| 0 |
Subject: A-Rod for Ramirez with Nomah to SoCal?
Posted by: KrazyKoalaBears
- Leader [517553018] Sat, Dec 06, 2003, 22:57
TEX and BOS owners are talking. If it can all get worked out, it looks like A-Rod goes to BOS, Ramirez goes to TEX, and Nomah is sent packing to a SoCal team (ANA or LOS). The article says the deal is likely to happen this week, before the winter meetings, if it is to happen. |
| Only the 50 most recent replies are currently shown. Click on this text to display hidden posts as well. |
| 55 | biliruben
Leader
ID: 49132614
Mon, Dec 08, 2003, 18:25
|
remember, you have to make a case that there would have been suitors prior to the 2003 season.
Why? I already made a specific point that there were few if any who could pay Yankee-level salaries, and whole-heartedly (actually more than whole-heartedly) agreed that it would be difficult to do.
|
| 57 | Mattinglyinthehall
Sustainer
ID: 217351118
Mon, Dec 08, 2003, 18:28
|
Well then I have successfully shown your contention that my initial and subsequent statements were "absurd" is wrong.
|
| 58 | biliruben
Leader
ID: 49132614
Mon, Dec 08, 2003, 18:33
|
You picked a bad week to stop sniffing glue, MITH.
Should I get you a banner, a flight-suit and an aircraft carrier as well? Proclaimations based in delusion don't usually get much credit with me.
|
| 59 | Mattinglyinthehall
Sustainer
ID: 217351118
Mon, Dec 08, 2003, 18:35
|
Proclaimations base on delusion? Whats the delusion?
|
| 60 | Mattinglyinthehall
Sustainer
ID: 217351118
Mon, Dec 08, 2003, 18:36
|
What proclaimation?
|
| 61 | Mattinglyinthehall
Sustainer
ID: 217351118
Mon, Dec 08, 2003, 18:43
|
Lets just recap here.
MITH - Yanks couldn't have shaved that much salary and contended.
Bili - Absurd.
MITH - DO tell.
Bili - Easy. Swap Pettitte for Willis, Giambi for Lee, Jeter for Cora. There you go, a sub-luxury-tax contender.
MITH - Uh, none of that could have actually happened. You still haven't shown how what I said was absurd.
Bili - You're delusional.
MITH - Huh?
|
| 62 | Bandos
Donor
ID: 422571916
Mon, Dec 08, 2003, 18:52
|
A few points to help clarify:
The luxury tax did in fact exist, in a different form, prior to 2003, and yes, there were several teams over it, including Boston and NY among others. This is why Steinbrenner was complaining cuz he (not one of the richest 50 people) was sending money to Carl Pohlad (one of the 50 richest) and they were pocketing it. Thus we need a Salary Floor (for another thread)
The luxury tax threshold was a compromise between the owners who wanted it at 100 mil and the players union at 135 mil, thus 117.5 was what they(after a year of bargaining!) came up with. It goes up, as does the percentage you pay if you are consistently over the top. MITH is absolutely right that the UNION was trying to defend the Yankees payroll as it was driving those salaries way upward to the benefit of the players.
I admire that all seem to agree that the Schilling trade was great for Boston, who do have a shot to win it all. How it was for the Brewcrew and D-backs is yet to be seen. That is not spending willy nilly. The same money for Millwood would ahve been spending willy-nilly.
So the question is: Does the pursuit of A-rod, rumor, whatever, constitute "They're doing exactly what the Yankees are doing, but not quite as well."
First off, you have to take into consideration the difference in ownership and management. DanD STUDIPLY overpaid for Manny to try to save his own ass after the MO and Clemens debacles (though letting MO go doesnt seem so bad now does it?). Has present ownership OVERPAID for anyone? NO. You could argue that the 17.5 mil option for Pedro is overpaying, but that was previous management's contract and keeping Pedro was contingent on it - nonetheless - its a one year blip. If Pedro doesn't sign for under 13 mil a year, he's gone now, the Sox have made that clear. Is Schilling overpaid - I don't think so.
Compare this to Giambi, Williams, Posada, Mussina, Jeter who all appear to be overpaid.
The Sox fill in holes with guys like Ortiz and Millar, not Sheffield.
But Simply
110->100->105, last three years Sox payroll
110->135->180, last three years Yanks
Pretty different to me. The Yanks Pitching staff alone will be more than most teams entire salary anbd the cheapest everyday player will be sori at around 5 mil a year. Every team in the majors respects the cap the Yanks don't. They don't have to so why should they. This isn't whining, its fact. Them's the rules, everyone agreed to them, however reluctantly, now we play by them.
Ah, but doesnt the apparent pursuit of an upgrade at SS appear to say the Sox are willing to spend "just like the Yankees". NO. Here's why.
You have to understanbd the whole story. The main goal is NOT to get A-rod.
1) This is about getting rid of Manny's contract, NOT about getting A-rod.
We tried to unload Manny's contract on ANYONE, no takers, so if we HAVE to take A-rod, we will. Is he worth 25 mil/yr - NO, is he worth 5 mil more than Manny - yes. Can the Sox afford ONE bad contract - yes.
2) This is about bargaining with Nomar, not about getting A-rod.
Not until today did I ever hear Nomar utter the Words "I want to retire in a Boston uniform." So there was much speculation that he wanted to leave. The Sox approached Tellum (Nomar's agent) and offered what is reported at about 14 mil per year, 3-5 years - the standard for this new ownership/management group. That offer was rejected out of hand, they wanted closer to Jeter money - 18 mil. So if you are Red Sox ownership what do you do? HOPE Nomar changes his mind and let him walk while picking up Royce Clayton. Overspend for Nomar AND Manny. NO. You begin planning for life without Nomar. The only replacements are Tejada, Matsui(a Met), A-rod.
Not only, along with Tejada only getting 10 mil or less, does this increase the bargaining HAND and drive down the price for Nomar, but the possibility of UPGRADING at SS from Nomar quells any public backlash at management. This is fricking Genius business.
The SOX will not eat any of Manny's contract. So the scenario plays out like this if Nomar's demands don't begin to understand the new reality.
Manny and Williamson to texas for A-rod
Nomar to Anaheim for Washburn and Glaus (who WILL walk from Anaheim after 2004) or if they could pry Garrett Anderson away.
It's a reasonable scenario, money wise and keeps them under or just over the cap. Thus, its a great bargaining position. "You want to test the FA waters next year, Nomie, and get 3 yrs 11 mil from San Diego/Anaheim et al, or stay in Boston for 12-14 mil a year, use Fenway park to get to the HOF, become the guy who brought the championship, etc etc etc." You choose.
GREAT ONE :"The ARod thing really gets me because:
1) I don't see why you really need to upgrade a perennial MVP candidate middle infielder. I know ARod is an upgrade, but something should be said for having players like Nomar play their entire career in one uniform.
2) They are emulating the Steinrenner way of doing things when it isn't even working for the Yankees. They have not had good success when they have tried buying players. They were at their est when they built their team from the ground up."
I hope you see the reason this whole thing is happening now and realize that 25 mil for A-rod and 8-9 mil for a LF = the offense production of Manny and Nomar, AND better Defense.
|
| 63 | Mattinglyinthehall
Sustainer
ID: 217351118
Mon, Dec 08, 2003, 19:02
|
This is about getting rid of Manny's contract, NOT about getting A-rod.
We tried to unload Manny's contract on ANYONE, no takers, so if we HAVE to take A-rod, we will. Is he worth 25 mil/yr - NO, is he worth 5 mil more than Manny - yes. Can the Sox afford ONE bad contract - yes.
The SOX will not eat any of Manny's contract. So the scenario plays out like this if Nomar's demands don't begin to understand the new reality.
Bandos, by every account that I've read, Texas isn't willing to deal ARod to Boston unless Boston pays some of Manny's salary. Obviously, that's the stumbling block here, but understand that Texas certainly realizes that Manny's contract is much more of an albatross than ARod's. I wouldn't be surprised if Boston winds up giving in and and covers 1/4 to 1/3 of it.
|
| 64 | Mattinglyinthehall
Sustainer
ID: 217351118
Mon, Dec 08, 2003, 19:12
|
Btw Bandos, your salary floor comment was well taken, even if it is for another thread.
|
| 65 | biliruben
Leader
ID: 49132614
Mon, Dec 08, 2003, 19:32
|
You are being deliberately dense, MITH.
For the 3rd time, I've already agreed with you that it would have been difficult to impossible to shave that much salary in that short a time. You tirelessly ignore this fact and keep insisting on my defending a position that is the opposite of what I believe. Let the strawman catch fire burn to the ground.
|
| 66 | Mattinglyinthehall
Sustainer
ID: 217351118
Mon, Dec 08, 2003, 19:40
|
Bili
If that's the case then I apologize. The way I was understood your posts (and frankly I still guess I don't understand what you could must in some of them), you seemd to be conceding that point and still insisting that what I said was absurd, knowing that I was speaking under those terms all along.
|
| 67 | biliruben
Leader
ID: 49132614
Mon, Dec 08, 2003, 19:43
|
It's all about whether the yankees could contend. That is the ONLY thing I was commenting on.
Let me make it simple: if 33 million dollars worth of Yankee players were tragically trampled in a DVD stampede at Walmart, the Yanks would still be favorites to win the World Series.
That you speculate that they wouldn't even be in contention for the playoffs I found absurd.
|
| 68 | Mattinglyinthehall
Sustainer
ID: 217351118
Mon, Dec 08, 2003, 19:47
|
I was trying to show you in 44 that I was speaking under those terms frok the begining.
|
| 69 | Mattinglyinthehall
Sustainer
ID: 217351118
Mon, Dec 08, 2003, 19:47
|
from the beginning.
|
| 70 | biliruben
Leader
ID: 49132614
Mon, Dec 08, 2003, 19:51
|
Okay, maybe it's me that doesn't understand. Are you suggesting that they would have had to get rid of 100 million in players to get to 117 million payroll?
Even then, I seem to remember several teams in contention this year that were around 50 million.
|
| 71 | Tastethewaste
ID: 249352813
Mon, Dec 08, 2003, 20:00
|
Sheesh youre both dense
Mith is dealing in the logistical matter of how to get rid of 33 million dollars of payroll and still be in contention while Bili is dealing in the hypothetical of taking away 33 million dollars worth of players off the roster and saying the yankees would still be good.
Its very easy to understand
Mondesi get rid of 13 million 20 to go
Hitchcock, Ventura, Contreras and Weaver... done. I think the yankees are still a contender with that roster.
Now who would take those guys at those values for nothing is what Mith is trying to say...i hope, and bili is saying its not the point
JKP was saying if the yankees got rid of 33 million and couldnt contend then the yankees are awfully mismanaged, because anyone should be able to contend if you spend 117 million dollars even remotely well. Mith agreed with that.
Right?
|
| 72 | biliruben
Leader
ID: 49132614
Mon, Dec 08, 2003, 20:02
|
Righto, Taste. Except I'm still not sure what MITH meant when he said they couldn't contend.
|
| 73 | Mattinglyinthehall
Sustainer
ID: 217351118
Mon, Dec 08, 2003, 20:11
|
NO. Here's what I think happened. I said...
"in the pre 2003 AL East, the Yankees couldn't have possibly pared $33mil without removing themselves from contention, if they could have at all."
...And you apparently didn't think that I was taking into consideration the difficulties in actually moving $33 million dollars worth of real contracts from their roster and be left with a team that contended. I was saying that if the Yankees really wanted to avoid paying the luxury tax this year, they would have had to approach their problem the way that I presented it to you in post 53.
It would have been difficult enough for them to have found suitors for $33m worth of those contracts and get Major League talent in return for all of it, much less at the positions they needed to replace in the time they had to act. Factor in the challenge of doing this and having the end result be a contender in the AL East and I don't see how they could have done it.
You apparently were stuck on the idea that my hypothetical did not include realistic stipulations and could not get past the literal wording of my post, even after I repeatedly explained myself, and insisted that what I was saying was absurd.
Of course you can remove a bunch of those big contracts and replace them with smaller, more efficiant ones. You can do it at every position and build a sure winner, better than the '03 Yankees. But The Yankees in real life could not simply do that, and you couldn't seem to get it in your head that this was what I meant. Perhaps I still confused, but I really don't think I was being (as) dense.
|
| 74 | Mattinglyinthehall
Sustainer
ID: 217351118
Mon, Dec 08, 2003, 20:14
|
Tastethewaste expressed it better than I appear to be capable of.
Thanks.
|
| 75 | Mattinglyinthehall
Sustainer
ID: 217351118
Mon, Dec 08, 2003, 20:19
|
I'm still not sure what MITH meant when he said they couldn't
I leave open the possibility that they might be able to dump those contracts off on other teams, but the twisting they'd have to do in order to get under the cap would not leave a team that contends. In other words, in order to get a team to take Hitchcock, I might have to pair him with Moose in exchange for a 10 million dollar Headache.
|
| 76 | Unemployed
Donor
ID: 42103617
Mon, Dec 08, 2003, 21:01
|
Yikes!! This is not what the thread title led me to believe ... so what's this I hear about Arod and the Evil Empire II?
|
| 77 | The Great One
ID: 91133420
Mon, Dec 08, 2003, 21:34
|
OK, how about this for a weird scenario?
What if George and Hicks are in cahoots? Say the Yankees didn't want Manny @ 20 million, but they would pay him 15. If Hicks can get the Sox to pay 5 million of Manny's salary per season, then they make the Manny for ARod deal. Then Texas puts Manny on irrevokale waivers and the Yankees claim him, taking on his 15 million per season. They put him in left, Matsui in center and Sheffield in right, moving Bernie to DH.
Texas gets out from under ARod at no cost to them.
New York not only gets Manny, but gets the ultimate joke on the Sox owners as they are now paying Manny 5 million per season to play for the Yankees.
Again, this is really just meant to be an interesting scenario, not a prediction or anything.
|
| 78 | Mattinglyinthehall
Sustainer
ID: 217351118
Mon, Dec 08, 2003, 21:36
|
Would the Sox be free of his contract once he is placed on waivers?
|
| 79 | The Great One
ID: 91133420
Mon, Dec 08, 2003, 21:48
|
I don't think so if he is claimed, but I am not 100% certain.
|
| 80 | Farn
Sustainer
ID: 451044109
Mon, Dec 08, 2003, 23:21
|
I thought if he was placed on waivers the Sox would be free of his contract. That's why they tried to do it a few weeks ago.
Unless its different if you ahve agreed to pay $5 million and then somebody else dumps him...
|
| 81 | Tastethewaste
ID: 269383120
Mon, Dec 08, 2003, 23:40
|
Bili, post 72. He's saying for example, the 5 people I mentioned no one would take off the yankees hands at their price tag for nothing. So Mith is saying...realistically or not for the yankees to shed payroll they would have to give up better players take on other players who either also have huge contracts or are huge headaches which would result in more losses and not much of a difference on their payroll. You cant just get rid of Hitchcocks salary and not have to pick up another persons salary or take on a head case or pair hitchcock with someone else on the yankees that is really good, like Hitchcock and Soriano for oh i dont know Vina lets say. So the yankees save some money but not nearly the equivalent of just dumping hitchcock and get worse at 2b. Do that over and over and suddenly you have a 117 million dollar team full of malcontents and worse players than they already had.
I still think this is possible, but we're not GMs and I dont know what GMs of different teams are interested in. Maybe Omar Minaya wouldve done Vidro for Soriano and Hitchcock but then again im sure montreal wouldve made the yankees also pay some of Hitchcocks contract and thus the yankees are not getting under the cap and they're not getting better. Thats all hes saying.
Mith make sure i got it right, im starting to confuse myself.
P.S. The yankees spend too much money and its not good for competitive balance. The redsox are being forced to do the same because they feel they have a good team and can beat the yankees but feel they need to spend more. Its the Cold War of baseball and poor KC, Pitt, and Minn are 3rd world countries.
Some of these teams are just mismanaged and need to get their head out of the sand and start trying to compete. See Milwaukee, stupid Bud Selig big idiot and shouldnt his daughter have to sell the team, isnt that conflict of interest?
The End
|
| 82 | Matt S
Donor
ID: 34945140
Thu, Dec 11, 2003, 03:18
|
Does anybody else see a striking similarity with the current Yankees-Sox situation and the Cold War? ;)
|
| 83 | Mattinglyinthehall
Sustainer
ID: 217351118
Thu, Dec 11, 2003, 06:43
|
Yeah. And the Yankees ultimately wound up beating the red guys in that one, too.
|
| 84 | Mattinglyinthehall
Sustainer
ID: 217351118
Thu, Dec 11, 2003, 06:44
|
;)
|
| 85 | Cosmo's Cod Piece
ID: 53439419
Thu, Dec 11, 2003, 06:51
|
Matt S.: I see the similarity, but this war is nothing but Cold. Its Hot. These two teams really step it up a notch when they face each other.
Being a Cubs fan and White Sox hater, I really have no interest in American League baseball. Perhaps I'll have a greater interest this year as my beloved Coo could wind up in the World Series. However, I never miss a Yankees/Red Sox game on television. Roger Clemens was my favorite player when I was a wee lass and before Kerry Wood came along, so that adds a nice dynamic to the rivalry for me.
I think this rivalry is great for the game. Even the financial aspects of it. Both sides are playing the system in which they're constrained. I can see where Big Stein's strategy can tick off some people, but like the great WWE philospher Booker T said, "Don't hate the playa'. Hate the game."
|
| 86 | The Great One
ID: 91133420
Thu, Dec 11, 2003, 07:19
|
Bandos-
What left fielder are we talking about?
Manny's lifetime OPS- 1.011
Nomar- .925
ARod- .963
So we would have to get a left fielder with p[retty good numbers to replace Manny.
Also, I would be leery of trading for any 50+ home run per year player with steroid testing coming up.
|
| 87 | Bandos
Donor
ID: 422571916
Thu, Dec 11, 2003, 13:56
|
Look at the most recent three years and Manny/Arod are VERY similar with A-rod with more HR and RBI. So you have to replace Nomars numbers with on OF, much easier to do since OF are easier to find than SS.
|
| 88 | KrazyKoalaBears
Leader
ID: 2752157
Thu, Dec 11, 2003, 16:01
|
The Great One, MLB's steroid testing is a joke. Anybody that gets caught should be forced to where "Dumbass" in place of his name on the back of his jersey for at least 5 years. First off, every player knows MLB will only test during Spring Training and the regular season. So, just stop then. Secondly, there will only be 2 tests for any one player during the year. The first test will be given randomly, but the second test (a follow-up) will be given within 5-7 days. After that, no more testing for that player for the entire season. So, if a player gets tested in Spring Training (which I'm sure all of them are hoping for), he's home free for the rest of the year to use whatever steroids he wants. In other words, "What steroid testing?"
|
| 89 | The Great One
ID: 91133420
Thu, Dec 11, 2003, 16:59
|
Bandos.....ok, well I guess it's easy to replace a perennial MVP candidate with an outfielder, so give me a name.
KKB-
I don't know very much about steroids like how long they stay in your system or how quick the effects you get from them wear off, so I take your word for it in that there is no danger.
|
| 90 | Khahan
ID: 3127107
Fri, Dec 12, 2003, 11:40
|
Well, the Rangers are still insisting that Boston picks up some of A-rod's salary (shouldn't Boston be insisting that Texas pick 1-2 mil of A-rods salary since they are taking on the higher contract?).
What do people think the chances are of a 3 team deal in which A-rod--->Boston Manny---> to Texas
Nomar --->3rd team 3rd team ---> $$ to Texas and OF to Boston?
I could see LA having some funds available for something like that if the Kevin Brown deal goes through.
|
| 91 | Razor
Donor
ID: 190612
Mon, Dec 15, 2003, 16:42
|
This deal is back from the dead. Things are heating up, apparently. With almost all of the marquee hitters off the market, I wouldn't be surprised if Evans muscles his way into getting this deal done. If he can sweeten the deal enough for Texas, then Nomar is going Hollywood. Reportedly the deal would be Perez and a prospect for Nomar.
|
| 92 | Farn
Sustainer
ID: 451044109
Mon, Dec 15, 2003, 18:16
|
I am being told by a guy a close to Epstein that the ARod to Boston deal should be done within a few hours, at the latest by tomorrow unless something unforseen happens.
|
| 93 | Razor
Donor
ID: 190612
Mon, Dec 15, 2003, 19:27
|
Evans has a boatload of bargaining power here, especially if the interest from Anaheim is luke warm. I wonder if it's going to be a three-way deal of two separate deals. Theoretically, it is essentially a four team to deal because Boston wants to move Odalis for an outfielder to replace Manny.
|
| 94 | Razor
Donor
ID: 190612
Mon, Dec 15, 2003, 20:29
|
Various non-legitimate sources are reporting that the A-Rod/Manny swap has been agreeed to in principle and that it will be finished as soon as Hicks and Henry can work out the restructuring of A-Rod's contract.
|
| 95 | Species
Leader
ID: 569221717
Tue, Dec 16, 2003, 17:00
|
From Boston.com -- might be old news.
Sources confirmed that the Sox and Dodgers have discussed a deal in which Garciaparra would go to LA for a package that would include at least Greg Miller, a prized 19-year-old pitching prospect from the Dodger system, and possibly another pitching prospect as well, with one or both of those pitchers packaged with Ramirez and sent to Texas for Rodriguez. It was unclear whether the Dodgers would include a big-league player as part of the deal, but lefthander Odalis Perez is no longer being mentioned.
|
| 96 | Razor
Donor
ID: 190612
Tue, Dec 16, 2003, 17:20
|
Not a fan of this switch. Send Odalis packing before Miller.
|
| 97 | biliruben
Leader
ID: 49132614
Tue, Dec 16, 2003, 18:36
|
Nomar for Miller? Done and done.
|
| 98 | Perm Dude
Dude
ID: 141046261
Tue, Dec 16, 2003, 22:59
|
According to a line in this report, the Dodgers interest is "fading" in Nomah.
I'm going to just throw this out: I think the Indians are going to make a serious bid for Nomah, and move Guillen to 3B (Blake to 2nd until Phillips is ready).
pd
|
| 99 | Razor
Donor
ID: 190612
Tue, Dec 16, 2003, 23:08
|
The Dodgers have too much leverage to give up a package consisting of Miller. Evans has the power to stop the biggest trade in Major League history on a whim. You think Hicks and Henry want this huge deal that they've been working on for weeks to go down the drain because Epstein is asking for too much for a disgruntled player heading into his walk year? The Dodgers couldn't get fair value for Sheffield. The A's couldn't get fair value for McGwire. The M's couldn't get fair value for Griffey, though it sure worked out well for them thanks to the Griffey injuries. The Red Sox are in a tough spot now, and they can't ask for the moon for Nomar, especially considering the suitors are few and far between. Perez and a B prospect or two.
|
| 100 | Motley Crue
Donor
ID: 610391711
Wed, Dec 17, 2003, 08:00
|
I just read the Red Sox might send Nomar, Williamson, and BK to the ChiSox for Magglio Ordonez. Or else a three-way between ChiSox, LA, and Boston where Nomar heads to LA, pitchers go to Chicago from LA and Boston, and Boston gets Magglio. This came from The Baltimore Sun.
|
| 101 | Matt G
ID: 541156811
Wed, Dec 17, 2003, 10:26
|
I don't like the trade... look at the numbers, I think A-rods Numbers don't compare to Nomars and Mannys together. Yes Manny is a lot of head aches, but still... I'd keep Manny and Nomar...my opinion.
|
| 102 | clv
ID: 191112179
Wed, Dec 17, 2003, 11:07
|
If the Red Sox were able to pull off the Nomar-Maggs deal mentioned in the article Motley Crue notes, then I think any of the early comparisons between the Sox being as free-spending as the Yankees become more cemented. Nomar's looking for $15 mil/yr. Maggs walk year is next year, and his current contract pays him 9 this year and 14 next year, then what's he going to be worth on the open market? My bet is AT LEAST what Nomar is asking for, if not more, so what kind of bind will that put Boston in? Schilling and A-Rod's deals are backloaded and increase when Epstien has to make an offer to Maggs or let him go and get nothing in return just like with Nomar now. Don't get me wrong, IF they can pull off both deals, I'd rate them as the favorites in spring training, but essentially all they will have accomplished is taking on more salary for players they'll only keep for a couple of years at most, then let them go and try to find a replacement. I have no problem with the Yankees doing that, and would have no problem with the Red Sox doing so as well - just realize that there's no longer only one "Evil Empire" Boston fans - if you play the same game to try to compete with the Yankees, sooner or later everybody's going to group you with them as well.
|
| 103 | Motley Crue
Donor
ID: 610391711
Wed, Dec 17, 2003, 12:54
|
And who the hell cares, as long as they win the World Series? Or at least, that is Epstein and Henry's thought, clv. If I were a Red Sox fan, I would be expecting a World Title in the next year or 2, maybe both. Anything less is a huge disappointment.
Is it preferable to have ARod and Maggli-O or Nomar and Manny? The answer is it probably doesn't matter with a rotation of Pedro, Schilling, Lowe, Wakefield, and (Hell, me!)whoever. But with ARod you can at least justify the 33% hike in ticket prices! And Manny takes too many games off with sore ear lobes and the like. I just don't see this as a bad thing for the Sox. The bad thing will be when the Orioles sign Pudge and Vlad~look out rest of the division. Ugh, I just want out of 4th place.
|
| 104 | clv
ID: 5911351713
Wed, Dec 17, 2003, 15:01
|
That's it in a nutshell Motley - as unbelievable as it is to many people, the Yankees have always been my second-favorite team behind the Braves. I really don't care if EVERY team tried to "buy" championships (even though most do so, they're just not as hated as the Yankees). The Marlins went over budget last year to sign Pudge and trade for Urbina and it won them a championship, the Phillies went WAAAAY over budget to sign Thome, trade for Wagner, offer arbitration to Millwood, etc., to try to finally catch the Braves - and I don't hear anyone complaining about those moves. Get over yourselves Yankee-haters, everybody's playing the game by the same rules, Steinbrenner is just better at it, followed closely by the Red Sox lately and the Braves during the Turner regime when the ONE organizational goal was winning championships. Accomplish that, and suddenly you have more revenue to pay the inflated salaries. Penny-pinch like the Pirates, Expos, et al, and you will consistently field AAA teams in 3/4 empty stadiums. That's just the way the game is played today.
|
| 105 | clv
ID: 5911351713
Wed, Dec 17, 2003, 15:02
|
Remember the cliche' - "You've got to spend money to make money"? It became a cliche' for a reason !!!
|
| Rate this thread: | If you wish, you may rate this thread on scale of 1-5. Ratings should indicate how valuable or interesting you believe this thread would be to other users of this forum. A '5' means that this thread is a 'must read'. A '1' means that this is a complete waste of time. If you have previously rated this thread, rating it again will delete your previous rating. If you do not want to rate this thread, but want to see how others have rated it, then click the button without entering a rating, or else click here. |
|
|
Post a reply to this message: (But first, how about checking out this sponsor?)
|
|