Links for Monday…
- The MLBTR Forums are rocking with over 3,600 members. Join the discussion today! Just added a prospects section; we've also got areas to discuss trade rumors, free agents, the draft, general baseball, fantasy baseball, and every team.
- Tom Krasovic tweets that the Twins have a scout at tonight's Padres-Giants game, but it's just a routine visit. He adds that Heath Bell remains on Minnesota's radar, but the two sides haven't talked since Spring Training.
- The Giants have no interest in Jermaine Dye, tweets Henry Schulman of The San Francisco Chronicle. The reasons are the same as they've been all winter: defense and asking price.
- More changes could be coming to the Dodgers' bullpen, says Dylan Hernandez of The Los Angeles Times. Russ Ortiz was designated for assignment yesterday, and Hernandez thinks Ramon Ortiz could be next.
- Talking to MLBTR's Ben Nicholson-Smith, I learned that teams can now safely promote minor leaguers for their MLB debuts with no chance of the player amassing 172 days of service in 2010. By promoting '08 first-rounder Ike Davis today, the Mets ensured that he will be under team control through 2016 instead of 2015. In contrast, the Braves have Jason Heyward through '15.
- On that same topic, agent Scott Boras told MLB.com's Peter Gammons that Stephen Strasburg starting in the minors "had nothing to do with money."
- Joe Posnanski digs into Forbes' team revenue numbers, noting that the Yankees made $173MM more than any other team.
- MLB.com's Jenifer Langosch tells us Hayden Penn has accepted the Pirates' Triple A assignment in lieu of electing free agency.
- In a statement, Cal Ripken said he looks forward to continued talks with the Orioles about a position in the organization.
i like ike!
i like Ike!
i like ike!
I AM HERE
Wait a second. The Yankees made $173m MORE than every other team. That’s the MINIMUM gap.
So when the Yankees spend $200m+ on payroll and the Brewers spend $80m in payroll it isn’t just because the Brewers ownership are greedy bastards? Does this article suggest that the Yankees actually spend more simply because they make more than everyone else? Shocking.
I’m bookmarking this article. The link will be posted whenever Yankee fans start in with “our owners just want to win more that’s why they outspend everyone” argument.
Mets promote IKE DAVIS….postponing my plans to jump off the Shea Bridge indefinitely.
For those interested in the Revenue Sharing article make sure you read the whole thing. Also go through the comments. Quite a few interesting points they make.
To make baseball fair you either have to:
1. Restrict the maximum amount of money that teams can spend on payroll/player development, etc OR
2. Provide all teams the opportunity to earn equal revenue. As several posters pointed out, the biggest issue is market. If NY is 5-6 times larger than KC why not have more teams in NY? It’s an interesting argument.
Either of the two solutions listed above would create a more competitive balance that disregards the current natural advantages some teams have simply because of their geographic location.
5-6 Teams from NY. I’m salivating at the thought…
OR AM I?! I can’t decide if that’s a good thing or bad.
That’s really something to think about.
As for additional team(s) in NY, technically the town might be able to sustain at least one more, but with the history of baseball in NY and the attitudes of the NY fans, I wouldn’t necessarily bet on it.
The thing with that its like turning America towards Socialism. Its the owners money let them do what they want with it, its not fair to make someone give up their own money to other people because the owners aren’t going about developing the right way. Look at the Rays they are a small market team and they compete they did it the right way and they aren’t complaining about the Yankees.
The Rays were one of the worst teams in the league for many many years and thus accumulated many high draft picks, the scouting and developing of those picks by the Rays was very well done, but the competition level that they enjoy now is due to the lack of competition level that was the MO of Rays teams for so many years.
Not completely true. The Rays changed ownership & improved the way they do business. it’s not just simply because they were bad. There are teams who’ve been worse for alto longer & are nowhere near what the Rays are. Pirates & Royals quickly come to mind.
also they are getting a big slice of revenue sharing pie.
Not completely true. The Rays changed ownership & improved the way they do business. it’s not just simply because they were bad. There are teams who’ve been worse for alto longer & are nowhere near what the Rays are. Pirates & Royals quickly come to mind.
The Rays were one of the worst teams in the league for many many years and thus accumulated many high draft picks, the scouting and developing of those picks by the Rays was very well done, but the competition level that they enjoy now is due to the lack of competition level that was the MO of Rays teams for so many years.
The current model is very anti-free market. Sure, not having a salary cap gives baseball the appearance of true capitalism. However, think about these other aspects …
1. It’s an exclusive club. Owners have to approve teams moving, new teams coming aboard, new ownership groups buying existing teams, etc, etc. That is an extremely protectionist policy.
2. Teams share pooled money from master agreements secured through MLB.
3. Teams transfer wealth from club to club through revenue sharing (and to some extent – luxury taxes).
In a truly free market society, there would be no limit on baseball teams (theoretically). If demand grows a smart business man starts a new franchise in a market that is under-served. If baseball loses popularity you could see your team move to greener pastures, or just contract. Teams would naturally go where the revenue is. If NY can support 6 teams then there will be 6 teams. If KC can’t support a team then that team leaves or contracts. There would be no salary cap as each team has the same opportunity to earn similar revenues.
Now, I don’t think those scenarios are good for the game necessarily. I just wanted to point out that baseball today is really the antithesis of modern capitalism.
True I think anyone who wants to start and has the funds to do so should be allowed to without approval.
True I think anyone who wants to start and has the funds to do so should be allowed to without approval.
because there is no league to play in if u allow all the small clubs to fail. Unless u want to see the Yanks and Red Sox play 162 times a year
because there is no league to play in if u allow all the small clubs to fail. Unless u want to see the Yanks and Red Sox play 162 times a year
1. Well if your concerned about socialism then teams should be allowed to put their franchises wherever they want and not have to go through the league to get approval. This would mean there could be 5-6 teams in NYC, a bunch more in Chicago, Los Angeles, etc. In other words all teams would be in large markets. I think I’ll pass on that.
2.Yeah, and itt only took the rays a decade of losing seasons and pure mediocrity to do it. The Rays are the exception not the rule.
I was just using them as an example look at the D’Backs, the Marlins. They did things the right way and won a few world series’s
I was just using them as an example look at the D’Backs, the Marlins. They did things the right way and won a few world series’s
Since the Rays were an expansion team, I don’t think 10 years of sucking is that bad.
Since the Rays were an expansion team, I don’t think 10 years of sucking is that bad.
1. Well if your concerned about socialism then teams should be allowed to put their franchises wherever they want and not have to go through the league to get approval. This would mean there could be 5-6 teams in NYC, a bunch more in Chicago, Los Angeles, etc. In other words all teams would be in large markets. I think I’ll pass on that.
2.Yeah, and itt only took the rays a decade of losing seasons and pure mediocrity to do it. The Rays are the exception not the rule.
This forum is not for Yankee “fans”. It is Ike Davis time in NYC.
I really don’t like the mets at all, but after all the mets fans getting excited about this kid, i’m surprisingly pretty excited to see him play, and i plan on watching tonight.
I really don’t like the mets at all, but after all the mets fans getting excited about this kid, i’m surprisingly pretty excited to see him play, and i plan on watching tonight.
If you ask me holding players down in the minors until a certain date just to retain them is hurting the game. Yes it’s the logical move, just like in the NFL resting your starters when you’ve got your seed locked up is logical, but nobody likes to watch that. Let the kids play.
If you ask me holding players down in the minors until a certain date just to retain them is hurting the game. Yes it’s the logical move, just like in the NFL resting your starters when you’ve got your seed locked up is logical, but nobody likes to watch that. Let the kids play.
Can we please steal Joe Posnanski away? Joe Strauss is atrocious, and Posnanski is a pretty solid writer.
Can we please steal Joe Posnanski away? Joe Strauss is atrocious, and Posnanski is a pretty solid writer.
Leave it to Sabean to declare that a team bereft of right-handed power isn’t interested in a guy who has a .913 OPS against lefties over 2007-2009.
Sure, his defense is questionable at best, which is why you put him in LF instead of RF at AT&T. Can he be any worse than Fred Lewis was in LF? Going with a Dye/Rowand/DeRosa outfield with Bowker and Schierholtz off the bench will do just fine.
As for the money, well, what’s worse? Shelling out another $3.5 million to get into the playoffs, or not doing so and wasting another year’s worth of great pitching?
Does anyone else on that team come close to a .913 OPS against lefties?
Leave it to Sabean to declare that a team bereft of right-handed power isn’t interested in a guy who has a .913 OPS against lefties over 2007-2009.
Sure, his defense is questionable at best, which is why you put him in LF instead of RF at AT&T. Can he be any worse than Fred Lewis was in LF? Going with a Dye/Rowand/DeRosa outfield with Bowker and Schierholtz off the bench will do just fine.
As for the money, well, what’s worse? Shelling out another $3.5 million to get into the playoffs, or not doing so and wasting another year’s worth of great pitching?
Does anyone else on that team come close to a .913 OPS against lefties?