MLB 2010 Discussion Thread

[quote name='Jodou']So basically you're saying that Yankees just have fans, not fans of baseball. Yeah, I don't see what point you're trying to make here. . .[/QUOTE]

You're kidding, right? Please tell me you are...please?

If you honestly don't see the point, and are not just being the tool you usually are on these boards, I really don't know what to tell you. I actually would feel a bit sad for you if a concept like that is too big for your mind to wrap itself around.

But because I've seen you post on here, I just realized you probably are serious. So, I'm gonna give you a hint: people watching the game = money = good for baseball. Now, go sit in the corner and think about that one for a few days. Then, after you're done crying and cleaning up the blood that leaked out from your nose and ears, we'll talk about it.
 
[quote name='Jodou']So basically you're saying that Yankees just have fans, not fans of baseball. Yeah, I don't see what point you're trying to make here. . .[/QUOTE]

I think "fans of baseball" probably represent 1% or less of the total fanbase of Major League Baseball.

I consider myself a fan of the sport (though obviously the Red Sox come first) but it's a lot harder to religiously follow the entire league than it is for the NFL, simply because there are almost 10 times as many games as in football.

I'm not saying I think MLB has too many games, because I don't, but it goes to explaining why people don't know as much about other teams - it's hard enough just keeping up with one. Consequently, that's why the World Series is typically a ratings nightmare these days unless someone like the Yankees or Red Sox is in it.. EVERYONE watched the Super Bowl, but typically only fans of each team and that 1% or so of "fans of baseball" watch the World Series.
 
While the fact they aren't big market teams (as far as I'm aware) comes into consideration, you have to realize this as well. Now, I don't know how much of the US is affected by this, but Fox and Dish Network (if it's not them, I know it is/was somebody) are having a dispute and some customers are unable to watch anything on Fox.
 
[quote name='JStryke']While the fact they aren't big market teams (as far as I'm aware) comes into consideration, you have to realize this as well. Now, I don't know how much of the US is affected by this, but Fox and Dish Network (if it's not them, I know it is/was somebody) are having a dispute and some customers are unable to watch anything on Fox.[/QUOTE]

dont forget Cablevision...which is a chunk here on the east coast. Newscorp has a problem with everyone apparently.
 
[quote name='bigdaddybruce44']So, I'm gonna give you a hint: people watching the game = money = good for baseball.[/QUOTE]
So you're saying it would be better for baseball, as a sport, to have Yankees in the WS every year. And I'm the fool. . .
 
[quote name='Jodou']So you're saying it would be better for baseball, as a sport, to have Yankees in the WS every year. And I'm the fool. . .[/QUOTE]

That wasn't the point either. It was that for all the people who claim the Yankees are ruining baseball, they help a lot more than people realize. On top of the money they flat out give to MLB for revenue sharing, they also just generate A TON of revenue. So, in the years that the team does well, MLB also usually prospers. Things like this are probably the only reason the Pirates and Royals still exist. Simply put, the Yankees have done a better job than most teams at creating a fanbase and keeping it. As it's been said, it costs money to make money.
 
No one says that the Yankees ruin baseball financially--at least I've never heard that. People know the big market teams get big ratings, that's common sense.

Just that the lack of a salary cap lets big market teams dominate their divisions (not always the playoffs) more often than not and it ruins the competitive balance and has killed our interest in the sport.
 
[quote name='n8rockerasu']Simply put, the Yankees have done a better job than most teams at creating a fanbase and keeping it. As it's been said, it costs money to make money.[/QUOTE]

Not that I'm holding this against them, but it helps to play in a city which is more than twice as populous as the next largest city in America (LA) and has a Metropolitan area which is more than a third larger.

They're called small-market teams for a reason. :D

I don't think the Yankees are bad for baseball, especially not from a financial standpoint (that should be glaringly obvious). From a competitive standpoint, if they had that much of an advantage they would win every year, which they don't, so I don't think their advantage is an unfair one, and I say that as a Red Sox fan.
 
[quote name='bvharris']Not that I'm holding this against them, but it helps to play in a city which is more than twice as populous as the next largest city in America (LA) and has a Metropolitan area which is more than a third larger.

They're called small-market teams for a reason. :D
[/QUOTE]

That's definitely true to an extent. But the Knicks don't have the same fanbase the Yankees do. I'd even argue the football Giants have less fans...in a more popular sport that is easier to follow. So, you can't really put it all on the population of NYC. By keeping the team competitive, the fanbase stays interested, and the team continues to rake in money. That's business 101: putting your profits back into your own product. Unfortunately, not every team does that.
 
[quote name='n8rockerasu']That's definitely true to an extent. But the Knicks don't have the same fanbase the Yankees do. I'd even argue the football Giants have less fans...in a more popular sport that is easier to follow. So, you can't really put it all on the population of NYC. By keeping the team competitive, the fanbase stays interested, and the team continues to rake in money. That's business 101: putting your profits back into your own product. Unfortunately, not every team does that.[/QUOTE]

Some like to do that with the Cubs, Red Sox, Yankees, Dodgers, and Phillies money too.
 
[quote name='craven_fiend']Some like to do that with the Cubs, Red Sox, Yankees, Dodgers, and Phillies money too.[/QUOTE]

Can't leave the mets off lol we were third on the list
 
It would help if the ESPN games of the week weren't completely comprised of Yankees, Mets, Cardinals, Cubs, Rays and Red Sox all playing each other.
 
[quote name='GhostShark']It would help if the ESPN games of the week weren't completely comprised of Yankees, Mets, Cardinals, Cubs, Rays and Red Sox all playing each other.[/QUOTE]

Yeah...but they didn't start showing Rays games until they put a decent team together. I'm sure there will be more Giants and Rangers games broadcast next year. There's not much point giving a crappy team national exposure.
 
Hal Steinbrenner is trying to play hardball with Derek Jeter. Are you freaking kidding me??? AJ Burnett gets $17 million a year for being an idiot, they've wasted millions on the likes of Kei Igawa, Javier Vazquez, Jason Giambi (the latter years), Carl Pavano, etc...but yet feel the need to lowball Jeter. Aside from what he has meant to the team, he'll reach 3,000 hits next year and will be the first Yankee ever to do so. Of course his skills are declining, but Jesus Christ man. They've given far worse contracts to far worse players. Get over yourself, Hal!
 
[quote name='n8rockerasu']Hal Steinbrenner is trying to play hardball with Derek Jeter. Are you freaking kidding me??? AJ Burnett gets $17 million a year for being an idiot, they've wasted millions on the likes of Kei Igawa, Javier Vazquez, Jason Giambi (the latter years), Carl Pavano, etc...but yet feel the need to lowball Jeter. Aside from what he has meant to the team, he'll reach 3,000 hits next year and will be the first Yankee ever to do so. Of course his skills are declining, but Jesus Christ man. They've given far worse contracts to far worse players. Get over yourself, Hal![/QUOTE]

Not that it will happen, but what would you do if this cause Jeter to suit up for the Red Sox?
 
[quote name='n8rockerasu']Hal Steinbrenner is trying to play hardball with Derek Jeter. Are you freaking kidding me??? AJ Burnett gets $17 million a year for being an idiot, they've wasted millions on the likes of Kei Igawa, Javier Vazquez, Jason Giambi (the latter years), Carl Pavano, etc...but yet feel the need to lowball Jeter. Aside from what he has meant to the team, he'll reach 3,000 hits next year and will be the first Yankee ever to do so. Of course his skills are declining, but Jesus Christ man. They've given far worse contracts to far worse players. Get over yourself, Hal![/QUOTE]

The argument won't be over money - it will be over the length of the deal. There are reports saying that Jeter wants a 6 year deal which is insane because that will put him at 42 years old when he may only have 1 or 2 more years left in him. Yes, A-Rod is signed through age 42 but even the Yankees can't be trotting out 40 year old players to play 3B and SS.

I agree with your statement though - Jeter pretty much deserves whatever he can get. He is the greatest Yankee since Mickey Mantle and the new deal should almost be like a thank you from the team for past services.
 
[quote name='craven_fiend']Not that it will happen, but what would you do if this cause Jeter to suit up for the Red Sox?[/QUOTE]

It will never happen. I don't see him wanting to go to another team.
 
[quote name='craven_fiend']Not that it will happen, but what would you do if this cause Jeter to suit up for the Red Sox?[/QUOTE]

Unleash the t-virus on the state of Massachusetts? lol, I don't know. Walk to Tampa and kick Hal in the nuts? Actually wait, the second one sounds good.

[quote name='javeryh']The argument won't be over money - it will be over the length of the deal. There are reports saying that Jeter wants a 6 year deal which is insane because that will put him at 42 years old when he may only have 1 or 2 more years left in him. Yes, A-Rod is signed through age 42 but even the Yankees can't be trotting out 40 year old players to play 3B and SS.[/QUOTE]

Well, if Jeter actually wants to play another 6 years, then you have to start talking about the possibility of him going after Pete Rose. After this season, sure that looks unrealistic (almost 1300 away...he'd need to get back on his 200 hit clip), but he's one season removed from a .334 average. They need to honestly assess how banged up he was this year. My suspicion was that he was hurt since May. If that's true and is something that can be fixed, then I don't see a reason he can't get back to hitting .320 again.

The other thing is, if he's NOT intending to go after Pete Rose...why play till you're 42? Yes, yes, he loves the game, sure whatever. But why commit to that amount of time...to that age, without a solid goal in mind? If he's 42 and he's 100 hits away, is he going to retire? That's crazy. If I'm the Yankees, those are the serious questions I look into when deciding on the length of the deal. There's more to it than just "keeping up with A-Rod" or winning more championships. I don't normally like putting individual accomplishments over those of the team, but like Ron Burgundy, this one is kind of a big deal, haha.
 
I would assume that partly why they signed A-Rod until he's 42 is because he would be chasing the HR record. Why not do it as a Yankee? Same goes with Jeter.
 
[quote name='madbst']I would assume that partly why they signed A-Rod until he's 42 is because he would be chasing the HR record. Why not do it as a Yankee? Same goes with Jeter.[/QUOTE]

Well, yeah. Definitely with A-Rod that was the case. With Jeter though, it seems like the challenge has been too lofty to even put on him. And he's always given the answer of "till it's not fun anymore" when asked about how long he wants to play. But I think now that question finally has to be answered. He either cares about going after the record or he doesn't. If he doesn't, I don't really see much of a need for him to play more than another 2-3 years.
 
What other team would pay jeter this much? Who would give him that kind of money for even 5 years ? There are other players with 3000 hits so it should bethat important. Jeter has been well paid for his career so they Yankees dont need to reward him or own him anything
 
Last edited by a moderator:
When negotiating a contract you always shoot high. The Yankees know how valuable Jeter really is but they have to do what is best for the franchise. What his agents are doing is setting a high value and will work their way down to what both sides will think thats reasonable. i really forsee a deal around 2-3 years maybe 4 with at least 20 million a year.

The yankees have that much money plus they are willing to throw the kitchen sink at Cliff Lee. Imagine that 4 players maybe 5 getting over 100 million on their contracts. Thats nuts!
 
Here's how the 2011 Hall of Fame ballot is shaping up:

First Time Candidates
Wilson Alvarez
Carlos Baerga
Jeff Bagwell
Bret Boone
Kevin Brown
Cal Eldred
John Franco
Juan González
Marquis Grissom
Bobby Higginson
Charles Johnson
Al Leiter
Tino Martinez
Raúl Mondesí
José Offerman
John Olerud
Rafael Palmeiro
Paul Quantrill
Steve Reed
Kirk Rueter
Rey Sánchez
Benito Santiago
B. J. Surhoff
Ugueth Urbina
Ismael Valdez
Larry Walker
Dan Wilson

Returning Candidates
Roberto Alomar
Harold Baines
Bert Blyleven
Barry Larkin
Edgar Martinez
Don Mattingly
Fred McGriff
Mark McGwire
Jack Morris
Dale Murphy
Dave Parker
Tim Raines
Lee Smith
Alan Trammell

Veterans Commitee Candidates
Vida Blue
Dave Concepción
Steve Garvey
Pat Gillick (Executive)
Ron Guidry
Tommy John
Billy Martin (Manager)
Marvin Miller (Executive)
Al Oliver
Ted Simmons
Rusty Staub
George Steinbrenner (Executive)
 
[quote name='speedracer']I'm boycotting boycotting if Carlos Baerga isn't a first balloter.[/QUOTE]

I hope you're being sarcastic.
 
[quote name='madbst']I hope you're being sarcastic.[/QUOTE]


he is

Woo Johnny Franco. I know you wont make it but nice to see the name up there lol.

Bagwell is a definite. If he doesnt than give it to Smith or Blyeven for once.
 
Wow, Jeter getting another Gold Glove is a little silly. I mean, we all know the awards are an utter joke at this point, and that being a popular player is a great way to get one, but they need to stop giving him the award at this point.
 
[quote name='bigdaddybruce44']Wow, Jeter getting another Gold Glove is a little silly. I mean, we all know the awards are an utter joke at this point, and that being a popular player is a great way to get one, but they need to stop giving him the award at this point.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, completely agree with that. Jeter didn't deserve it. I thought that Cano deserved his GG and I'm a little iffy on Teixeira's GG. He makes great plays but he doesn't have a lot of range.
 
battleship0.jpg


Looks like the Sox have fired the first real shot of the offseason, Adrian Gonzalez. Casey Kelly and Anthony Rizzo is a pretty good return, they're the two best prospects the Red Sox have, plus they're getting Rey Fuentes and a PTBNL.

Still have to sign Gonzalez to an extension within the negotiating window but everything else is a done deal.
 
I did not see that Werth deal coming. The Nationals???? What's next, Crawford going to the Royals? I hope Werth enjoys last place for the next 7 years. We don't need him anyway as long as the guys on our team who are supposed to hit do hit. That and hopefully we can keep the injuries down this year.
 
If you overlay Gonzalez's Petco hit chart over Fenway's dimensions, you end up with 30 HR. Just at home.

They've agreed to the broad parameters of the deal but they won't make anything official until after opening day for luxury tax purposes.
 
[quote name='yukine']Gonzalez is going to kill at Fenway, I won't be shedding any tears to have him leave the NL West.[/QUOTE]

How do you feel about the Reynolds trade?
 
[quote name='GhostShark']It would help if the ESPN games of the week weren't completely comprised of Yankees, Mets, Cardinals, Cubs, Rays and Red Sox all playing each other.[/QUOTE]

ESPN is looking to make money. They are going to play games of teams that have large fanbases, especially ones that transcend their region.
 
[quote name='pitfallharry219']How do you feel about the Reynolds trade?[/QUOTE]
Eh, I'm a little mixed on the Reynolds trade. I like Hernandez, and I think he will dominate hitters in the NL West... but at the same time, D'Backs have practically no power in that lineup now that Reynolds is gone. If we can land Konerko, then it's a different story, but that is pretty unlikely.

Love the signing of Putz though, our bullpen is looking pretty solid so far.
 
still in shock how dumb the Nationals are.

loved Alderson's quote: " It makes some of our contracts look good."

i know i should be the last one to criticize bad contracts...but really....your going to give this guy 126 million and not re-sign a fan favorite with even more power in Adam Dunn...plus Dunn is no where nearly expensive as Werth is. plus the Natties have tons of holes to fill as is....dont know what Rizzo is thinking.

Word has it that the Phillies want to jump in the on Lee sweepstakes but no one will outbid the Yankees.
imagine that rotation.....Halladay/Lee/Oswalt/Hamels. you dont even need a 5th starter.
 
At least it's not the Yankees? :razz:

Also, heard that Carlos Pena signed with the cubs for 1 year. 10M or somewhere around there iirc.
 
Too much money for Crawford, really heats up the Cliff Lee talks though as Crawford was the Yankees plan B and the Angels top priority.

I guess thats the market for outfielders now? God thats awful.
 
I knew Crawford was going to get major dollars, but these deals lately are just nuts. Next time a team cries about finances, shit like this and Werth should be brought up. I really hope the Rangers don't go overboard on Lee. The cost of living and the tax advantage should be figured into his deal (it probably won't be, but it should be). I would rather see the Rangers sign Webb and Penny and take their chances than give him 25 million. A-Rod should serve as a reminder of how big money deals kill franchises down in big D.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top