Pearlman Whine Corked?
Posted by Steve Lombardi on August 21st, 2009 · Comments (15)
What’s Jeff Pearlman talking about here?
Somebody needs to remind Jeff that the Red Sox basically went out and bought Pedro Martinez, Curt Schilling and Josh Beckett…and did go out and buy Manny Raimrez, J.D. Drew, Keith Foulke and Johnny Damon.
And, the Mets went out and bought Carlos Beltran, Pedro Martinez, Francisco Rodriguez and Billy Wagner.
Teams buy players all the time. It’s not just a Yankees thing…
Jeff Pearlman is an idiot, but anyone who has read his books already knew that…
He obviously knows that teams buy players all the time, he just knows it resonates more with the masses (who are asses, don’t forget) if he rips on the Yankees. It’s no fun to rip on the Mets because they’re not a national-landscape team and everyone knows that ripping on Boston is sacred-cow tipping and thus verbotten…
The most ridiculous thing he wrote, however, was the last sentence: “If I’m a Yankee fan, I’m bored and unamused.” Huh? Why would Yankee fans be bored and unamused that they have the best record in baseball? Isn’t that what ALL fans want from their teams? I can philosophically understand why fans of other teams would hate the Yanks but I don’t see why we’d hate our own team. That’s just silly.
Steve, the Red Sox traded for Beckett and Lowell giving up their prime jewel Hanley Ramirez for them along with others. Epstein didn’t make that trade and supposedly still covets him. Pedro and Curt were traded as weel, so they weren’t bought so to speak. and they were not obvoius salary dumps like Rios recent waiver claim was either. On that note, those players don’t count as being bought.
The thing with the Yankee hatred is that they bought the top three agents this off season and spent like 425 million dollars. What other team spent that much this past season? What other team could afford to pay a first basemen 23 million and an ace 23 mill? The Yankees one and only. Yes, the Yankees have an incredibly unfair advantage, that’s undeniable. But at the same time, Pearlman and his ilk should change the rules. Have a hard payroll cap at where the luxury tax is. Campaign to change the system BECAUSE under this current sytem them’s the breaks. As gluttonous as the post Cash man era Yankees have been payroll wise, they still haven’t won the big one since 2000! So for all the Yankee haters, yes buying players keeps them competitive and gives them an edge BUT other teams like Boston (who spend far less money) have won 2 in the last 5 years.
Good point about the Mets,though. They don’t have resources like the Yanks(no one does) BUT they do spend. And Boston. The Dodgers etc so on. Steve the Yanks spend 60 mill more a year then the Mets though. And as of now, 70 mill more than the Red Sox. It would be less irksome to the rest of baseball if the Yanks were closer to the other teams in terms of payroll. Remember who had the biggest payroll back in 96? The Baltimore Orioles not the Yankees.
The White Sox added Jake Peavy and Alex Rios who, combined will earn at least $111.7M (and possibly as much as $142.2M if their team options are exercised) over the next several years. Did anyone else add at least $111.7M at the trade deadline? Is Jeff Pearlman or any other person complaining about that?
It’s all selective amnesia when it comes to ripping on the Yankees.
butchie22 wrote:
They were salary dumps, nonetheless.
This is what I posted as a reply over there:
“…and how much in outgoing salaries did the Yankees “lose” before signing the “Big 3″?
I think you’ll find that the salaries of Sabathia, Burnett and Teixiera are more than matched by the outgoing salaries of Giambi, Mussina, Abreu, and Pavano.
So, was it OK for them to finish out of the playoffs with a payroll that was $8 million higher than it is this year?
It’s acceptable for them to pay tons of money for old, declining players, but not to pay slightly less money for players in their prime? How does that work, exactly?
(And by the way, they’ll be players in decline themselves by, oh, about 2012 or 2013. Will their salaries be acceptable then?)“
butchie22 wrote:
Yanks have bought players in about every decade, why people think that some kind of salary cap is going to hinder them is beyond me.
Babe Ruth was acquired in a salary dump. They bought players from the PCL. They had a working agreement with the KC A’s.
Smart teams find a way to win, no matter the system. Bad teams don’t. If they’re not the Senators, or the Browns, they’re the Indians and Braves. Or the Nationals and Pirates.
There is no system that will save a team from stupidity.
Here’s a more accurate depiction of Yanks/Sox and “buying” players from Tony Massarotti from the Globe:
” (Referring to the 2007 Sox WS team) Back then, there was no outrage – at least in New England – about excessive spending and the ability to buy championships, especially while the Sox were simultaneously building a farm system that is now regarded as one of the best in the game. Not only had the Sox caught the Yankees, but Boston’s ability to draft and cultivate talent allowed the Sox to run right past New York, leaving them with a foundation for continued success entering the 2008 season.
Since then, a funny thing has happened on the road to a dynasty: The Yankees have caught – and perhaps blown past – the Sox. If the Red Sox have built their future on their farm system while complementing that core with free agent signings, the Yankees have done the opposite. Teixeira and Sabathia may very well be the centerpieces of the Yankees, but New York has surrounded the duo with home-grown players who should be valuable contributors for years to come.”
In other words, it’s not just the Yanks. If the Yankees “bought” their way to first place so far, than the Sox also “bought” themselves a championship in 2007. What’s real is they’re both mixing free agent spending with home grown talent, and it’s working. In no way are the big, bad Yankees just buying everybody and making it hard for their fan base to even root for them. This writer is an idiot.
YankCrank wrote:
I used to think so too. But then he’s getting paid to write things like this, and people just lap it up without thought… I’m beginning to rethink my position on baseball writers.
YankCrank wrote:
Raf wrote:
I used to think so too. But then he’s getting paid to write things like this, and people just lap it up without thought… I’m beginning to rethink my position on baseball writers.
His readership’s stupidity notwithstanding, Pearlman can still be an idiot. It’s really more a commentary on the (idiotic) mainstream baseball media and the (iditioc) people that read it.
@ MJ, the White Sox have tons of salary coming off the books AND they are not spending 200 mill a year BUT half that. I was shocked that Reinsdorf gave him the leeway, but the money they have coming off the books will keep their payroll at almost the same rate, more or less @ 96 to 100 mill. @ Raf, The Red Sox gave up something for Curt and Petey ,no? Pavano was in that Pedro trade…some Marlins fans could say he was a talent and Yankee fans would say no What did Chicago give for Rios? Money ,pure and simple. No talent! They didn’t even lose a draft pick either….Don’t forget the Yanks tried to get Schilling and the Diamondbacks didn’t like their package. It’s up for debate whether or not Colangelo was pissed at George for the Wells fiasco BUT they did do the Johnson trade a couple of years after that.
The Yanks are buying talent and remaining competitive while doing so, let’s not be delusional. The money gives them a decided edge over every other team. @ Raf, the chasm in payroll was never this stark between the have and the havenots before, so yoour reference to the past is moot. As I had mentioned, the Os had a bigger payroll than the Yanks in 96! They are 70 mill above Boston! That is absurd….
I’sd love to see Cash Man on a team like Philly or Seattle where he was able to spend very, very little and have no payroll flexibility. Most teams work under those conditions and I don’t see any other team coming close to 200 mill.
@ Crank, the Red Sox did buy championships in 2004 AND 2007,too! How’s that for being objective? They have resources(but to a much lesser degree than the Yanks) that are much greater than most teams. Yes, Theo cried poverty in 2006, but he was so full of shit his eyes were brown! They have an ability over other teams to procure players that middle market and lower market teams can’t buy. Yes, they are spending much less (70 million less than the Yanks) BUT they ain’t in da poorhouse
butchie22 wrote:
Butchie, the Expos were not going to be able to afford Pedro, that’s why he was traded to the Red Sox, who . The Expos were not going to be able to afford Wetteland, that’s why he was traded to the Yanks. These trades were salary dumps. Whether it’s money or suboptimal talent given in return, it doesn’t change the fact that a player was traded because an original team wanted to get out from under his salary.
butchie22 wrote:
No it isn’t. There were teams that were poorly run in the 10′s, there were teams poorly run in the 50′s, there were teams that were poorly run in the 80′s, there are teams that are poorly run now. The stark “chasm in payroll” has little, if nothing to do with it. If you give them more money, it will not change the fact that they are poorly run, it will mean they’re poorly run with more money to blow. If you can’t see that, then we’ll have to agree to disagree.
butchie22 wrote:
I think he’d do just fine, given enough time. The main reason being he’d be free of the mandate to win a title every year, so he wouldn’t have to sign free agents to long term deals, he’d be able to really go all out with a farm system (because he wouldn’t always have to overpay for reliability, as with Mussina or Sabathia).
He wouldn’t build any dynasties, but I think his teams would be competitive.
Go ahead and flame this assessment; it doesn’t really matter anyway, as it’s not happening anytime soon. I won’t even respond, because the truth is, nobody really knows.
Evan3457 wrote:
The problem is that no one takes into consideration things like retaining Posada, Jeter & Rivera. They cost money too. Texas unloaded Rodriguez’s contract on the Yanks. The Phils unloaded Abreu’s & Lidle’s contracts on the Yanks. Could the Yanks have taken on less salary? Sure, certainly. BUT, and here’s the key, the Phillies and Rangers would have taken more in exchange. Less $$ = more quality. More $$ = less quality. That’s the way it usually works.
As for the payroll, and roster construction, compared to other markets, the Braves were right there with Burnett, the Red Sox were right there with Teixiera. The only player that the Yanks really overbid on was Sabathia. The Phils have spent $$, Seattle is coming off a period where they spent $$ (Beltre, Sexson, Washburn among others).
People focus too much on the dollar amounts, and really need to take a look at the processes. It really isn’t as simple as opening up a checkbook and signing players.
Raf wrote:
Raf, sorry mate but you are wrong on the payroll issue. You don’t address the fact that the yanks spend 70 mill more than their divison rivals(the red sox), when was there such a gap between teams in baseball like this? The Mets spend what 143 mill, 60 less than the Yankees, right. I must say that is the issue at hand, not what happened in 1910 in terms being run BUT what money spent relative to those times you mentioned.
As for my original point regarding the trades, they weren’t bought they were traded. Once again, the Red Sox had to give something For Shill(they even liked the Red Sox package better than the Yankees BTW), they didn’t sign him for money and not give up talent ,there is a difference. They gave up Brandon ,Lyons, Cassey Fossum,MIchael Goss and Jorge De La Rosa. Yankee fans cried foul at those players BUT the Dbacks didn’t. He even structured an extension that was not obscene as to give the Red Sox payroll flexibility.As for the Expos, they got talent in return for Pedro, it wasn’t for free. Pavano and Tony Armas Jr weren’t exactly chopped liver at the time either. Raf, what did the White Sox give up for Rios? Nichts, Nada, Niente, Nothing, Nil!
Raf, I disagree with your assessment of who was right there. The Red Sox don’t wanna go over the luxury tax. They have resources BUT not even like the Yankees. Hennry and Lucchino hold to a price AND that’s it. They wouldn’t go the extra mile on Teix, whereas the Yanks could. The Braves were on Burnett? Not on the fifth year ,they weren’t! Once again, they have to allot a certain amount of money for their payroll and they probably said that burnett would be banged up by then. That money could be used to serve a better purpose indtead of having someone on the DL. THe Seattle payroll is what this year: 98 million? It went down from last year. The Phils? 113 mill this year plus the Lee and Pedro money. So the Yanks are twice what the Mariners are AND the phils spend about 80 million more….wo that’s close in terms of spending money. But this demonstrates where the Red Sox are closer in payroll to the other teams, whereas teh Yankees are in a realm by themselves.
@Evan. We will never know about Brian,until he goes to another team. I don’t think he’s a bad GM, but he’s not a great GM either. BUT for him leaving and going to say the Rangers(who have fiscal restraints) it would be interesting to see what he would do…since he couldn’t just buy a Teix, CC or AJ to solve his problems per se. It’s like shopping at Tiffany’s and then having to go to the Dollar Store for jewelry!
*sigh*
my give up… apparently, things happen in a vacuum in MLB, no context or anything.