MLB
- Thread starter ArGenTin3
- Start date
yeah, and we were 20th. only a $18 million difference between the two teams.
now compare the giants to the yanks who were 1st...
$110 million difference between 1st and 10th place.
:ermm:
yanks are looking at $250 million in payroll this next season if they get Lee.
they have 1 player (ARod) who makes a mere $10 million less then the entire payroll of the Pittsburgh Pirates....lol
now compare the giants to the yanks who were 1st...
$110 million difference between 1st and 10th place.
:ermm:
yanks are looking at $250 million in payroll this next season if they get Lee.
they have 1 player (ARod) who makes a mere $10 million less then the entire payroll of the Pittsburgh Pirates....lol
Is that really the case? I don't think the Rays even made an offer to Carl Crawford, and now he's going to be with the Sox for 7 years. That's 7 years with one tem. After that, the Sox will probably not offer him a deal of more than 1-2 years because he'll be older, and he'll probably take the longest length contract offered to him with the Sox or another team.
Its has nothing to do with pride or team mentality at all. It's the way the business is.
Its has nothing to do with pride or team mentality at all. It's the way the business is.
I think a lot of you are blowing things out of proportion. Smaller-market teams are making more than enough money through revenue-sharing, TV/MLB.com revenues, and the luxury tax. Their owners just happen to be cheap and prefer to get rid of their players before they get too expensive. Look at the A's and Marlins: they've produced a ton of star players yet prefer to trade most of them.
Each team can get at least 3-4 cost-controlled years out of their homegrown (drafted and international signees) players, before another 2-3 years of arbitration. That means that teams such as the Royals, Pirates, Nats etc can potentially field cheap and productive teams for up to 7 years if they draft and and sign correctly (which they should given their high draft positions). A perfect example of this is the Rays of the last few years, they've won with homegrown players and a couple of complementary free agent signings.
Another thing to consider is the players willingness to go to certain teams. Unlike Jayson Werth, Mark Teixera declined a BIGGER offers (Nats and Orioles) than the one the Yankees made him. So, even if a team has the money to sign a few big players the fact that they don't have "winning" tradition, the biggest fanbase or aren't in the right city can be their downfall. The A's have been trying to sign Adrian Beltre for the last two years and have offered the most money/years and he's blown them off completely.
Each team can get at least 3-4 cost-controlled years out of their homegrown (drafted and international signees) players, before another 2-3 years of arbitration. That means that teams such as the Royals, Pirates, Nats etc can potentially field cheap and productive teams for up to 7 years if they draft and and sign correctly (which they should given their high draft positions). A perfect example of this is the Rays of the last few years, they've won with homegrown players and a couple of complementary free agent signings.
Another thing to consider is the players willingness to go to certain teams. Unlike Jayson Werth, Mark Teixera declined a BIGGER offers (Nats and Orioles) than the one the Yankees made him. So, even if a team has the money to sign a few big players the fact that they don't have "winning" tradition, the biggest fanbase or aren't in the right city can be their downfall. The A's have been trying to sign Adrian Beltre for the last two years and have offered the most money/years and he's blown them off completely.
