What’s scary for the rest of the baseball is they are seemingly moving away from a model where they used to spend it stupidly.

And it’s a shame - though unfortunately not surprising - how many people don’t get this.  There’s a FanGraphs post today about a “super tax” ON TOP of the current luxury tax, and a lot of commentators complaining about how the Yankees don’t develop players, just buy them.  And noting how the Yankees MiL system is weak.  It’s like they don’t bother looking beyond the ESPN headlines.

I think you’re being generous in attributing that $423 million figure to the media.  Whenever I hear a dollar amount mentioned, it’s “half a billion.”

Also, isn’t the $423 million for a total of 20 years of service (8 for Tex, 7 for CC, 5 for AJ)?They make it sound like the Yankees spent all that money just to win this year.

I don’t recall many payroll/salary cap articles when the $150 million Red Sox beat the $50 million Rockies in the World Series. Funny, that.

Does anyone else get upset when they hear “half a billion” used to estimate the “$423 million?”

They make it sound like the Yankees spent all that money just to win this year.

A few weeks ago Posnaski(sp) wrote that the Yankees were spending over $1B on their top 10 players.  While technically correct, that included full-value for the all of Jeter’s contract, etc.  Why put things in perspective when you can write inflamatory statements that 70% of your readers will drool over?

OK SG, the other day you wanted us to just enjoy it and not start talking about next year.  And yet, the “Magic Number” counter has already been reset?

And yet, the “Magic Number” counter has already been reset?

Does that mean it’s time to start talking about Wang, Nady, Damon, Matsui and Jackson?

Does anyone else get upset when they hear “half a billion” used to estimate the “$423 million?”

Just a wee bit.

Like I’ve always said, Posnanski is an obnoxious toolbox who is beloved by many for some reason.

[6] We can probably start talking about when the right time to promote Montero will be!

I’ve been laughing quite hard the last couple of days at all sorts of revenue sharing proposals from various parts of the blogosphere.  People really should take at least a passing glance at the current formula before they try to improve it.  Many of the ideas being bandied about would actually take less money from the high-revenue teams.

What’s the deal with Nady? Is he under contract still?

[9] Oh, man. My diabolic plan is for Montero and Posada to split time between catcher and DH, keeping them both in the line up all the time. Let the $26M fall off the books, get a decent OBP LFer who plays stud defense and watch Chamberlain and Hughes go from 4.50 FIP/150 IP starters to 3.75 FIP/180-200 IP starters. But if it’s not time to talk about that yet, that’s cool.

[8] Well, he’s generally a good write and tells good stories.  And since he often uses some sabermetric ideas in his writings (though not often correctly), it is good that he promotes interest in the topic.  However, when it comes to serious analysis or unbiased opinions…

[10] I pulled this from a comment from Fangraphs. It’s a comparison of revenue to payroll for every team.  The conversation was centered on making some a salary cap that was different for each team and based on some percentage of revenue.

As for salary caps, I don’t know how the Yankees spending less is going to make the front office of the Nationals and Pirates smarter.

Team Rev(in $mil) Payroll(in $mil) % of Rev to Payroll
NYY $375 $209 55.73%
BOS $269 $133 49.44%
NYM $261 $137 52.49%
LAD $241 $118 48.96%
CHC $239 $118 49.37%
PHI $216 $98 45.37%
LAA $212 $119 56.13%
CHW $196 $121 61.73%
SF $196 $76 38.78%
STL $195 $99 50.77%
HOU $194 $88 45.36%
SEA $189 $117 61.90%
DET $186 $137 73.66%
ATL $186 $102 54.84%
WAS $184 $54 29.35%
CLE $181 $78 43.09%
COL $178 $68 38.20%
ARI $177 $66 37.29%
TEX $176 $67 38.07%
SD $174 $73 41.95%
BAL $174 $67 38.51%
MIL $173 $80 46.24%
TOR $172 $97 56.40%
CIN $171 $74 43.27%
OAK $160 $47 29.38%
TAM $160 $43 26.88%
MIN $158 $56 35.44%
PIT $144 $48 33.33%
KC $143 $58 40.56%
FLA $139 $21 15.11%

@8 I left the following comment at Posnanski’s blog yesterday:

B-O-O H-O-O suckers!

i’m not going to bother debating this rationally with people, they can suck it. We won they lost, fuck off.

I gotta say, I think the Yankees MiLB system is weak right now too.  I’m not overly impressed with the so called high ceiling guys.  So far AJ!, Betances and Brackman aren’t exactly top prospects anymore.  I’m not saying the Yankees farm hasn’t produced some quality MLB players but weren’t most of the current “home grown” starters outside of Posada, Jeter, and Pettitte signed in the international draft not drafted?  Mo, Cano, Melky, Wang, even guys like Cervelli and Aceves.  Even guys like Kennedy and Joba they got because of signability issues. 

Also, they were able to keep the “Core 4” and other home grown players with money other teams don’t have.  And trade farm pieces like Soriano (another international signing) for guys like A-Rod because they had money to take on his salary.

That’s not to say I agree with the MSM.  I know you guys joke about it all the time but I think the business side of running a team is every bit as important as the talent evaluation side of it.  When George bought the team in the early 70’s they were middle of the pack in attendance and didn’t even have a TV contract.  He put a higher percentage of his revenue back into his team than any other franchise.  He was able to build the value of the team, use that to start a TV station and build a new stadium which both bring in more money.  It took the Yankees 35+ years of reinvestment to get to this point while other owners took their money and put it in their own pockets.  That is every bit as important as talent evaluation and smart personnel moves so I’m not going to apologize for it anymore than the Indians should apologize for the Colon trade or Rays should apologize for the Kazmir trade and drafting well.

[8] He’s beloved by many because he’s a good deal better at speaking English than most sportswriters, and he really loved Buck O’Neill.

[3] In 2007, the Yankees had a $190M payroll and about a $30M operating loss while the Red Sox had a $143M payroll and turned about a $30M profit.  It’s pretty clear that a good bit of the payroll disparity is purely a matter of choice.

[11] No, he’s a FA.  I think he might still be a “Type B” as well, though I’m not positive about that.  I believe his arm is supposed to be ready for ST.  I think the Yankees should offer him a minor-league contract and an invitation to ST, and give him an out in like May.  If he’s healthy and they need an OF or DH, or even a 1B for a month (say Teix pulls a hamstring last day of ST), he’d be nice to have around.  SWB Yankees could also likely use a RH power-bat, especially if they want Montero to start the year at AA, and then Nady is there in reserve if there’s a need.  Would Nady accept such a deal?  Definitely not until late January, but if he doesn’t have a good offer by then he might.

[16] Didn’t the Indians get Grady Sizemore in the Colon trade?  I don’t think they need to apologize for that one.  They should however, apologize for trading Lee and Martinez when they still had a cheap option year on each and were only out of it in a weak division because of a bunch of injuries.

[18] - Why not offer him arbitration?  He only made 6.5M last year.  Not a big risk on a 1 year deal.

[8] I honestly don’t mind him. But that’s in comparison to all the other mainstream site writers. So I guess it’s a weak compliment at best. Even when he makes stupid arguments, at least he sounds rational in doing so.

But when the top of the heap writers at the mainstream sites still are so blatantly unbiased, it’s time for people to head to other sites. Which is why I don’t frequent espn/si very often anymore; it’s just not necessary.

[19] - I’m not saying it was a bad trade for their team.  They actually got Cliff Lee, Brandon Phillips, Grady Sizemore and Lee Stevens. It was a great trade for them and they shouldn’t apologize for doing so well in a trade.  Nor should the Rays for hosing the Mets in the Kazmir trade.

If we really do see the rash of non-tenders that Gammons and Olney are predicting, Nady is not likely to see many major league contract offers.

[20] I’ve got to think that an arbitration offer would follow some calculated risk on Nady’s injury. If Cashman feels that the chance that he’ll be ready (meaning ready to be productive) come spring training, he’ll offer arbitration. If the risk is too great, you see if you can get him on a deal that’s more on the Yankees terms (or closer to the Yankees terms) and if you get him, great.

[19] I think his point was that those moves were good business decisions by those teams, just as Steinbrenner made some great business decisions for the Yankees.

[20] Even less of a risk because an arb award is not guaranteed.  If he’s not ready to go by the end of ST he only costs you 1/6 of whatever he gets.  But he does cost you a 40-man roster spot if he accepts, and that might be an issue.

[19] Ahh, yes.  Totally misread that.

[19] = [22] in [26]

Does anyone else get upset when they hear “half a billion” used to estimate the “$423 million?”

It’s even worse than that sometimes.  Stark (I think) had a comment about the Yankees spending more than the GDP of Trinidad and Tobago on their 3 FA.  He was only off by 2 orders of magnitude, as the GDP there is $35B.  I mean, I understand hyperbole, but still.

If there is going to be a wave of non-tenders, then how is trading for Hermida such a great idea?

Yankee-hater Ken Tremendous (of FJM fame) had a great line on his Twitter that I was reminded of when I saw SG’s post:

Congrats to the Yankees, the best team in baseball. Let’s see how strong you are next year when Damon is replaced by…Matt Holliday. Shit.

Check out House Resolution 893, currently on the floor:

http://clerk.house.gov/floorsummary/floor.html/thisweek.htm

I’ve got the pdf if anyone wants it.

I gotta say, I think the Yankees MiLB system is weak right now too.

Part of the problem is comparing it w/ other MiL systems, which is tough to do if you’re like me and just like following your own team’s system.  For my perspective, I think the AAA team last year - in the 25 and under category - had quite a few guys that project to be major-league players.  Most of them don’t project to be more than backups/bullpen/back of the rotation starters, but there are a few guys I think can still be All Stars at their peaks (Jackson) or #2 starters (McCallister).  But just having a AAA with players you can get by with for a month during a pennant race I think is more than several systems have.

Down further they have some players with a solid upside or better, but I’m not nearly as familiar with players in AA or below.  Perhaps if Fabian ever gets around to his “top-10” (or more list) we could explore that.  While I don’t think the Yankees have a *strong* system right now, I also don’t think it is *weak*.

[29] I’m not sure if i’m remembering this correctly; but I believe Herminda was even mentioned specifically by buster olney on ESPN radio as being someone who would be non-tendered. In which case, Boston could have gotten him without giving up prospects…or something.

What these same media outlets don’t want to acknowledge is that when the RS win, they are doing the same thing, only on a somewhat smaller scale.

[31] God Bless America.

[35] There the bill text is there if you click on the link.

[20, 24, 26] Well part of it is I don’t think they want to pay him $6M, even if he is ready.  Obviously I don’t know all the budget details, but supposedly they “borrowed” against the 2010 budget for 2009.  So I’d rather they save an extra $4M of that or so to pursue Holliday, re-sign Damon, etc. 

Plus, even though they *could* recover 5/6ths of the contract, they really have to prove he doesn’t deserve a job (physically or otherwise), not just that they don’t feel like paying him.  Which means a grievence they have to deal with, and may even lose (probably settle for something in between).  And as MC said, there is the 40-man roster issue.  There are a LOT of players in AAA who will need to be protected from the rule V, and a lot of them would make sense to; at least more sense than giving Nady a 40-man spot when they aren’t even sure they’ll keep him.

Nady would be a nice player to have.  Maybe.  If he’s healthy.

Is [31] the health care bill, or a resolution calling for a salary cap in MLB?

[38] Only one way to find out, my friend.

At least they can’t do anything to screw up the country if they’re debating HR 893.  Good for them.

Plus, even though they *could* recover 5/6ths of the contract, they really have to prove he doesn’t deserve a job (physically or otherwise), not just that they don’t feel like paying him.

Well, if he can’t throw, that’s a non-issue.  I was not advocating offering arbitration and I don’t think they will.  I was just pointing out that arbitration awards are not guaranteed contract, which is something that people tend to forget (or not be aware of in the first place).

Anyone have any comments on the huge revenue of the Yankees? Fer sure, some of it comes with just being in NY, but some also can be due to being smart about how they invest in the Yankee brand, assets, and such.

[31] Is it safe?

[16] The other side of the coin is the degree to which the Yankees’ expenditures contribute to the bottomline of many other baseball franchises through revenue sharing, increased attendance when the Yankees play in their stadiums, etc. In some ways, they are the financial engine that propels MLB forward.

[31] Oh my!  We need a bill for that?  Why couldn’t they just put forth a motion on the floor and approve by voice-vote?  They obviously had some staffers looking stuff up and writing the bill, and since it is a bill they’ll probably have to debate it and potentially attach amendments and such.  Aren’t they supposed to be too busy working on other stuff?

[43] Safe? Dude.. just check it out.

[46] He meant safe for work. And yeah, it’s a .gov site. As safe as anything else out there.

Other points that never get mentioned:

1.  To some degree (and I don’t know how much), the Yankees have to pay more to their players than teams in other parts of the country just because of taxes and cost of living.  I doubt many sportswriters would fine it acceptable to work in NYC for the same salary they would make in Tampa, Fla.

2.  Because of the luxury tax, all the obsence Yankees spending is putting more money in the pockets of small market teams to spend on player personnel.  However, a lot of those teams’ owners are simply pocketing the extra dough.  IOW, while they claim they “can’t compete,” they are not even trying to be as competitive as they can. 

3.  Another form of subsidy the Yankees provide to small market teams is driving up their attendance when they play in their ballparks. 

4.  Major league teams aren’t just competing with each other, they are competing with the NFL and other sports for fans.  The Yankees and other “marquee” franchises that are loaded with All-Stars are what drives interest in MLB. 

5.  The Yankees can’t just “buy” any player they want.  Players are completely under the control of the team that drafted them for the first, what, six years of MLB service?  Moreover, the Yankees don’t have unlimited roster spots with which to stockpile players.  Therefore, to the extent the Yankees rely on expensive FAs, they are necessarily dealing with older players, incurring the inherent risk of longer-terms contracts often involving no-trade clauses, forfeiting draft picks needed to maintain a healthy farm system, subsidizing other teams through the luxury tax, and limiting their own future roster flexibility.  The writers almost exclusively focus on the upside of dealing in the FA market, rarely on the downsides.

6.  Why the hell shouldn’t the Yankees, with probably 30 million fans around the country, win the WS more frequently than say the Pirates, who perhaps have a million or two?  Where is it written that every franchise, despite the size of market, history, fan support, or any other distinguishing factors, should be on an overall equal competitive footing?  So long as the rules are applied equally to all teams, there’s no problem with certain teams winning for WS than others.  It’s to be expected, in fact.   

7.  Finally, in terms of 2009, I’m sick of hearing Red Sox fans (including those in the media) point to the Yankees’ advantage in revenue as the reason for their WS win.  The fact is that, before the season started, all these Red Sox fans picked their team to beat the Yankees.  This was, of course, AFTER the FAs were signed and the rosters were set.  So evidently whatever edge the Yankees had in revenue as of Opening Day was still not enough to overcome the inherent superiority of the team from Boston.  Only later, after the Yankees beat the RS in the regular season and went on to win the WS, and after the Sox then got swept in the playoffs, NOW they come out and say it was because of the financial edge.  Honestly, if they feel that way, they should all pick the Yankees to win the WS again next year, because NY will still hold the revenue edge then.  But they won’t do that because playing the payroll card against the Yanks would force them to acknowledge that they’re not as good as they think they are.

some also can be due to being smart about how they invest in the Yankee brand, assets, and such

Yeah, it’s not our fault as fans that other teams aren’t smart enough to open up-scale butcher shops in their ballparks!

Well, if he can’t throw, that’s a non-issue.

Of course it is, simply b/c the union can make it an issue.  They would claim the Yankees knew about the injury before hand and obviously wanted him so they should place him on the DL instead.  It’s not a matter of if that makes sense or not, just the fact that the union WILL do that - even if Nady doesn’t care - and it’s not worth it.  And I know you’re not advocating the offer arb.  I just noticed it and wanted to shoot it down as an argument in case someone else picked it up.

j and all, 893 is well worth clicking thru to. Thanks for that.

[48] Your second point is not true, though it would stand to reason that it should be.  Although it is called the “competitive balance tax” the money is not transferred to low-revenue teams to enhance competitive balance.  It goes into a discretionary fund controlled by the commissioner, and I’m not aware that there has ever been any accounting of what he does with it.

Of course it is, simply b/c the union can make it an issue.

I think you’re overstating this a bit.  Teams have gotten out of arbitration awards without grievances being filed.

Parade starts in 15 minutes. Damn living in Maryland. Wish I could be there.

The Yankees need to position themselves, both by accumulating high end prospects and maintaining financial flexibility, so that they have the ability to acquire top young stars that could become available through trades within the next year or so, like Hanley Ramirez or Felix Hernandez.

Where is it written that every franchise, despite the size of market, history, fan support, or any other distinguishing factors, should be on an overall equal competitive footing?

While I’m in no way in favor of a cap, and don’t like the luxury tax, I think we need to at least make sure that teams have a chance of surviving.  Now, if the problem is a team is in a market that can’t support enough revenue, my first question would be, “where can we move them”?  If the Royals for example can’t survive in KC, then is there a place we can move them?  So step one would be to remove the barriers that prevent teams from moving to competitive markets; let there be a team in northern NJ for example.

I think that would go a long way to reducing those imbalances.  If we run out of markets to support all 30 teams (there shouldn’t be 6 teams in the NYC area, for example), THEN look to something else.  I think there’s probably only 3 or 4 teams that would need to be moved.  If you took the lowest revenue teams and moved them to high-revenue areas - and kept revenue sharing the same - all teams would be better off w/o adding a cap or anything like that.

[53] Perhaps, though I think w/ a team like the Yankees the union would be all over that.  As much as anything I think the union likes to get media coverage, and they aren’t going to get much coverage in KC or Oakland or anything.  Of course, I’m most familiar with the cases (not necessarily arb but anything) that the union files grievences over, not the ones they don’t.

I think there’s probably only 3 or 4 teams that would need to be moved.  If you took the lowest revenue teams and moved them to high-revenue areas - and kept revenue sharing the same - all teams would be better off w/o adding a cap or anything like that.

Not sure where [14]‘s number came from, but assuming it’s relatively around the ballpark:

CIN $171 $74 43.27%
OAK $160 $47 29.38%
TAM $160 $43 26.88%
MIN $158 $56 35.44%
PIT $144 $48 33.33%
KC $143 $58 40.56%
FLA $139 $21 15.11%

I’d be hard press to say there is 3 or 4 teams that should be moved. To me, it’s more about owner/management greed, and incompetency.

How in the world the marlins get away with spending that little on their baseball team…no wonder no one shows up to the park.

Has SG lifted the ban on armchair GMing yet?

Look, guys, I know the MSM gets carried away in their hatred for the Yankees’ spending, but you cannot - I repeat CANNOT - argue that the Yankees don’t benefit from grossly unfair structural inequities in the game of baseball.  To make that argument, or to argue that those inequities are mitigated by various factors, is to be completely and utterly oblivious of one’s privilege as a Yankees fan.  It’s like a trust fund baby arguing that his fortune was achieved purely through hard work and merit: yeah, maybe he studied stock trading and expanded on the fortune he inherited, but he had a farnsing fortune to work with to begin with, whereas the Pittsburgh Pirates were stuck working at Wendy’s in an effort to earn some basic spending money.  Sure, when you’re taking in a Wendy’s salary, you shouldn’t spend your scant money on Jeremy Burnitz, but that ignores the fact that the Yankees could (and have) wasted their own money in fairly extravagant ways and have barely, if at all, been effected by it.

Cliff’s notes: arguing against the existence of Yankees financial privilege is an intellectually disingenuous position, one rooted in your own Yankees bias.

I personally don’t want to see the current system changed, because a) I haven’t seen any better proposals, and b) as a Yankees fan, I like the inherent competitive advantage the Yankees enjoy.  But I’m under no delusions about the position of extreme privilege from which the Yankees are operating and from which I, as a fan, benefit (in a way that is unfair to most, if not all, other teams).

Ok, off to watch the parade.

[60] Nope. That’s why we’re armchair commishing.

Wish I were at the parade! Thank God MLBN is carrying it. Though I wish Reynolds wasn’t blathering on

Cliff’s notes: arguing against the existence of Yankees financial privilege is an intellectually disingenuous position, one rooted in your own Yankees bias.

I think everyone here would agree that spending money is how you improve a team, and most people are just reacting to the media that treats the Yankees as a special case, when really they are just the biggest example of the Mets/Dodgers/Angels/Red Sox/Cubs teams who all have “enough” money to spend to bully the Royals and Rays etc.

[61] But you can also say that the Yankees ain’t the only trust fund babies, by far. And that they did a better job leveraging their advantage as well as building their brand and assets. While some of the others just invested badly, or basically crippled their fund.

I am pretty confident (and optimistic) that we will see more than one Yankees ticker tape parade within the next few years.

[66] I hope so, but it’s too early to get extremely excited, terrified, nervous, anxiety ridden, and nauseous.

and speaking of bias.

It’s like a trust fund baby arguing that his fortune was achieved purely through hard work and merit…

Most trust fund fortunes were amassed through hard work and merit.  It’s just that it was not the hard work and merit of the beneficiary.

But I’m under no delusions about the position of extreme privilege from which the Yankees are operating and from which I, as a fan, benefit (in a way that is unfair to most, if not all, other teams).

The only wrinkle I would suggest in response to this is that when Steinbrenner purchased the Yankees, their revenue stream was average in MLB.  Obviously, the massive market and history of the Yankees gives them a huge advantage in raw potential over every other team, but the current ownership group deserves real credit for maximizing their return on this.

But yeah: the Yanks have a giant advantage in terms of resource potential.  That they tapped this deepest well reflects the ability of their management, and that they’re willing to dump it back into the team is great for us.  We’re lucky as hell and we shouldn’t harbor delusions that minimize the financial advantage the Yankees have.  I mean, Sabathia, Teix, Jeter, Posada, A-Rod and Rivera?  It’s absured.  And it really is the money.  I say, Farns it.  Baseball is entertainment.  I embrace the villain.  Go Darth Vader!

And naturally baseball likes it like this: the game is rigged.  The big-market teams winning disproportionately is great for business.  And revenue sharing keeps the little owners happy, they merrily pocket the dough even as they publicly wag their tongues at the unfairness of it all.

absurd.

Mrs. Tex is adorable

Parade Parade ParadeParade!!!!!!!!!!!

Ha, Molina and AJ sharing the same float. Binder!

Jeter kicking it with the Yankee jacket, that should add some more revenue to the trust fund.

That’s Minka with Jeter. She’s pretty cute.

Posada on the same float with Jeter, with his (I assume) kids.

OK SG, the other day you wanted us to just enjoy it and not start talking about next year.  And yet, the “Magic Number” counter has already been reset?

Wasn’t me, must have been Larry.

Robinson Cano looks so lackadaisical on the float.

[78] Maybe he was hanging out with Lincecum before the party?

That’s Minka with Jeter. She’s pretty cute.

Sure is.  A keeper.  And Jeter’s parents are there too.

I just watched some of the postgame tape and there was a shot of Jeter meeting up with Paul O’Neill at the first base line and they gave each other a huge hug.  That was neat.

Jeter’s dad looks pretty good to.

Parade, bitches!!!

Molina and AJ on the same float, of course.

LOOK, WANG SIGHTING!

Last position player of any consequence to come through the system (this doesn’t include Cano et al) was Nick Johnson. Seems like there should have been more.

Did Girardi have to come out and help anyone on the parade route?

Dang, Exit light, enter night. Mo sighting.

You know who’s probably feeling awesome?  Damaso Marte.  The guy was injured, returns to the team but never looked like he was going to effective at all - and then absolutely outperforms in the World Series.

Jeter should propose to Minka on the city hall steps after getting the key.  That would be a friggin’ scene for the city.

PANAMANIAN FLAG!

Jeter should propose to Minka on the city hall steps after getting the key.  That would be a friggin’ scene for the city.

Ha. I was thinking the same thing.

Then Alex goes looking for some phillies to mount.

Andy’s kid has a spock hair cut?

[88] But I guess that would be completely unlike Jeter who seems to be a pretty private guy.
Then again, I’m fairly surprised that Minka is with him on the float.  And really, surprised that she was so visible throughout the season.

[89] So is Centaur pulling a float by himself? He is a monstrous humanoid after all.

[61] It’s not that I’m denying the Yankees don’t derive any benefit from the “rule” that says teams can spend as much as they want on FAs (which is actually not a “rule” but rather the failure of MLB to impose a salary cap at any point in its entire 100+ years of existence).  The point is that the whiners in the media focus on the FA spending as if it’s the sole factor in the Yankees’s success (historical and in 2009), and as if it constitutes some kind of intolerable evil. 

First of all, it’s obviously not the sole factor in the Yankees success.  I don’t even want to waste time reviewing why this is such a specious argument.

Second, for a number of the reasons I discuss above, it’s really not a bad thing for the game for a few teams to spend a lot of money assembling a team of all-stars.  MLB as a whole benefits from the Yankees’ supposed profligacy.  Moreover, despite the Yankees’ financial stranglehold over the rest of baseball, EIGHT different teams have managed to win the WS this decade.  The burden clearly is on those who want to radically change how baseball operates to show that their socialistic overhaul will make things better in the long run.

Although you seem dismissive of them, there are, in fact, many features of the current system that DO operate to mitigate the effect of the Yankees’ supposed economic dominance.  For example, teams that sign coveted FAs get penalized with the forfeiture of draft picks.  I don’t see how acknowledging this “is to be completely and utterly oblivious of one’s privilege as a Yankees fan,” as you assert.

As a Yankees fans, I’m glad there’s no salary cap.  But I’m also glad as a baseball fan.  For one thing, I like trades, and I hate the idea of teams’ being literally forbidden from executing trades a lot of the time due to salary cap complications.  Salary caps can really mire inept franchises in long-term ruts from which they can seemingly never escape.  That doesn’t improve parity.  Under the current system, there is a LOT of player mobility from one season to the next, and even in-season.  Let’s not screw with that simply because some people are offended the big bad Yankees were able to pull off two WS wins in a single 10-year period.

[61] I agree with you. But a simplistic interpretation of your post is: capitalism sucks and creates inequalities. I agree. I also agree that socialism (or parity, if you prefer that term rather than the loaded political term I used) creates equities, but kills incentives to create really good teams, with the result that you have a lot of equally sucky teams. So, take your pick.

Also, by nature, baseball is an equitable game. The sucky Detroit Tigers of 2003 won like 27 percent of the times, whereas the Detroit Lions in football won 0 percent of the time last year, and 2004 Atlanta Hawks won 15 percent of the time. So, that by itself obviates dramatic measures at parity.

The problem with MLB (or any other North American sport for that matter) is that there is no competition, they are a monopoly/oligopoly run by a set of owners who form a club. If the owners faced competition from any random billionaire to be acquired, then they would be run far more efficiently. But they are not, so it is an inefficient system, where a sucky owner is not accountable to anyone but Bud and his cronies.

You know who’s probably feeling awesome?  Damaso Marte.

Damned straight.  When they shut him down the second time, I was absolutely convinced that he would throw a baseball in anger again until 2010.  It’s really great being wrong sometimes.

that he would NOT throw a baseball in anger again

It is great being wrong sometimes, but it always sucks to be unable to type.

Mo transcend whatever SI cover curse.

In the future you’ll be able to tell what parade footage you’re watching by looking at Mo’s hairline.

If the owners faced competition from any random billionaire to be acquired, then they would be run far more efficiently.

So all MLB needs is a couple of Berkshire-Hathaways?

“Thank You Kate Hudson” sign.  Priceless.

Mo handsome.