Money talks and Yankees win

For God sake.....Get a salary cap!

BOB don't blame the yankees, blame BUD SELIG, the players union, & the rest of the owners, the yankees play by the rules set forth by the retards in charge of this sport... the Steinbrenners dow what few owners in MLB do, reinvests in the team, on field product, the nuttings and some other owners pocket the money they get and screw the fans, so bark at players union, selig, & other retards in charge...

(I did NOT blame the Yankees. -- Bob Smizik)

What is your point? The Yankees hadn't won a WS since 2000.

Wow....The Yankees haven't won the World Series since 2000....What a drought!

You "forgot" to mention that this was their 4th trip this decade to the Fall Classic.

It's a joke.....

The Yankees make a joke out of baseball.

They should make the playoffs every year and pretty much win the World Series maybe every other year? Maybe once every three years?

Saying the Yankees were only "good" is silly. They have a Hall of Fame candidate at basically every position (except maybe CF) and have for the better part of the past 10-15 years. They Yankees should be winning over 100 games every year. And *not* winning that many every year is a major upset. They can buy any player they want.

There are some other mega teams out there. Boston is pretty solid across the board. And there are solid rosters out there - like the Angels, Dodgers, Phillies etc - and those teams obviously poach a Series here and there. So there is some competition because in any 7 game series, anyone can win.

The Pirates get excited when we acquire a 2B with an OPS of ~.750. Hell, he'd be a bench player on the Yankees. He'd never play. For the Pirates, he is the highest paid guy, on the Yanks he'd be the 25th guy.

That's baseball.

I recently read an article comparing the parity in MLB and the NFL and the writer made a great point.  While there is huge separation between the haves and have-nots in the NFL, there is at least equal opportunity to field a competitive team for every franchise in the NFL.  MLB likes to think that they've seen parity in the last decade, but there's definitely not equal opportunity for low payroll teams.  There won't be until there's some sort of salary cap in baseball, but I doubt that will ever happen considering the strength of the players union and the big market teams.

1. There's a reason the TV networks are based in New York. What's good for the Yankees is good for baseball.

2. southernBurgh makes a good point - the Yankees are playing by the rules. Why shouldn't they use them to their advantage?

3. Hopefully, their new ballyard will bring in even more revenue for the Yankees, and more Series wins. Only when the Sox, Angels, Dodgers and Cubs start crying foul, will there be changes made.

Without having watched the broadcast, I wonder, Bob, how often the announcers referred to the Yankees' payroll as opposed to their "mystique."

No, the Yankees had not won since 2000, but the system allowed them a legitimate chance to do so in every year since then, with the exception of one in which injuries were a huge factor, as memory serves. That, in and of itself, underscores a systemic difference that is looking increasingly inexplicable in the world of professional sports.

Think about it: Everyone harps on baseball to attach asterisks to the names of athletes judged to have had an unfair advantage.

What about the teams?

The days of the "Moneyball" clever guys outsmarting the big spenders are gone. The Yankees, Red Sox, Angels and others are run by smart people and have no less an edge in the draft, Latin America and other areas than the Athletics, Twins, Rays or anyone else. Thus, the money becomes the separator.

Make a lousy trade in which Ross Ohlendorf goes to Pittsburgh for Xavier Nady?

No big deal. Just sign CC Sabathia. No one remembers the trade, and no damage done.

And allowing all this to go on is an enormously complicit national media that glorifies the pinstripes without ever addressing why the Yankees and other big-spending teams are there year after year. All these faux controversies -- umpires suddenly missing calls, catchers visiting the mound -- get stirred up, and everyone misses the elephant in the living room when all four league championship series teams are spending $100 million plus.

Nothing against the Yankees here. They compete intensely, including at the ownership level, within the system that is in place. The same cannot be said of the Pirates in a definitive sense over the past 17 years, and be sure that most of what has ailed them has been self-inflicted.

But the system is looking increasingly preposterous.

Absolutely, positively agree 100%. Can't even remember what we were disagreeing about, earlier today.

If not for being able to buy their championship, the Yankees would possibly be as bad as even the Pirates. I think Robinson Cano is the only good position player on the team who've they've brought up on their own over the last decade. In addition to this year's obscene half a billion dollar spending spree on just three players, the Yanks also previously outbid everyone for A-Rod, ditto Matsui, lured Damon away from the Red Sox-... oh, everybody knows the depressing details.

Last year's Tampa Bay Rays were a flash in the pan. The team is already dismantling itself. I thought the Brewers' Mark Attanasio and a few others would continue to pipe up after they broached the salary issue last year. But alas, this requires persistence. Until enough of the rest of team owners band together and see to it that true reform -a spending cap- is introduced, the Yanks and the players union win and the rest of us stay home and watch New York continue to stockpile paid-for championships.

I can understand the sentiment about the Yankees payroll - and complained about it for years also.  But they had not won in 9 years and there is a salary level with the right managment that can compete.  The Mets and Cubs missed the playoffs while the Redsox, Phils, Angels, Dodgers spent around $100-130M and the Twins and Colorado spent around $70M to get there.  At $25-30M the Pirates ownership continues to take HUGE profits to allow baseball's version of the "Washington Generals" play foil the rest of the league's Harlem Globetrotters.  The Penguins and Steelers can compete and win but their ownership doesn't use the team as an ATM. I agree that a salary cap is needed - both upper and lower or the Nuttings will continue to have no incentive to expend resources to win.

(And your proof that Pirates ownership uses the team as an ATM is . . . ?  Furthermore, what is your proof that ownership of the Penguins and Steelers are not taking a healthy profit for themselves?  ---  Bob Smizik)

The Yankees outspend everyone else by a huge margin every year. They don't win every year.

The '08 Rays were a flash in the pan? So were the '60 Pirates, in all likelihood.

The '60 Pirates were 95-59, followed by 75-79 in '61, a decline of 20 games. The Rays declined by 13 games from '08's 97-65 record.

The Yankees make a joke out of baseball?  Please.

Teams like Tampa Bay and Cleveland just up and quit midway through the season and it's the Yankees that make a joke out of baseball?  The Pirates don't spend money and it's the Yankees that make a joke out of baseball.  Let's not forget that the Pirates traded Eric Hinske to the Yankees and paid the Yankees $400,000 to take him.

The Yankees will have competition next year and a repeat is certainly not a given.

Hi Bob:

Can't say its one of your better posts since the subject is fairly obvious.

Those salary cap people in your commenters, dont' seem to understand that a salary cap for baseball is a pipe dream. Even Nutting doesn't want it.  In what other sport can you field a constently losing team, avg 17 to 20,000 fans per game and make a lot of money.  Why should you vote to increase costs and eliminate reasons that you can hid behind for losing, all the while laughing to the bank.  What everyone on this forum needs to understand is that with baseball owners they want to make $$$, winning is not a priority.

What baseball really needs is a salary floor i.e. you must spend $50 or $75M.  The sham is that some owners are permitted to spend $32 or $24M.  I think baseball would be a lot more competitive with a salary floor.

Without it the Pirates, and other teams like them, return to the series or even the  playoffs is not very likely in the near or even distant future

>>>No, the Yankees had not won since 2000, but the system allowed them a legitimate chance to do so in every year since then, with the exception of one in which injuries were a huge factor, as memory serves. That, in and of itself, underscores a systemic difference that is looking increasingly inexplicable in the world of professional sports.<<<

NFL has a salary cap, and the Lions still go 0-16. Why? Because they run a lousy organization. Pirates lose 17 years in a row. Care to guess why?

Bob,  you neglected to mention how the Yankees also fund the rest on MLB teams with the luxury tax (revenue sharing tax, or whatever you call it.)

Note that it is just not the free agent system that enables the Yankees so successful on the field.  For many of the years prior to FA, the Yankees were always able to buy players from poorer teams ..it was well known that the St Louis Browns would have folded a few times had they not traded or sold their better players to the Yanks in the 40s.

The final insult was right before FA was really taking hold in 74, the Indians GM Gabe Paul traded Greg Nettles and Chris Chambliss to NYY, and then a few months later became a NYY employee ... all without the interference of Commish Kuhn.  

Of course, MLB is better as long as the NYY are on top ... right?  That's what I'm always being told.

(The Yankees make a healthy contribution to revenue sharing. They do not ``fund'' the rest of MLB. -- Bob Smizik)

"John Russell could have managed this team to the World Series. I could have been its general manager. I know how to sign checks."

This is great because it's so true!

If the players and many of the owners will not agree to a salary cap, then maybe the MLB playoffs should be expanded to give the small market teams something to shoot for.  Expand to 12, 14 or 16 teams in the playoffs.  Late season games will mean more for many teams leading to better attendance, TV ratings and small club revenue.  An additional round of playoffs benefits everyone financially as well.  And who knows, a low-salary team could catch lightening in a bottle and knock of 1 or 2 of the big boys in the playoffs.  

The only downsize is making the regular season more meaningless and having to play more games in November.  But doesn't the current arrangement already accomplish the former for most teams and the latter for playoff teams?

(The prospect of playing into mid-November or later makes the expansion of the playoffs highly unlikely. I'm sure MLB  would love to get more teams in the post-season it's just not feasible. -- Bob Smizik)

Andy8, I agree that a floor is also needed, but a floor without a ceiling would just inflate salaries across the board, meaning the Yanks would just spend $300 million to get every player they want. Folks have to understand this team spent a BILLION DOLLARS to build their own stadium, they didn't beg for one. I don't really blame the Nuttings for sucking profit out of the dead carcass of the Pirates; why spend an extra $40 or $50M to get competitive, just to have your best players taken from you by the big guys anyway? (I do blame them for not fighting for a cap.)

How do you think the Indian fans felt when they watched their two great pitchers from last year face off in game one of the Series? Is it really better to have loved and lost than to never have loved at all?

Agreed, the Yankees payroll is ridiculous, but they are playing by the rules which the owners agreed to.... the Pirates do not.  They take the revenue sharing money and "pay down debt, put into the DOmincan or what ever they claim.  The money is to be used on the MLB payroll.  OUr payroll is 30 million..... pathetic.

We are worse for the game than the Yankees are.

Bob - this is one of the best articles I have ever read from you - thanks for writing it!

I have posted your AD on another site - Steelersfury.com - with additional comments from me.

steelerfury.com/.../viewtopic.php

Oh - Forbesfielder - whats Bob's point?  You think just because the Yankees hadnt won since 2000, Bob's point makes no sense?  BALONEY DUDE - that just shows you how bad the Yankees management has been - to have all of those resources, a bigger advantage over every other team, and they dont win it every year - just tells you how much of a joke they and what a bigger joke MLB is!  

It also makes me realize how great the Pittsburgh Steelers are - they win the right way.

ForbesFielder,

I think you're missing the boat here. I'll paint you a better picture. This past offseason, the Yankees and Rays had roughly the same team according to their records and run differential. The Yankees got immediately better by buying the best THREE free agents on the market. The Rays? They added Pat Burrell. Wow.

In the salary cap world, the Yankees are prevented from getting all three. If they have room for one, they do it, and the other two find different homes. Every team at least starts out on equal FINANCIAL footing. If you're dumb enough to put Matt Millen in charge of your personnel, then you end up going 0-16 eventually. At least then it's ENTIRELY your own dumb fault. You can't blame your big spending brother that can cover up a mistake (Ohlendorf for Nady) by spending for a replacement (Sabathia or Burnett). In the current system, you can, and the Pirates, Royals, et al can always use that excuse.

It's like playing golf. I stink at it, so I have a huge handicap (I'm a solid double bogey kind of guy). I play in a league where most of the guys expect to be in the low 40's by the end of 9 holes, so they spot me a few (all right, all right, maybe 10...or 12) strokes to make it even. I win some, I lose some. Now, if they didn't give me those 10 strokes, it would take my best round ever and one of them playing their worst for me to win.

This is what it's like for the Rays, Pirates, Twins, etc. IF they get good ownership, and IF they get good management, they stand a not very good chance of competing. Once or twice a decade, they'll play the round of their life or get hole-in-one, and the team will in the playoff hunt or make the playoffs. In the current system, the Yankees, Red Sox, Mets, and Dodgers will always have a chance unless injuries kill the team like the Mets or Cubs this year, which basically happens once or twice a decade. So, if you're the Rays, you need need to cross your tails and hope that in the year that you have the round of your life that the Yankees or Red Sox also have some injuries so that you can claim at least a wild card. Last year, the planets aligned for them.

All the "salary cap" crowd wants is a chance to truly know how good or bad ownership/management really are. We assume the Nuttings stink, and until Huntington proves otherwise, he stinks. But, to be fair, they don't have the same chance as Steinbrenner and Cashman, so how can we judge them with the same standard?

The Rays were a better team than the Yankees in 2008.  Mike Mussina retired.  Andy Pettitte's return was uncertain.  The Yankees needed pitching bad.  They overpaid for CC Sabathia and AJ Burnett.  The Rays kept one of their best pitchers in the minor leagues at the start of the season and then, while still very much alive in the playoff race, inexplicably dealt Scott Kazimir to the Los Angeles/California/Anaheim Angels.  The Rays did not miss the playoffs because the Yankees spent more money.  The Rays missed the playoffs because of questionable management.

Cosmopolitan New York vs. parochial Pittsburgh.  

The Yankees pay out big salaries because they make money in their ball park.  Ticket prices are double and triple what the Pirates charge at PNC Park.  Concession prices are much higher.  Then there are the huge population numbers from which to draw fans.  

The only way the Pirates and other small market clubs can compete is by finding and signing talent.  Of course this talent will eventually move on through free agency.  So the cycle will have to be one of continuum.

WAAAAA WAAAAA yet ANOTHER whiny Pirates apologist trying to blame a well run franchise like the Yankees for the fact that their team will NEVER EVER BREAK .500 AGAIN !!! Did you people ever consider that maybe, just maybe, Pittsburgh shouldn't have a Baseball team anymore ? Baseball is a business, and if you can compete or be successful where you are, either MOVE or GO OUT OF BUSINESS !!! Don't blame the Yankees because they are smart enough to mine all possible revenue sources. In addition, they get punished every year with the ridiculous Luxary Tax that goes to prop up Welfare Queen franchises that shouldn't exist LIKE THE PIRATES !!! I would say if any team is bad for Baseball and it's fans it's the traditional unsuccessful franchises the Pirates and Royals and not the Yankees. If Baseball were run more wisely they would either move these teams to a more favorable market or contract them altogether.

@Meathead, The Yankees did not overpay for CC Sabathia and AJ Burnett.  They paid them to win a championship, and that's exactly what they got.  As for the rest of the argument, I agree a floor is necessary as well.  However, a floor without a ceiling will inflate prices further...and a cap isn't going to happen.

I agree with imbetterthenyouare in a lot of ways.  The current system is horrible.  People living in Pittsburgh and other small markets are subjected to horrible baseball year after year with no real chance to compete (there is the once-a-decade miracle team that ALMOST wins the series, but that's not really enough to hope for).  As a result, baseball is dying here.  If baseball won't fix its system with a salary cap and real revenue sharing, then the only way to preserve the game outside of the metros is to contract or move.  Give New York 3 or 4 franchises; they have 3 in hockey and nobody complains.  I'm sure NY's 4th would outspend Pittsburgh 3:1.  If the Indians have any business sense, they'd capitalize and become a regional team, like the Cards.  If they are able get on TV here, then it would give them more money to compete against the Yanks.  Pirates' fans, ask yourself, would you rather cheer for a perenial loser with no chance to ever win because of an unfair system, or be combined with the Indians and be fans of a regional team with a legit shot?  I'd rather MLB go with an NFL model and leave Pittsburgh with a team that can possibly contend, but as a fan, second best would be to be put out of my misery and move on.

Wow, imbetterthenyouare, (I think you misspelled your own name, by the way) your extreme emotional outburst shows just how much you realize your victory was tainted.

You say, "Baseball is a business, and if you can compete or be successful where you are, either MOVE or GO OUT OF BUSINESS !!"

How much fun is it rooting for your accountants and media advertising salespeople, your season ticket sales staff and other assorted bean counters that let your team compete despite mediocre management? It must fill your heart with pride to know that the biggest, richest city in the nation can use it's size and wealth to gain an unfair competitive advantage.

Most people rooted against Darth Vader and the Evil Empire.

Bud Selig, former owner of the Milwaukee Brewers, needs to do the right thing and step down.  Total conflict of interest.

There should be term limits for Commissioner for the same reason there should be term limits in the state and federal government: fresh ideas, opinions every few years.

The biggest, richest city in the nation's other franchise hasn't won a World Series since 1986.

Bob, one of your best pieces ever.  So much of it's so obvious, but never said quite so well.

congrats to the Yankees. They played within the rules.

Pittsburgh's 17 years of losing are due to the Pirate management decisions - not the Yankees spending. Small market teams such as the Twins, A's, Rays and Marlins seem to reload for a push every couple years. They do this with smart drafting and trades for prospects. if Pittsburgh had  this type of system in place - I think everyone would be content.

As mentioned in other notes - spending does not always equal a championship. However - spending does help hide draft/trade mistakes.

Money can't guaranty wins (enough teams spend that they all can't win, and injuries are the great equalizer).   Lack of it ensures losing.  

eric, you're seriously using the Rays as a positive example?  They had ONE good year when everything clicked at the same time.  The Marlins spend a ton in the years that they win, then spend nothing and lose a lot.  How many championships have the Twins and A's won recently?  They both have benefitted a lot from having no big spenders in their division. Recently the Angels and Rockies started spending, and look at how the A's have dropped off in the past few years.  

Bob I'm having a hard time understanding your stance towards small market attendance with MLB teams. You stated in this blog "Nor does it look like fans in cities when teams don’t have the money to come close to matching the Yankees will rise up in anger and cause the sport to rethink its economic position."

Yet in earlier blogs/letters from what I can gather you enjoy a night out at the ballpark in the summer, and that is your reason for still going to games.

While not attending Pirates games might not be considered rising up in anger, it is a way for ownership to see that paying customers are not satisfied with the product on the field regardless of whether it's a nice night out at the ballpark. I'm not trying to single you out but I know there are a lot of fans that go because they enjoy a night out at the ballpark or they will support the team regardless of the quality of the product.

While I understand that fan attendance is not that essential in terms of small market profits (Pirates received around $45 million before any attendance/stadium revenue), I see fans of small market teams not attending ballgames as an effective way of showing the owners that the current system puts small market teams at a disadvantage. What suggestions do you have for fans of small market teams to rise up in anger?

Bob,

That's what I like about you.  You talk just like a fan.  However, fortunately major league baseball isn't run by fans.  It is run by business men.  For instance, the Nutting family run the Pirates like a business.  As a result, Pittsburghers get to see major league baseball in the most beautiful stadium in the country.  (Remember when the Penguins were run by a fan and went bankrupt).  Will they ever be competitive, probably not.  But the true fans have already figured out major league baseball has more in common with professional wrestling than true competitive sports leagues like the NFL.  Major league baseball is purely entertainment with a little sport thrown in.  (Professional wrestlers are some of the best pure athletes on the planet).  On that basis, I prefer seeing the Tampa Bays of the world rise up every once and a while (I used to love seeing Bruno Samartino defeat Crusher Lisowski) and smack down the mighty Yankees.  We need the Yankees to be "THE YANKEES".  What better entertainment is there than that!  Besides if the Yankees make a billion dollars a year, hat difference does it make if they spend 500 million?

OK, let's go with the "contraction" model. Here's what you're left with:

American League

Yankees

Red Sox

White Sox

Angels

Rangers

Orioles (maybe)

National League

Phillies

Braves

Mets

Cards

Cubs

Dodgers

D-Backs (maybe)

Good luck putting together a 162 game season. Or a television audience that will watch the same two teams play each other 40 times a year.

Frankly, go ahead and contract down to this. Then the rest of teams can form their own league.

The question is why?

Why does MLB differ from the the other three (NFL, NBA, and NHL) leagues when it comes to a salary cap?

Yes it is money.....however money is just as important to the other owners/players so why have these other leagues gravitated toward a cap over time?

The answer is:  Cable TV.

The owners of the mega teams have been allowed to diversify their interests into Cable TV.   The programming weight of the lengthy MLB games/ season can carry a local and regional networks.  Smoking guns....are YES and NESN.  The new owners of the Cubs also have a 25% interest in their regional cable channel and while not overtly considering a "National Cubs TV Network" at this point, ithas been discussed...

sports.espn.go.com/.../story

The ability for mega-owners to parlay the density of their team's on air time into other business interests is a failure of Congressional oversight.  Why, because of the anti-trust exemption extended to baseball.  If the exemption stated an owner cannot use the monopolistic advantage your league is granted outside the confines of the league....i.e. you cannot own other related businesses then mega owners could not wield their clout outside the lines.....actually, the whole exemption should be thrown away and a competing league allowed to form, why not?

BTW, watch out for the Jones, Maras and Snyders this time around in the NFL....they may let the cap go the way of the single wing and that will be the beginning of the end for NFL parity.

It's only gonna get worse fellas...according to a report today (as I understood it) regarding the changes in the arbitration eligible players now encompassing those with 3-5 years of MLB experience, there is expected to be as many as 100 quality players that will be cut loose from mid-market/small-market teams over the next 5-6 weeks!  Anyone care to venture an educated guess as to where the vast majority of those players will land?

I'm thinking 85 of them will sign with the Yankees and 14 of them will sign with the Red Sox.

"The biggest, richest city in the nation's other franchise hasn't won a World Series since 1986."

Herein lies part of the point. The Mets are terrible ON MERIT compared to their other big spending peers. Their management is terrible, but even then, they've been in the playoff hunt this decade more often then not. They appeared in the WS in 2000 or 1999, and have several other playoff appearances.  I would venture a guess that any of the lousy GM's the Bucs have had (Bonifay, Littlefield, etc) would have had 4 or 5 playoff appearances in the past decade had the payroll been Met-esqe. It can be argued that the Mets are basically the Pirates with a larger payroll. That's what the disparity in $$ would like buy the Pirates. A few bites at "the big apple"!

Californication,

WRONG!  The answer is GREED, Steinbreener (& a select few others) are sitting on a gold mine & they're not willing to share their claim equally with anyone, even at the expense of the betterment of MLB.  It amazes me that so many are willing to defend these baseball barons under the guise of "don't blame the Yanks, blame MLB", when it is indeed the Yanks who are amongst those that should be blamed.  Afterall, it was primarily Steinbrenner who fought tooth & nail against full revenue sharing the last time the owners & the union attempted to regain some dignity to MLB as a whole.

New York's TV Housholds amount to 7.5 million.  Pittsburgh has 1.1 million.  Needless to say, NY can rake in the $$$ from broadcast revenue at a pace to maintain their payroll, pay luxury tax, and field (buy)  a championship caliber team every year.  

We can scream and write about it all we want, but it's interesting that the small market owners never seem to take action.  

Another solution that I've proposed before is to go to a Eupoean soccer system.  The top 15 teams play in 1 league, the bottom 15 in another.  They don't play each other.  Every year the best 2 or 3 from the bottom league get promoted and the worst 2 or 3 get demoted.  Getting promoted would be a big deal, and something for the bottom teams to play for instead of being canon fodder every year with no end in sight.  And getting demoted would be humiliating for a team like the Mets, so the teams at the bottom of the top league would still be trying to compete at the end of the season.  More meaningful baseball for everyone all season.

(I don't think half the teams would appreciate being labled a ``minor league.'' That would cripple attendance, TV revenue and merchandising. -- Bob Smizik)

Greed is not an answer, it is a natural human tendency.

Society, within the construct of "civilization," places checks/balances on greed so that any individual, or group of individuals, does not act out this part of human nature to the detriment of the society.....or it should - but that is a whole different discussion.

The way the game is financially structured today is a joke. It simply isn't worth the emotional or time investment for fans in cities other than L..A., New York, Boston, Chicago or Philadelphia. I didn't watch the post season this year\-for that matter the last 15 years. Until someone convinces me otherwise I will not bother to become invovled in a sport that requires rabid spending in order to compete at the highest level.  I once loved baseball above all other sports. No more. It boarders on my list of favorites near the bottom slightly above the NBA.

richinomaha,

Amen, dude...just wish I could do the same, been sayin' I'd do the same for years, yet still get pulled back in, if for no other reason than to root against the Evil Empire.

Bud Selig says there's parity in baseball. I just wonder if he can explain how there's parity when Baltimore, Cincinnati, Pittsburgh and Kansas City have in the past ten seasons played 40 Major League combined and have among the four of them two winning seasons and no playoff appearances. Meanwhile, the Yankees and Red Sox have 20 winning seasons, 15 playoff appearances, four World Series wins and 6 World Series appearances. How dumb does Selig think we are?

nycrob,

The soccer model might be an improvement, but unfortunately not enough of one for the buccos, not when you loose 20 straight on the road to a team that is a mirror image of yourself on a financial level.  Sadly, it seems that most likely contraction or possibly relocation,  are the most likely options to ultimately ending the ongoing misery.

Contraction ain't gonna happen and there are no feasible markets for relocation.

Bob,

I enjoy quality baseball. I enjoy a racous crowd and fan spirit. I enjoy baseball in November and i will enjoy my spring training  tickets and walking a block across the street from my office to watch the Yanks when they begin spring training at Legend's Field.

Better to rule in hell than serve in heaven Pirate fans.

Bob,

My family was once from New York and my dad raised me to be a Yankee fan.  I remember watching the Yankees win with Scott Brosius, Paul O'Neil, and Tino Martinez.

These players were Yankees.  The mercenaries disguised in Yankee uniforms are not and never will be Yankees in my eyes.  I stopped following the Yankees when they began to spend money to win.  In a sense, they sold out on everything it meant to be a Yankee.  Like you said, I could not find any enjoyment out of watching a team in which they were always expected to win.

I began following the Pirates when I moved to Pitt.  I would much rather cheer for a team where winning the game is not expected.  Even though the losing is frustrating, I know that the next Pirates World Series will mean much much more than any of the 27 Yankees championships.

"...but it's interesting that the small market owners never seem to take action..."

This is what I spoke to, way up at the beginning of this burgeoning thread. The "have-nots" and the "also-rans" MUST unite and speak with one, firm voice. Otherwise, the status quo lies in perpetuating the interests just of the four or six rich teams;  none more than the Yankees. And while I'm not the first to state it, the *current* revenue-sharing regime is part of the problem. This is the opiate that hooks and placates teams like the Pirates. Because the Pirates could NEVER stay open for business and just keep muddling along as they do, without revenue-sharing. Some say the Nuttings are pocketing money they should be plowing back into the team. Others say "prove it." But regardless, take away the revenue check the Pirates get each year, and per force, they and their weaker brethren would either: get religion, or sell to someone who already has. I repeat: the *current* revenue-sharing regime is the worst of both worlds for us. Implement a SALARY CAP. That, along with revenue-sharing -and a salary floor too, if you must- will force the Yankees to earn their championships. It will reward the well-run, teams like the Minnesota Twins with a legitimate chance to win it all, every year. And it may not end the mismanagement garbage that passes for running a major league team in Pittsburgh, but it will remove the incentive, or opiate, that makes it easier to do things the awful Pittsburgh Pirate way. Reform it, or get used to watching the rich guys in pinstripes joyously celebrate their paid-for championships, every autumn.

(Speaking for myself, and I believe this applies to most, I have no idea what is transpiring in those meetings where the economic issues facing MLB are discussed. For all we know, Kevin McClatchy and/or Bob Nutting has made an impassioned plea for the small-market owners to unite. Now I doubt that has happened, but it could have and we would not know because what goes on in those meetings rarely gets out.

The fact is that baseball is making a ton of money, and the only way to change the economics of the game is to disrupt that cash stream with a labor stoppage. That was easy enough for NHL owners to do because they were not making money and their very existence was in jeopardy. MLB has no such pressure on it and until it does, the status probably will remain quo.

As for a salary cap, it also requires a salary floor and I believe there are teams, like the Pirates, who would not want a salary floor. -- Bob Smizik

Good, yet obvious, thread!

I think ANYBODY who has even an ounce of intelligence realizes that baseball will never be competitive until there's a salary cap. There's no doubt about this.

1) I also think Dejan brough up an excellent point...and I pray he's not 100% right. It seems like 10 years ago teams like Minnesota, Oakland, Tampa Bay, etc., could kind of do their own thing and in some ways "outsmart" the Yankees, Red Sox, Dodgers,...ect. But now.....those elite teams are stocked with great baseball people as well....that advantage has been taken away. Look at the last few years' trade deadline deals; it no longer is even possible for another club to get prime propsects for an established star. Remember when the Pirates acquired  starters at pitcher, catcher, and CF for Tony Pena.....those days are long gone!

And that should make everybody shudder. Its almost a form of collusion in that it seems the have's have vowed not to give their top prospects to the 'have-nots'. To the point where NO top prospects are moving it seems.

2) As much as I know that the WS was bought and as much as I believe that talent is paramount to winning....I still hate to see a good coach/managerial job blasted. I'm not saying Girardi is the second-coming of Casey Stengel, but give the guy his due in that it can be MORE DIFFICULT to win with a team when you KNOW  the talent is there and you KNOW that the only acceptable standard is a championship. He has to juggle all of those egos in addition. Joe Torre did it for years - and I believe he's a great manager as well.

There are people out there who rip Phil Jaokson for winning all those titles with Jordan's Bulls and the Lakers- but I always maintained that he's a great coach. Coaching a team with the ego of Jordan and making it work with his teammates over a long season requires a tremenoudous amount, imo, of people skills and intelligence. Maybe moreso than a coach who takes over the underdog who nobody expects anything from and wins a title with them.

So, no, I don't believe Bob that John Russell could have won a World Series this year if he were managing they Yankees.

What baseball needs are these:

1. Revenue Sharing. Just like in football. You succeed as a league or else call yourself the Globetrotters.

2. A minimum salary. To force teams to invest in their own success on the field.

3. Force the batters to stay in the batters box.

4. Force the pitchers to stay of the mound and pitch.

5. Maybe allow for offensive & defensive teams.

OldDuffer, I couldn't agree more with 4 of your 5 points (only the 5th do I disagree!!).

Specifically....FOR THE LOVE OF GOD BASEBALL HAS TO SHORTEN THESE POSTSEASON GAMES UP!! I love sports, but they are hard to watch. EVERY PITCH takes 20-25 seconds....I'm talking scoreless game in the third inning of Game 2 and the batter's stepping out four times, the pitchers walking off the mound five times....ITS RIDICULOUS.

I honestly believe there should almost be a "pitch-count" clock similiar to a play-clock in football. Start it as soon as it hits the pitchers glove on the return from the catcher. Give the batter ONE timeout per at-bat....there's only so many times a contact can get cloudy for goodness sakes!!! And enforce it....Nolan Ryan and Steve Carlton must cringe when/if they watch baseball these days!!!

You can't have a "pitch-count" because then the base stealer would know that the pitcher has to come to the plate.

You can't have a "pitch-count" because then the base stealer would know that the pitcher has to come to the plate.

________________________________________________

LOL! I know, I know....but you gotta admit.....these games are absolutely ridiculous in their longevity!

I agree.  I don't watch them.  Go Panthers!

"it can be MORE DIFFICULT to win with a team when you KNOW  the talent is there and you KNOW that the only acceptable standard is a championship. He has to juggle all of those egos in addition. Joe Torre did it for years - and I believe he's a great manager as well."

PREPOSTEROUS!  Poll 30 MLB mgrs. & see which they'd chose, my money says "talent & championship expectations".

btw, Torre never won a World Series title or even a pennant, while mamanaging anything other than a bloated Yankee payroll.  Not in Atlanta, St. Louis nor L.A.

What is unbelievable is how many sports talking heads seem to be minimizing the fact the Yankee payroll is so rediculous.  MLB has sunk to a historic low.  Honestly, how gratifying would the 2 Steeler Super Bowls be this decade if you knew the team had more than a $100 million payroll advantage over most of the league?  

And you are right, there does not seem to be a strong push for more parity.  What am I missing here?  One of your past entries touched upon how lucky Pgh is just to have Baseball and enjoy....but that only goes so far.  

My interest in the game is at an all time low.  Hopefully, MLB popularity will wane and some changes will be made but it does not look good at all for the small markets and that basically stinks.  

You are right brudda.  It is a joke.  It is not like Steinbrenner spends more because he is generous.  He spends more because he has more revenue coming in based solely on where his team is located.  Every team should relocate to NY or LA.

msb21,

Sorry dude, not buyin' the Yanks of the end of the 20th century were "not mercenaries disguised in Yankee pinstripes".  Based on the following team payroll figures, I ask what really is so different, other than the extent of the disparity?

- 2000 Yankees:  $93M  (MLB's highest), MLB avg. $57M

- 1999 Yankees:  $88M  (MLB's highest), MLB avg. $49M

- 1998 Yankees:  $63M  (MLB's next highest), MLB avg. $40M

- 1996 Yankees:  $52M (MLB's highest), MLB avg. $32M

1.66x the median payroll (over those 4 yrs.), different?  HOW???

Good info., Blitz.

Couldn't agree more about the lengths of games.  In addition to 1-4 above, I would limit the number of trips that a catcher can make to the mound per game.  And a pitch-clock could at least be used when nobody is no base, which would make it somewhat more merciful.

It isn't just that the games are so late that I can't stay up, it is also horribly boring to watch in between pitches.

First, I concede that Pirate management is awful and that Yankee management is better, it would have to be because it could not be worse than Pirate management.

I think most are missing the point of the salary cap and how it relates to the Yankees and their management and their revenues.   It is obvious that the Yankees revenue stream allows them to do a fantasy draft each off season.  And it is also true that a well crafted and managed team such as the Marlins can every now and then win the World Series.  Even the Pirates of 90-92 won division titles.  We're all familiar with the A's and Twin of the previous decade and how they drafted and traded for talent and competed quite well with it.  The difference that not having a salary cap means though is that those teams cannot afford to KEEP their talent, and THAT is the biggest reason why a salary cap is needed.  

If franchises like the Yankees can simply wait in the wings and outbid the A's for Jason Giambi or the Indians for C.C. without having to worry about bumping up against a cap, then teams like the Pirates, A's and Twins have no realistic chance of retaining their own home grown and developed talent.  Not only can the Yankees swoop in to claim a delicious meal, but their revenues assure that the price for talent will continue to climb out of the range of the Pirates, Royals, A's, Twins, Marlins etc.

Put it this way, in 5 years, regardless of how well managed or successful the Pittsburgh Pirates may be, does anybody actually believe that Alvarez will be resigned by the Pirates?  Now compare that to the NHL where both Malkin and Crosby did a second contract with the Penguins and the NFL where Ben inked a $100 million dollar second contract with the Steelers.  IF there is no cap in the NHL or the NFL, do any of those players remain with their team?  No, they go to the franchise with the most revenue available.

Or, to put it another way, do you know what the longest current streak of losing seasons is in football?  8, by Detroit.  Essentially, they had a couple of bad front offices.  Think Cleveland is pathetic?  They made the playoffs in 2007.  In football (and hockey) if a team is doing lousy, they can replace a front office and have a chance that the team will be in contention in a few years.

In baseball it's truly (not almost) impossible.  Does anyone here think that the Pirates will contend for a WS in the next 10 years?  20?  They might get to .500 some year, maybe even contend for a wild-card if their best season coincides with some mistakes from the big boys, but a legit contender? Too hard to believe.  Until the system is completely revamped, location and market size will be all that's important.  That's why I was annoyed with the trades this summer, bc I thought we had a chance at .500 or better, and trading for the future makes no sense when the future will never come.

Probably the happiest guy in Pittsburgh having the Yankees win the Series is the estwhile owner himself Nutting. Since the Pirates profitability is generated by the Yankees luxury tax, the Yankees success is Nutting's success. He probably had the chance to sign Iwamura 2 weeks ago but wouldn't let Huntington pull the trigger until he was sure the Yankees would win it all. That became pretty obvious after Game 5 when all the Phillies had was Cliff Lee and he was used up. I also think there's some fallacy to the money and parity deal also. The really good franchise's in the NFL where there is parity win consistently (Steelers, Patriots, Eagles, Colts). The bottom teams (Browns, Lions, Rams) still lose in spite of parity money. I think it would probably hold true in baseball as well. The Pirates, Royals, Nationals and the poster child for huge money and horrid management the Mets would probably still be awful in a Parity World as well.

To say the Yankees won it all by writing huge checks doesn't give their organization enough credit.

Sure, the Yankees spent obscene dough.  However, all three of their off-season signings delivered.  You didn't see any of them not show up prepared, shoot their mouths off to the media or not be professional.  

And their manager held everything together without having any egos flare up.

(Speaking for myself, and I believe this applies to most, I have no idea what is transpiring in those meetings where the economic issues facing MLB are discussed. For all we know, Kevin McClatchy and/or Bob Nutting has made an impassioned plea for the small-market owners to unite. Now I doubt that has happened, but it could have and we would not know because what goes on in those meetings rarely gets out.

If Pirates ownership were hypothetically fighting for a cap, wouldn't they tell Dejan?  They'd look a lot better in my eyes if I knew.  

I'm more inclined to believe that the small market owners don't want to kill the goose laying the golden eggs.  It's easier for them to play damage control while managing the hand they're dealt.  

nycrob,

The Browns haven't made the playoffs since the 2002 season, losing @ Heinz Field to the Steelers & the TommyGun Offense.

Bobcatbuzz,

What exactly is your point regarding NFL & MLB franchises?   Of the NFL teams you refer to as perennial winners, the Patriots & Colts have both had some of the leagues worst teams within the past two decades & the Rams whom you call a doormat won the Super Bowl just a decade ago.  Conversely, the Pirates were indeed an elite franchise (likewise, the Royals) at the onset of free agency, before the Cable TV revenues of the large market teams distorted the competitve balance.  Bottom line is that with a salary cap every team has an equal chance of winning, developing talent & then securing the talent once developed.  How that is not clear to anyone, baffles me!

CaliBurger,

How much credit do you want to give to a GM & a pair of spoiled brat owners, for emptying the proverbial "open checkbook" to the tune of $1.6 BILLION over 9 seasons, before finally getting it right???

Once again, I doubt if I could do worse, given the same!

BlitzBurghDude my point is that Parity doesn't necessarily relate to winning. I agree MLB's structure creates a near impossible stucture for any semblence of competitive balance. However, the NFL structured for competitive balance still has it's dogs. The best ownership/management/coached teams in the Parity NFL are head and shoulders above the ones who aren't. Look at the Redskins, probably the biggest of the spenders in the NFL and what has it gotten them - jack squat. In MLB the Mets for all their NY advantages, yearly spending sprees etc., are more pathetic than the Pirates when you consider the resources available and spent. My point being even if there were a parity structure in MLB, the Yankees, Red Sox, Dodgers etc. would year in year out still be better than the Pirates, Mets, Nationals etc.

BlitzBurgh-

You're right.  They went 10-6 in 2007 and missed the playoffs.  I was confusing the standard. Point was, even though it seems like they've been pathetic forever, by baseball standards, it's not been that bad.

bobcat-

How do you know?  Those teams have the huge advantages, so it's impossible to say what they would do without them. Before the vast payroll disparities started in the early-90's, both the RedSox and the Yankees were terrible.  The Yankees didn't start winning until they could double and triple other teams' payrolls.

The difference between parity in the NFL and lack of it in MLB is that even the bad teams have a chance to be good with a few good drafts and key signings, and the good teams aren't guaranteed to cover up any misses.  I can't believe that you're putting the Pats up as a model of a "good" franchise. Before this decade, they were horrible.  And when Brady got hurt, they were bad again (inflated record against weak opponents last year notwithstanding).  If Brady hadn't come back, that team would have been right back with everyone else.  In MLB, if a player goes down,  the Yanks would just sign someone else in the next offseason.

Re: "You can't have a "pitch-count" because then the base stealer would know that the pitcher has to come to the plate."

There's nothing stopping a pitcher from throwing it SOONER. The 24 second clock lets the D know when a team has to shoot, yet they still seem to score occasionally in the NBA.

Plus, a little more base stealing would make the game more fun.

The luxury tax is nothing but a bribe paid to keep the have-nots from pushing for a salary cap.

Chico 99, you were a Pirate fan, a Pitt fan, and a liberal, and now you're a Yankee fan, a Florida Gougers fan, and a conservative.

Do you need a hug?

The best thing about the Yankees' win is that former Pirate/current Yankees bench coach Tony Pena finally got a World Series ring.

Bob, well said and unfortunately, too true!

There can be little glory in the Yankees win this year.  Their money bought a World Series, one they should be in EVERY year for the amount they spend annually.

Then there's the double whammy in Pittsburgh - Yankees abusing the system while the Pirates toil under an owner whose suspect cheap operation keeps us even farther away from any hope of ever being in any kind of post season games with the committed big money teams.

It's really hard to believe.  At this very moment, Bob Nutting is looking at a profit made for season 2009 while heading up the worst team in baseball.   Ditto what we may expect in 2010.

The real reason why the Pirates can't compete is that teams like the Yankees and the Red Sox supply the Nuttings an endless horde of free money. It doesn't matter how bad the Pirates are or how many fans stay away from the stadium. The Nuttings know that failure is a much more profitable venture and they are using all their business know how to achieve spectacular levels of incompetence. We're the Goldman Sachs of professional sports.  

"And your proof that Pirates ownership uses the team as an ATM is . . . ?  Furthermore, what is your proof that ownership of the Penguins and Steelers are not taking a healthy profit for themselves?  ---  Bob Smizik"

I'm all for ownership making a profit as long as they put a competitive team on the field.  The Steelers do very well and the Penguins recovered in the past few years.  However the Washington Redskins are profitable but stink as a competitive organization and the last 17 years have simply not been competitive for the Buccos.

The ATM reference was probably too strong but the Pirates are spending $25-30M in salaries and the ESPN/Fox TV contracts pretty much cover that($35M/team) before any other income from the ~1.6M people in attendence, $2M/yr naming rights, local broadcasting, $1m or so from the Yankees luxury tax.  I know that ther other costs, minor leagues, coaches, travel etc.  I dont want them to spend $150M or more like the Yankees/Mets/Red Sox or to just spend to bring in over priced rejects like the Derek Bell days

but 17-20 years is too long for fans to have to wait.

Bob, I continue ti enjoy your blogs and look forward to your take on the sports world.  

One final point & equally as troubling IMHO, as the gaudy Yankee payroll, yet having gone unmentioned to this point, is the WS MVP needing an interpreter to do a basic interview.  He has reaped a salary that has average 8 figures per year over the 7 seasons he's played here, yet cannot speak nor understand the primary language of the country in which he is afforded this luxury...APPALLING!

Please refrain from using the Geno comparison, as he has not only been playing here for a shorter time, but is also at least making an effort to learn the language.

(This is a bit harsh. It's possible he tried diligently to learn the language but couldn't quite get it and speaks it so poorly he'd prefer not to embarrass himself. -- Bob Smizik)

I don't think being fluent in English was part of the guy's contract. He is paid to play baseball, and he does it pretty well. There are millions of folks who could have spoken eloquent English after going 0 for 4. Besides, if I was an athlete who could avoid the press by pretending not to speak English I'd do it in a heartbeat!. I don't remember many players helping themselves by talking to the press, but I've seen hundreds cause themselves trouble.

(If I'm not mistaken he DID talk to the media -- through an interpreter. -- Bob Smizik)

Bob,

Harsh maybe, not saying you're wrong,still doesn't change the fact that it's appalling to me.

You're right, Bob, but I was referring more to his day-in, day-out dealings with the media. He couldn't exactly speak the King's English after winning the MVP if he's spent years fending off media with a smile and a shrug (although that would have been hilarious).  

Saturday, 1 a.m. Q: I may be in the minority, but I thought the intense booing of Brett Farve's return