Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 65

Thread: Don't you love it Mets and Red Sox fans criticize the Yankees for spending $?

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    9,157

    Don't you love it Mets and Red Sox fans criticize the Yankees for spending $?

    Talk about hypocritical. Both those organizations are money-machines and in the Mets' case they're getting a new stadium that is funded with $450 million in taxpayer money. Yet somehow they can't afford Tex.

    Let's say there was a salary cap in baseball. Sorry Mets fans, a certain Johan Santana would not be pitching for you because he'd probably still be in Minnesota since all MLB teams would be able to spend the same amount of money. Same could probably be said for the Red Sox with Josh Beckett and Daisuke Matsuzaka. The Red Sox bought both Pedro Martinez and Manny Ramirez. If there was a salary cap in baseball prior to 2000 the curse of the Bambino would probably still be in effect.

    Think the Mets would have been able to buy K-Rod if there was a salary cap? Think again.

    I can understand a Marlins fan or a Nationals fan complaining about the lack of a salary cap in baseball but Mets and Red Sox fans have nothing to complain about. I'm actually all for a salary cap in baseball. The ironic thing is a lot of these die-hard baseball fans who complain about inequality in the MLB dismiss the NBA and say it sucks even though the NBA has a salary cap and is a alot more fair then baseball.

  2. #2
    All League
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    2,725
    I agree with you about the salary cap in Baseball as it favors the larger market teams. Its good to be a NY fan knowing that we can land a few superstars for the team.

    However, the problem I have with the Yankees is that they, like the Mets, recieved a large sum of money from the taxpayers to build their stadium. Yet the Yankees are apparently still asking for more money to finish their stadium AFTER commiting the 420 million to new players. Not to mention the story that surfaced a few weeks ago about a possible appraisal scam that is screwing even more taxpayers out of money.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/17/sp...s%20tax&st=cse

    Its fine for the Yankees to spend their own money but taking money from the taxpayers, spending it extravagantly, and then coming back to the taxpayers with their hands out is pretty disgusting.

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    9,157
    Quote Originally Posted by Tony Danza View Post
    I agree with you about the salary cap in Baseball as it favors the larger market teams. Its good to be a NY fan knowing that we can land a few superstars for the team.

    However, the problem I have with the Yankees is that they, like the Mets, recieved a large sum of money from the taxpayers to build their stadium. Yet the Yankees are apparently still asking for more money to finish their stadium AFTER commiting the 420 million to new players. Not to mention the story that surfaced a few weeks ago about a possible appraisal scam that is screwing even more taxpayers out of money.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/17/sp...s%20tax&st=cse

    Its fine for the Yankees to spend their own money but taking money from the taxpayers, spending it extravagantly, and then coming back to the taxpayers with their hands out is pretty disgusting.
    And the $450 million the Mets got from the taxpayers had nothing to do with them signing K-Rod?

  4. #4
    All League
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    2,725
    Quote Originally Posted by VincenzoTestaverde View Post
    And the $450 million the Mets got from the taxpayers had nothing to do with them signing K-Rod?
    You are completely missing my point.


    To answer your question that money was given to the Mets to finish building a stadium, not sign K-Rod, so no I would say it had nothing to do with signing K-Rod. The Yankees also recieved their 450 or so million to build their stadium, not to sign free agents. The problem is that the Yankees were still asking for more money after recieving their 450 or so million. They were still asking for money after spending 420 million on free agents and after supposedly swindling the state out of even more money. Does that not seem wrong to you?

  5. #5
    All League
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    4,253
    Whom are these Met fans your talking about. A few? Many?

    I have notice only a few complaints from Met fans about these signings. And as a Met fan I could care less what and whom the Yankees sign. If they work out for you, good for you, and if they don't than the orginazion and your fans will pay for it.

    The same goes for us and our signings...

  6. #6
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    10,114
    Dude, I don't complain about anyone spending money but you are lost. If there was a salary cap in baseball the Yankees would actually need to get a real general manager...not to mention they have been trying to buy rings for years and years.

  7. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    9,157
    Quote Originally Posted by Tony Danza View Post
    You are completely missing my point.


    To answer your question that money was given to the Mets to finish building a stadium, not sign K-Rod, so no I would say it had nothing to do with signing K-Rod. The Yankees also recieved their 450 or so million to build their stadium, not to sign free agents. The problem is that the Yankees were still asking for more money after recieving their 450 or so million. They were still asking for money after spending 420 million on free agents and after supposedly swindling the state out of even more money. Does that not seem wrong to you?
    What seems wrong to me are teams like the Mets and Red Sox that have have huge revenue streams from selling out their stadiums and have their own stations (NESN and SNY) and receive hundreds of millions of dollars in public money yet their owners want to be greedy and maximize profit by not signing guys like Tex and Sabathia. Then on top of that their fans whine and cry bloody murder blaming the Yankees for everything.

    BTW, the Mets asked the City of New York for an additional $83 million to finance their stadium. Yankees aren't the only team asking for more money after signing players.

  8. #8
    All League
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    East of the Jordan, West of the Rock of Gibraltar
    Posts
    4,805
    I am a Met fan. I do not blame the Yankees for doing what they are doing; they are within the rules of MLB.


    The problem I see with MLB is this:

    The franchises in Pittsburgh, Detroit, Minnesota and Cincinnati are all weak in terms of personnel. (There are prolly some more good examples but what do I know) Add that with the world’s economy dropping thru the floor which causes people in general and mid-America folks in particular reluctant to spend their money. People are really reluctant to open their wallets for entertainment especially when there is so much available on TV and via the internet at a fraction of the cost of MLB.

    Anyway questions are:

    Will these (weak sister) franchises go belly up?

    Will non-NY (Boston and LA and Chi town) baseball fans start (some already are) to view MLB as a non-competitive sport?

    And will these folks who no longer care about MLB be in such large numbers that this brings down America’s pastime?

  9. #9
    All League
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    2,725
    Quote Originally Posted by VincenzoTestaverde View Post
    What seems wrong to me are teams like the Mets and Red Sox that have have huge revenue streams from selling out their stadiums and have their own stations (NESN and SNY) and receive hundreds of millions of dollars in public money yet their owners want to be greedy and maximize profit by not signing guys like Tex and Sabathia. Then on top of that their fans whine and cry bloody murder blaming the Yankees for everything.

    BTW, the Mets asked the City of New York for an additional $83 million to finance their stadium. Yankees aren't the only team asking for more money after signing players.
    Your right about the Mets asking too, that was pretty recent and I haven't seen it so I will concede defeat on that point. Although to be fair the Mets are asking for 83 compared to the 259 million the Yankees are asking for after already recieving what seems to be a sizably larger sum of money than the Mets. I don't know why you keep coming back to the money relating to the signing of free agents. These two things should not be related, this money should not fund the salaries of players. Again, my whole point in all of this is it is fine to spend your own money however you like but do not expect others to pay for your lavish spending. One must be accoutable for their own spending habits.

    Also, K-Rods contracts is for 37 million and Putz will make 5 mil in 09. Please do not try and comapre this to the 80, 160, and 180 million contracts the Yankees just gave out.





    http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slu...v=ap&type=lgns

  10. #10
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    7,241
    A cap has 0 chance until one of the small market teams actually pack up and fold.

  11. #11
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    18,349
    I don't really care that they spend money, it is the way in which they spend money that sometimes irks me a little bit. I've already had this debate in another thread, but was it really necessary to go 60 mill over the next highest bidder for Sabathia? Was 40 million not enough? They could have waited him out and got him for less money, I'm sure, but they got impatient and decided to back up a second truckload of cash.

    As for suggesting that the Mets ballpark is costing the taxpayers 450 million is completely ridiculous. The only thing the Mets have asked the City to pay for is the infrastructure improvements around the stadium (New Train Station, ect).

    Everything else they've asked for is in the form of tax-exempt bonds (ie: A loan that the Mets are going to have to pay back). The 83 million that you are talking about was agreed to back in 2006 as part of a contingency plan.

  12. #12
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Electric Avenue
    Posts
    26,683
    Quote Originally Posted by VincenzoTestaverde View Post
    Talk about hypocritical. Both those organizations are money-machines and in the Mets' case they're getting a new stadium that is funded with $450 million in taxpayer money. Yet somehow they can't afford Tex.

    Let's say there was a salary cap in baseball. Sorry Mets fans, a certain Johan Santana would not be pitching for you because he'd probably still be in Minnesota since all MLB teams would be able to spend the same amount of money. Same could probably be said for the Red Sox with Josh Beckett and Daisuke Matsuzaka. The Red Sox bought both Pedro Martinez and Manny Ramirez. If there was a salary cap in baseball prior to 2000 the curse of the Bambino would probably still be in effect.

    Think the Mets would have been able to buy K-Rod if there was a salary cap? Think again.

    I can understand a Marlins fan or a Nationals fan complaining about the lack of a salary cap in baseball but Mets and Red Sox fans have nothing to complain about. I'm actually all for a salary cap in baseball. The ironic thing is a lot of these die-hard baseball fans who complain about inequality in the MLB dismiss the NBA and say it sucks even though the NBA has a salary cap and is a alot more fair then baseball.
    First of all, I'm not a Mets fan or a Red Sox fan. Regardless of what the Red Sox have done as far as salaries and spending, they HAVE won TWO World Series since 2000, something the Yankees have failed to do while having far and away the highest payroll in baseball year in and year out. So that argument is a bit weak.

    And by the way, in 2008, the Yankees had 11 players on their roster that made more than either Beckett or Dice-K.
    Last edited by Jordy; 12-26-2008 at 02:04 PM.

  13. #13
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Fairfield County, CT
    Posts
    6,870
    Quote Originally Posted by Ven0m View Post
    I don't really care that they spend money, it is the way in which they spend money that sometimes irks me a little bit.

    I've already had this debate in another thread, but was it really necessary to go 60 mill over the next highest bidder for Sabathia? Was 40 million not enough?
    I didn't read your debate in the other thread, so perhaps this was already covered.

    But I think it's disingenuous to compare a 5 year, $100 million offer to a 7 year, $160 million one....and focus on the absolute dollar difference.

    Of course, the absolute dollar value is $60 million more, but for that the Yankees get two more years of service.

    And the market for a top young lefty in New York had been set at about $23 million a year by the Mets.

    So a fairer comparison to the Brewers offer, at least in theory, is that the Yankees offered about $15 million more over the life of the 5 years.

    Given that they were:
    1) enticing CC to switch leagues
    2) switch to living on the East Coast
    3) pitch in the same city as Santana and
    4) they wanted to lock him in for a long term...

    The Yankees offer was very appropriate.

  14. #14
    All League
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    2,725
    Quote Originally Posted by Phoenixx View Post
    I didn't read your debate in the other thread, so perhaps this was already covered.

    But I think it's disingenuous to compare a 5 year, $100 million offer to a 7 year, $160 million one....and focus on the absolute dollar difference.

    Of course, the absolute dollar value is $60 million more, but for that the Yankees get two more years of service.

    And the market for a top young lefty in New York had been set at about $23 million a year by the Mets.

    So a fairer comparison to the Brewers offer, at least in theory, is that the Yankees offered about $15 million more over the life of the 5 years.

    Given that they were:
    1) enticing CC to switch leagues
    2) switch to living on the East Coast
    3) pitch in the same city as Santana and
    4) they wanted to lock him in for a long term...

    The Yankees offer was very appropriate.
    Very good point. This contract as compared to Santana's could be very similar in the end. I believe there is an option for Santana and incentives that could make the total contract value somewhere in the 150 range. There was an article written, I believe in ESPN, that stated in the long run Sabathia's contract could be relatively cheap.

    However, it appears the Yanks drove up the market due to their own impatience which may or may not be true. If true it is bad for baseball as it keeps the inflation factor up in a struggling economy. At some point, escpecially so considering the Yankees ticket prices, they will be pricing out their own fans.

  15. #15
    Practice Squad
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    280
    I don't think they're complaining about the fact that the Yankees spend a lot of money but the fact that they can spend that much more then anyone else. The Red Sox and Mets are in the 125-140 mil range which is a ton of money while the Yankees have hovered around 200 mil the last couple years. That doesn't seem a little off to you? That's 60 million more then the Mets AKA three MVP/Cy Young caliber players. That can make a huge difference for a team. Now I think if you've got a good enough owner who wants to win that bad, good for you, but at the same time I can see why so many people get pissed.

  16. #16
    All League
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Parsippany, NJ
    Posts
    3,705
    Quote Originally Posted by Buster View Post
    I am a Met fan. I do not blame the Yankees for doing what they are doing; they are within the rules of MLB.


    The problem I see with MLB is this:

    The franchises in Pittsburgh, Detroit, Minnesota and Cincinnati are all weak in terms of personnel. (There are prolly some more good examples but what do I know) Add that with the world’s economy dropping thru the floor which causes people in general and mid-America folks in particular reluctant to spend their money. People are really reluctant to open their wallets for entertainment especially when there is so much available on TV and via the internet at a fraction of the cost of MLB.

    Anyway questions are:

    Will these (weak sister) franchises go belly up?

    Will non-NY (Boston and LA and Chi town) baseball fans start (some already are) to view MLB as a non-competitive sport?

    And will these folks who no longer care about MLB be in such large numbers that this brings down America’s pastime?
    If Pittsburgh and Cinncinnati are weak they have no one to blame but themselves. They draft poorly and make bad trades. Minnesota and Detroit are not weak teams, Detroit was picked by many to go to the WS last year.

  17. #17
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Electric Avenue
    Posts
    26,683
    Quote Originally Posted by adb280z View Post
    If Pittsburgh and Cinncinnati are weak they have no one to blame but themselves. They draft poorly and make bad trades. Minnesota and Detroit are not weak teams, Detroit was picked by many to go to the WS last year.
    The Pittsburgh's and the Cinncinnati's do not draft poorly. They simply cannot afford to keep their top tier players. They have to trade them for prospects and the vicious cycle continues. And Detroit had the 3rd highest payroll in baseball last season, just slightly behind the Mets. The one team that transcends this whole discussion is the Devil Rays.

  18. #18
    I don't really care what the fans think about it. What makes me laugh is when other teams complain about what the Yankees do. The ONLY team that has the right to complain about the current system in MLB is the Yankees. The Yankees were the only team that voted AGAINST the current CBA. Every other team voted for it.

  19. #19
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Electric Avenue
    Posts
    26,683
    Quote Originally Posted by JeffWeaverFan View Post
    I don't really care what the fans think about it. What makes me laugh is when other teams complain about what the Yankees do. The ONLY team that has the right to complain about the current system in MLB is the Yankees. The Yankees were the only team that voted AGAINST the current CBA. Every other team voted for it.
    You don't suppose the Yankees voted AGAINST it because it contained provisions for revenue sharing and the continuation of the luxury tax?

  20. #20
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Rockland, New York
    Posts
    5,359
    Quote Originally Posted by Jordy View Post
    You don't suppose the Yankees voted AGAINST it because it contained provisions for revenue sharing and the continuation of the luxury tax?
    Does that change the fact that the rest of the owners approved of the CBA?

    Not to mention that those clamoring for a salary cap have a long time to wait. You think the Players Union would ever agree to capping their salaries? If it did, it'd only be after one or two seasons of strike.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us