that money gives Yankees an unfair advantage as far as the score of a game goes, that's one thing. But it's ludicrous to me to suggest that this is "greedy" of them and to chastise them for spending money in this economy -- particularly in the same world where my government officials, not to mention good economists, are begging me to spend money to keep things going. The Yankees are a for-profit business, and they're really really good at it. This is in no way comparable to Wall Street greed. The fall there has been due to money that didn't exist yet being poured into the pockets of a select few. The Yankees are producing a quality product and making smart business deals like the YES deal, and the reason they can continue to afford to do this is because people pay to enjoy it. Not to mention that the more successful they are, the more money gets poured back into ALL of baseball and its teams via revenue sharing. With the new stadium, even with the MLB new stadium shield, the Yankees will easily pay upwards of $100 million in revenue sharing next year.

A lot of our financial and automotive institutions, among others, are falling apart because of very poor business decisions, production of a sub-par product, and ignoring the consumers of this product in favor of benefitting a select few within the organization. The Yankees have done the exact opposite of all of these things and are thriving...and I'm supposed to look at this enterprise as an example of what's wrong with American business?

However, for a city to maintain its credit rating, it can only issue a certain amount of bond dollars at once. This is one reason why the NY City officials are doing wrong. I am sure there is a long list of civic projects (roads, bridges, parks, etc.) that are waiting for funding via this route. By issuing these ridiculous bond dollars to the Yankees and Mets, just so they can blow MILLIONS on players, the city offcials are being irresponsible. There is such a thing as civic duty.....or is there?

Chip R
12-15-2008, 06:15 PM
A lot of our financial and automotive institutions, among others, are falling apart because of very poor business decisions, production of a sub-par product, and ignoring the consumers of this product in favor of benefitting a select few within the organization. The Yankees have done the exact opposite of all of these things and are thriving...and I'm supposed to look at this enterprise as an example of what's wrong with American business?


And that's the problem that people have with the Yankees and Red Sox. Not to get political but they are an example of America at its ideal. Those with the most toys wins. Survival of the fittest. Every man for himself. If your company is better than mine then my company better sac up or go down the tubes.

As sports fans, though, we want a socialistic model much like the NFL where all teams share in TV revenues equally and there is a limit on salaries.

vaticanplum
12-15-2008, 06:24 PM
However, for a city to maintain its credit rating, it can only issue a certain amount of bond dollars at once. This is one reason why the NY City officials are doing wrong. I am sure there is a long list of civic projects (roads, bridges, parks, etc.) that are waiting for funding via this route. By issuing these ridiculous bond dollars to the Yankees and Mets, just so they can blow MILLIONS on players, the city offcials are being irresponsible. There is such a thing as civic duty.....or is there?

Yes. The Yankees are ignoring parks and transportation in favor of Yankee Stadium. Or...not. Here (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/09/nyregion/09stadium.html?_r=1&scp=5&sq=yankee%20stadium&st=cse)
is a pretty fair article detailing the costs of the stadium bonds as well as some of the other bonds being distributed. The city giving out twice the amount of the same bonds to the parks and transportation ($660 million) surrounding the stadium ALONE. The bonds of course have to be repaid; the city loses only the interest money, but expects to more than make it up. Not to mention the jobs the money will allow to be created.

There's logic to be used here, for crying out loud. The Steinbrenners are not sleeping with Bloomberg. It doesn't serve the city to dole out money that's not going to benefit its citizens -- there's not a city in America that can afford that, at least not at this level and of this scale. I really think people jump on this without fully understanding it. This money will come back to the city, and much more so, in a positive way. It's just a matter of where the money comes from upfront. Investing in quality players, which cost a lot of money no matter who buys them, is a smart way to ensure that people will continue to pay to see the team and get that money back. Wouldn't it be far more irresponsible for the Yankees to scrimp right now, especially given how much money just came off their books?

WebScorpion, I think you have your facts correct but the conclusion wrong. Teams get to deduct those costs from their revenue sharing, but Yankee Stadium's profits this year are expected to exceed that by enough that they'll still pay $100+ million in revenue sharing. There are more details about this here (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/11/sports/baseball/11sandomir.html?scp=7&sq=yankee%20stadium&st=cse)
. That's pretty much what they paid last year.

vaticanplum
12-15-2008, 06:30 PM
And that's the problem that people have with the Yankees and Red Sox. Not to get political but they are an example of America at its ideal. Those with the most toys wins. Survival of the fittest. Every man for himself. If your company is better than mine then my company better sac up or go down the tubes.

As sports fans, though, we want a socialistic model much like the NFL where all teams share in TV revenues equally and there is a limit on salaries.

That's because people confuse what the ideal of the competition on the field with the reality of for-profit business. I'm not against changing some of the rules in baseball, like salary caps and revenue sharing. But until they're changed, the Yankees are nothing but a scapegoat. They're running their business, if not their team, better than just about anybody else under the same rules as everybody else. Holding that against them or, more laughably, calling it irresponsible is just plain sour grapes.

Mario-Rijo
12-16-2008, 07:05 AM
That's because people confuse what the ideal of the competition on the field with the reality of for-profit business. I'm not against changing some of the rules in baseball, like salary caps and revenue sharing. But until they're changed, the Yankees are nothing but a scapegoat. They're running their business, if not their team, better than just about anybody else under the same rules as everybody else. Holding that against them or, more laughably, calling it irresponsible is just plain sour grapes.

Well put and spot on.

gonelong
12-17-2008, 01:39 AM
That's because people confuse what the ideal of the competition on the field with the reality of for-profit business. I'm not against changing some of the rules in baseball, like salary caps and revenue sharing. But until they're changed, the Yankees are nothing but a scapegoat. They're running their business, if not their team, better than just about anybody else under the same rules as everybody else. Holding that against them or, more laughably, calling it irresponsible is just plain sour grapes.

When any team can move down the street from the Yankees, then I agree. The Yankees wouldn't and couldn't be the Yankees in Kansas City, though they'd be better than the Royals. (That's not to say that the Royals would be the Yankees if they moved to NY either.)

At one time, only the Yankees could be the Yankees, but I think the Red Sox have shown that other teams, given the right situation, could get there as well.

GL

WebScorpion
12-18-2008, 04:12 AM
Teams get to deduct those costs from their revenue sharing, but Yankee Stadium's profits this year are expected to exceed that by enough that they'll still pay $100+ million in revenue sharing. There are more details about this here (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/11/sports/baseball/11sandomir.html?scp=7&sq=yankee%20stadium&st=cse)
. That's pretty much what they paid last year.
That's assuming they sell out the new stadium's luxury boxes and $2500 seats, don't lose a lot in advertising and/or subscribers on the YES network, and generally turn a record profit in merchandise and refreshments. What they've done is essentially recession-proof their season...if they don't realize those massive profits, they don't pay much in revenue sharing. I agree that they run their business better than most other MLB teams, but Mike Brown ran the Bengals at a huge profit for the entire 1990's too. :eek: Being a well run businees is not necessarily good for the game or its fans...it's just good for the owners of the business.

Jpup
12-18-2008, 04:16 AM
That's assuming they sell out the new stadium's luxury boxes and $2500 seats, don't lose a lot in advertising and/or subscribers on the YES network, and generally turn a record profit in merchandise and refreshments. What they've done is essentially recession-proof their season...if they don't realize those massive profits, they don't pay much in revenue sharing. I agree that they run their business better than most other MLB teams, but Mike Brown ran the Bengals at a huge profit for the entire 1990's too. :eek: Being a well run businees is not necessarily good for the game or its fans...it's just good for the owners of the business.

The Yankees owners put the profits back into the team unlike the rest of them.

westofyou
12-20-2008, 11:48 AM
http://www.newsday.com/sports/baseball/yankees/ny-spken195970697dec19,0,1564905.column



Yankee-hating surely back in style

Ken Davidoff

December 19, 2008

Yankees president Randy Levine, on live television yesterday from the old Yankee Stadium, announced, "Today, we reaffirm the Steinbrenners' commitment to Yankees' fans."

For the rest of the world, of course, it meant just the opposite: Time to hate the Yankees again.

There existed, this past year, the tiniest window in which the Yankees made it difficult to loathe them. But they utilized the power left arm of CC Sabathia and the power right arm of A.J. Burnett to slam that window shut.

Yankees bashing is back en vogue. Spending $243.5 million on two pitchers, at a time when our country is drowning financially, will create some bad will out there.

"What skill does it take to run the Yankees?" asked an official of a small-market team. "Just outbid everyone by 30 to 40 million [dollars], and get executive of the year if you win. Get fired if you don't. I'd rather do it our way where you actually need some creative thought process and old-school scouting."

Even some Yankees supporters don't love what's going on. One friend of this space quoted his own pal, who loves the Yankees: "It's no fun being a fan of the dumb, rich team."

Is this fair? Not entirely. Wouldn't the Yankees, who pretty much print money thanks to their new ballpark and the YES Network, deserve more criticism if they didn't pour money back into the payroll?

But we're not here to debate what's fair and what isn't. We're here to talk about what is: In conjunction with reloading their starting rotation in a big way, the season after missing the playoffs for the first time since 1993, comes a fresh coat of paint for the target on their sides.

"I get boos everywhere," shrugged Sabathia, who quickly displayed his charm that makes him so popular in baseball circles. "I'm not the best physique-looking guy, so I get that everywhere. That's going to be [the case] if I was playing in Japan."

"I've got 57 days to prepare myself for that," the edgier Burnett said. "But I will be prepared for that. I will be. The more hitters that hate me, the better off I am."

Hal Steinbrenner's dad used to revel in such industrywide scorn. It fueled his desire to win. From speaking yesterday to Hal, who once again displayed his dedication by traveling here from Tampa to attend the news conference, it appears that the Yankees' new control person would just as soon block out everyone else's opinion.

"I've got enough things to worry about and think about," George Steinbrenner's younger son said. "I try not to concentrate on any of that."

Most of the veteran Yankees know how to channel this sensation when they encounter it in visiting cities. The captain, Derek Jeter, has that way of grinning with his eyes. The closer, Mariano Rivera, broke out in laughter when the Red Sox fans mock-cheered him a few years ago.

Brian Cashman, who has touted expensive pitching acquisitions plenty of times before yesterday, returned partly to take ownership of his Yankees legacy. So it didn't surprise yesterday that he voiced frustration over the latest round of criticism.

"What bothers me is, no matter what we do, we get criticized," Cashman said. "While we're going through a youth movement, you hear, 'The Yankees can't do that, developing kids. They shouldn't be developing guys.'

" ... I just think we made a smart play. It's as simple as that. It kind of gets on both ends. If we didn't [sign Sabathia], then all of a sudden it's, 'Why wouldn't they have?' If we did, it's, 'Jeez!' I've gotten numb to that."

The truth, however, is that a large segment of Yankees fans fully supported Cashman last year when he made his fateful decision to pass on a Johan Santana trade. Will those same fans advocate the significant risk (and forfeited draft pick) involved in giving five years to Burnett? Sabathia's deal is more acceptable, since he'll probably opt out in three years.

Let's face it, having the Yankees as the sport's punching bag is good for overall business. And, as we've learned, it's not like spending obscene amounts of money guarantees a parade.

Consider yesterday a Hot Stove treat for Yankees haters, and a preview of much more animus to come.

cincrazy
12-21-2008, 02:49 AM
http://www.newsday.com/sports/baseball/yankees/ny-spken195970697dec19,0,1564905.column

Brian Cashman has the worst job in sports, IMO. He works under the Steinbrenner family, he gets no credit if they win because they have more money than anyone else and he "bought" a championship, and if they lose, it's ALL his fault.

westofyou
12-24-2008, 11:32 AM
http://bats.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/12/23/loving-the-yankees-means-always-having-to-say-youre-sorry/

December 23, 2008, 7:44 pm
Loving the Yankees Means Always Having to Say You’re Sorry
By Jane Heller


Jane Heller is the author of the coming memoir, “Confessions of a She-Fan: The Course of True Love with the New York Yankees.” (Rodale)

“Unseemly.” “Insensitive.” “Galling.” “Grotesque.”

These are among the kinder adjectives being attributed to the Yankees after they spent nearly half a billion dollars to acquire three players. How dare they engage in conspicuous consumption when the rest of the country is suffering! What nerve flaunting their wealth during the worst economic catastrophe since the Great Depression! What a slap in the face to the small-market, payroll-slashing Have-nots in baseball, proving once and for all that the Yankees are a detriment to the sport and to humankind!

Over the top? Not on the blogosphere, where it’s a great time to be a Yankees hater. Even Yankees fans are behaving like Yankees haters. If I get one more e-mail telling me I should “wise up and dump the losers,” I’ll –-

Well, I just wish everybody would stop. I’m a grown woman. I can make my own choices. And I’m sick of having to apologize for loving a team with assets, as if that makes me some sort of “trophy fan” who’s in it strictly for the money. The fact that the Yankees do have money and aren’t afraid to lavish it on the people they care about isn’t so wrong, is it? It’s not as if they’ve roped us all into some giant Ponzi scheme and bled our retirement plans dry.

Actually, I pay no attention to the lifelong, die-hard, truly intransigent Yankees haters. They hate us just for breathing.

But to all the self-loathing Yankees fans that fear their team is buzz-killing the holidays for the denizens of San Diego, Minneapolis and Kansas City? It’s not your fault that the Padres’ owner needs to sell his team; not your fault that the Twins trade away their best players; not your fault that the Royals thought signing Kyle Farnsworth was a smart idea. Sure, you’re tempted to walk the earth in sackcloth apologizing to everyone everywhere, but you’re not responsible for society’s ills. Just get used to the idea that being a Yankees fan means always saying you’re sorry.

Besides, look at all the perks that go along with being a Yankees fan.

You’re getting a spectacular new house in April with every possible amenity. It combines the latest in interior design (wide-screen television, state-of-the-art sound system, gourmet kitchens, multiple baths) with outdoorsy charm (distinctive facade, park-like acreage, well-tended lawn, professional groundskeepers).

You get Brian Cashman, the modern-day equivalent of John Beresford Tipton, the guy on the old weekly TV series “The Millionaire” who dispensed million-dollar checks to unsuspecting, deserving individuals. Personally, I’m looking forward to seeing how his latest recipients will handle their wealth -– Will they use it for good works or fritter it away? -– just as I used to anticipate the fates of the TV show’s new millionaires.

Speaking of “new,” some fans are stuck with the same old dreary personalities year after year. Not Yankees fans. Our team always seeks out the most intriguing players, whether young or old, rookie or veteran, robust or chronically injured. As a result, Yankees fans are never bored. Sometimes Cashman keeps us entertained by pulling fast ones on us. Like the year he said Enrique Wilson was our third baseman, only to spring Alex Rodriguez on us. Or the time he swore that Bubba Crosby was our center fielder, only to fill the position with Johnny Damon. He told us Nick Swisher would be our first baseman this year, and now Mark Teixeira will be guarding the bag on Opening Day.

Fans of other teams accuse our team of overpaying for players, as well as awarding them large signing bonuses. Excuse me, but isn’t that the very definition of a good employer – an organization that’s generous with both salary and benefits?

As a Yankees fan, you get to root for a team that represents the largest city in the country. Frank Sinatra sings your theme song. You have your own cable TV network. You’re an international brand; people in foreign countries parade around in your interlocking N.Y. You are not the Kankakee Yankees and never will be, and there’s no reason to apologize for that, either.

Another thing to remember is that the Steinbrenner family has a diversified portfolio that includes the breeding and racing of thoroughbred horses as well as the ownership and management of eight Florida hotels. You picked wisely when you hitched your wagon to them. They are not asking Congress for a bailout.

And the next time a Yankees hater gives you the old “You people think you can just go out and buy a championship?” Don’t apologize. We’re fully aware that money doesn’t guarantee a World Series ring any more than it guarantees happiness. We’re not as clueless as our detractors think.

So please, Yankees fans. No more hand wringing. There will be plenty of opportunities for that once the season starts.

Unassisted
12-24-2008, 11:45 AM
http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/shysterball/article/its-worth-noting/


It’s worth noting . . .
. . .that the Yankees payroll on Opening Day 2008 was $209 million.

It's also worth noting that even with the additions of Teixeira, Sabathia, and Burnett, the Yankees' 2009 payroll obligations -- including signing bonuses -- stand at roughly $201-205 million, give or take.

Yes, that will change some as they fill out the 2009 roster, and yes, the implications of this winter's spending spree are larger than mere current-year obligations, but let's not go crazy talking about salary caps and manifest injustice and all of that jazz. The Yankees have spent extraordinary amounts of money this decade. The result of that has been the ability to bypass the typical success cycle by never truly cratering competitively and always being in the playoff hunt. The result of that has not been the disruption of overall competitive balance or the prevention of success on the part of the other teams such that radical changes are necessary, let alone desirable.

I will grant you that the former point is somewhat disheartening, but it is certainly not devastating. If you don't like Tampa Bay as an example of why the Yankees' spending isn't terrible (i.e. because it took a decade in the wilderness for the Rays to get where they are) I'll give you the Angels. Or the White Sox. Or the Phillies. Or the Twins. Or the Marlins. Or the Cardinals. Or any other team that has found success without spending $200 million.

The same level of success? Well, no. All of those teams have ups and downs, and unlike the Yankees, they do not have seeming carte blanche to acquire or retain any player they want. But baseball's prime directive is not to foster perfect competitive balance nor to ensure that players stay with the teams who developed them. Baseball's prime directive is to be a financially successful and entertaining enterprise, and it has gotten better and better at this even as the Yankees have gone nuclear with their payroll. Some would even argue that there's a causal relationship there. I don't know if that's the case, but it cannot be denied that the Yankees' success and subsequent largess of the past 15 years has correlated remarkably well with the growth of baseball's attendance and revenues.

Maybe that's cold comfort for Blue Jays and Orioles fans, but unless and until the Yankees' spending habits either (a) make a mockery of competitive balance; or (b) send fans away from the game in droves, those habits are not worth worrying about, and I don't see how any of their moves this past month are likely to lead to either of those developments.

lollipopcurve
12-24-2008, 11:46 AM
They are not asking Congress for a bailout.

Unless it's to build them a new stadium.


Speaking of “new,” some fans are stuck with the same old dreary personalities year after year.

Thank god for Arod and Tex -- those guys will still be the life of the party on the day their long-term deals run out.


As a Yankees fan, you get to root for a team that represents the largest city in the country. Frank Sinatra sings your theme song. You have your own cable TV network. You’re an international brand; people in foreign countries parade around in your interlocking N.Y. You are not the Kankakee Yankees and never will be, and there’s no reason to apologize for that, either.

Absolutely insufferable piece.