It looks like the Yankees played their cards right with Rivera.  In the end, they came up to his 2-year demand, but he apparently left more money and an extra year on the table--from all teams, the Red Sox.

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/blog/big_league_stew/post/Mariano-Rivera-returns-to-Yanks-ignores-better-;_ylt=AhnvsNGKUGNKxlKeZ4nNDKgRvLYF?urn=mlb-291554

It also looks like the Jeter situation is improving.

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news;_ylt=AiahSzsMwspYv0omZPejNsQRvLYF?slug=ti-jeterupdate120310

forsberg_us wrote:

It looks like the Yankees played their cards right with Rivera.  In the end, they came up to his 2-year demand, but he apparently left more money and an extra year on the table--from all teams, the Red Sox.

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/blog/big_league_stew/post/Mariano-Rivera-returns-to-Yanks-ignores-better-;_ylt=AhnvsNGKUGNKxlKeZ4nNDKgRvLYF?urn=mlb-291554

It also looks like the Jeter situation is improving.

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news;_ylt=AiahSzsMwspYv0omZPejNsQRvLYF?slug=ti-jeterupdate120310

"Further, does this mean The Captain will ease up on his own contract demands and follow Mo back to Yankee Stadium? If Rivera can pass on better offers, then Jeter can do the same to the imaginary offers he's not getting from other teams.  It would allow him to save some face."

Ouch.  Back to my earlier question, what will it be like to have a publicly neutered team captian in the Bronx?

forsberg_us wrote:

There's talk that the Red Sox are trying very hard to get a trade done for Adrian Gonzalez. They may be offers up to 5 minor leaguers, 3 of whom are considered high level prospects.  If Boston trades 5 players for Gonzalez, they're a lot more likely to re-sign him than make a run at Pujols if he becomes a free agent.

I am guessing most teams are not to worried about Pujols right now because they see how retarded it would be for the Cardinals not to sign him.  If ownership shows their retardedness other teams will scramble.

forsberg_us wrote:

There's talk that the Red Sox are trying very hard to get a trade done for Adrian Gonzalez. They may be offers up to 5 minor leaguers, 3 of whom are considered high level prospects.  If Boston trades 5 players for Gonzalez, they're a lot more likely to re-sign him than make a run at Pujols if he becomes a free agent.

Done. Kelly is the Shelby Miller of Boston's farm system.
I have no idea why San Diego makes this deal, unless they're absolutely convinced they can't re-sign Gonzalez after this season.
Maybe that's the wrong way to put it. Let's say this: I'd be pretty pissed off today if I were a Padres' fan.

Last edited by artie_fufkin (12/04/2010 2:01 pm)

artie_fufkin wrote:

Let's say this: I'd be pretty pissed off today if I were a Padres' fan.

Did you know that Ryan Ludwick had the highest salary among all Padres players last year?


http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/teams/sdg/roster

forsberg_us wrote:

artie_fufkin wrote:

forsberg_us wrote:

There's talk that the Red Sox are trying very hard to get a trade done for Adrian Gonzalez. They may be offers up to 5 minor leaguers, 3 of whom are considered high level prospects.  If Boston trades 5 players for Gonzalez, they're a lot more likely to re-sign him than make a run at Pujols if he becomes a free agent.

Done. Kelly is the Shelby Miller of Boston's farm system.
I have no idea why San Diego makes this deal, unless they're absolutely convinced they can't re-sign Gonzalez after this season.
Maybe that's the wrong way to put it. Let's say this: I'd be pretty pissed off today if I were a Padres' fan.

I read somewhere that the Padres 2010 opening day payroll was something like 35-40 million. Max's post about Ludwick being the highest paid would seem to confirm that.

Not that it matters for the Cardinals, but I wonder if they trade Ludwick.

"The Padres had the second-lowest payroll in the Major Leagues last season at $38 million, and they won't likely have a much higher payroll in 2011."

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20101203&content_id=16251206&vkey=news_mlb

forsberg_us wrote:

38 million is a joke. If they win fewer than 75 games, MLB should cut off their revenue sharing.

Agreed.  That's one of the first revisions of revenue sharing that MLB should make.  Either they win games or fill the stands.

Max wrote:

Does anyone else see an alternative perspective of the current model, wherein the revenue sharing system has created a a lower rung of MLB teams that are a de facto farm system for Yankees and Red Sox?

Geez, Max. That's the first time I've ever heard that theory. Can you elaborate?

Max wrote:

artie_fufkin wrote:

Max wrote:

Does anyone else see an alternative perspective of the current model, wherein the revenue sharing system has created a a lower rung of MLB teams that are a de facto farm system for Yankees and Red Sox?

Geez, Max. That's the first time I've ever heard that theory. Can you elaborate?

Was I being a naive newbie, reinventing the wheel, and doing a bad job of it?

I honestly had never heard it put quite like that and thought I had had an original idea.

In the wake of the Messersmith/McNally decision, the biggest and most frequently stated concern was all the free agents would wind up on either the west coast or east coast, specifically New York and Los Angeles, and eveything in between would be a vast baseball wasteland.
Apologies for my sarcasm last night. I posted not long after our annual Hannukah party had broken up and there were several cocktails involved.

but in any case, i think my point was not so much about free agency, but revenue sharing.  it's one of those ideas that the powerful dangle before the powerless as a means to get them to go along with a bad idea, with the powerless seemingly unaware that even the even the supposed pay-off, in this case revenue sharing, will also work in the interests of the teams paying the luxury tax. 

The 2010 Padres had 20 guys on their 24 man roster earning less than $450,000.  That's 20 guys getting tested at the MLB level, and the Yankees and Red Sox need merely to be patient until they become free agents, or within a year or two of free agency, in order to pick out the one or two guys who become stars.  How many teams in MLB fit the Padres profile?  Probably enough to keep the Yankees partially stocked with stars.

On the other hand, how many minor leaguer, minimum-wage guys get a chance on a so-called mid-market team like the Cardinals?  Probably less than half of those that the bottom echelon plays.  To my way of thinking, the Cardinals would develop a lot more minor leaguers into stars if each year they gave 20 of 'em a chance.  We'd suck, but we'd develop a lot of talent.

As long as relative payrolls around the league stay roughly similar, the teams developing the most minor leaguers won't be able to retain any of them.  Teams like the Cardinals develop fewer players (because fewer get the chance), but they might be able to retain a few (Pujols, Wainwright), too, as long as team loyalty stays high. 

So, in that way, teams like the Padres become a de facto farm system for the rich teams.  The "luxury tax" that was 'supposably' a punishment for spending too much, becomes "revenue sharing" that keeps bad teams afloat, and leaves them financially limited to being able to play nothing but minimum wage types.  So every few years, the Red Sox and Yankees send 2-3 prospects to the Padres, saying "here, develop these guys at the major league level.  After 3 or 4 years, and after you figure out which of them will excel at the major league level, we'll be back to take the stars off your hands and give you 2-3 more guys to try out."

If they really want the luxury tax to hurt, they should be forced to pay it all to their nearest, non-taxed divisional rival.

Last edited by Max (12/06/2010 11:28 am)

forsberg_us wrote:

Holy crap....Max is Bryan Burwell

http://www.stltoday.com/sports/columns/bryan-burwell/article_0c441c96-8400-57d6-afac-c6b7a0e65d88.html

Dammit.  My secret identity is out.  And you all thought my passion about racism in America was just the whining of a liberal white suburbanite when in fact I've been fighting for my people!

None of this bodes well.

Max wrote:

artie_fufkin wrote:

None of this bodes well.

Like signing Lance Berkman to play the outfield???

If the Pillsbury Dough Boy is a harbinger of a Pujols trade, I'll drive to St. Louis and bludgeon DeWitt with the blunt end of a saxophone.