I'll start this off saying I'm an astros fan, and far from unbiased right now, but I still feel the point holds some merit. Not sure if I have to do a lot of explaining about the issue as I'm sure you all know its about Boras and other agents making players into money whores. An inevitabilitly of the free agent process, or an unnecessary situation? Does it taint those players in your mind or do you understand their decision to go for more money? discuss
Its what the owners want. The Yankees contend every year. New York is happy. MLB continues to get TV contracts that allow every owner to make money no matter how crappy a team they throw out there.
Its what the owners want. The Yankees contend every year. New York is happy. MLB continues to get TV contracts that allow every owner to make money no matter how crappy a team they throw out there.
The NY market is just too damn big, The Yankees have the #1 payroll by far, and after signing Pedro, and possibly Beltran, it doesn't look like the Mets will be far from #2.
I'm a Yankee fan, but I can't stand the way the team is run. I would love it if they brought a team to NJ (Steinbrenner would never allow that), and I would switch alliances in a heartbeat. Watching baseball just isn't fun anymore.
I'm a Yankee fan, but I can't stand the way the team is run. I would love it if they brought a team to NJ (Steinbrenner would never allow that), and I would switch alliances in a heartbeat. Watching baseball just isn't fun anymore.
From a business standpoint the Yankees are run fantastically. Their value is hovering around $1 billion and the YES Network is gaining as well. Plus, they usually sustain an operating profit.
As a fan I love it also. If the team was losing money while spending lavishly then I would hate it, but if they are able to build these monsterous teams while making money then thats just terrific. The gripe I have is how they are spending this money though. I understand the significance of acquiring Randy Johnson to win us a WS this year but to trade a 28 year old pitcher along with a top prospect for a 43 year old...........well as a Ranger fan I am quite hesitant. Granted my hesitations will be gone if he's hoisting some hardware come next October. But that's just one move. The signing of Jason Giambi was just brutal. It totally went against the mantra that made the Yankees great. He was a liability defensively, his body was an injury waiting to happen, and he wasn't a clubhouse leader. Money got to the Yankees head there. They have to go back to the basics of what made the late 90s Yankee teams great and I think Cashman is beginning to realize that with his new emphasis on pitching and leadership (resigning of Tino).
For all of this talk about how money and free agent signings have harmed the Yankees, I really think the one free agent who really is perfect for this team is being overlooked, and thats Carlos Beltran. A young (28), well rounded (5 tool player), who could replace an aging Bernie, and who has a a reputation for being a peacefull and good teammate. In my opinion he would be just what the doctor ordered for the Yankees. Cashman..........find a way to viod Giambi's contract and sign Carlos.
I'll start this off saying I'm an astros fan, and far from unbiased right now, but I still feel the point holds some merit. Not sure if I have to do a lot of explaining about the issue as I'm sure you all know its about Boras and other agents making players into money whores. An inevitabilitly of the free agent process, or an unnecessary situation? Does it taint those players in your mind or do you understand their decision to go for more money? discuss
Agents are money whores too, the more money their client gets, the more money they get. If I was Beltran, I'd probably want the most money I could get too, it wouldn't be my fault owners are stupid enough to pony up the cash and then ***** because they can't field a competitive team because most of the money is going towards a few players.
Agents are money whores too, the more money their client gets, the more money they get. If I was Beltran, I'd probably want the most money I could get too, it wouldn't be my fault owners are stupid enough to pony up the cash and then ***** because they can't field a competitive team because most of the money is going towards a few players.
And this is why MLB is headed for a lockout or contraction. Too many teams are 'also rans' simply because of finances.
From a business standpoint the Yankees are run fantastically. Their value is hovering around $1 billion and the YES Network is gaining as well. Plus, they usually sustain an operating profit.
As a fan I love it also. If the team was losing money while spending lavishly then I would hate it, but if they are able to build these monsterous teams while making money then thats just terrific. The gripe I have is how they are spending this money though. I understand the significance of acquiring Randy Johnson to win us a WS this year but to trade a 28 year old pitcher along with a top prospect for a 43 year old...........well as a Ranger fan I am quite hesitant. Granted my hesitations will be gone if he's hoisting some hardware come next October. But that's just one move. The signing of Jason Giambi was just brutal. It totally went against the mantra that made the Yankees great. He was a liability defensively, his body was an injury waiting to happen, and he wasn't a clubhouse leader. Money got to the Yankees head there. They have to go back to the basics of what made the late 90s Yankee teams great and I think Cashman is beginning to realize that with his new emphasis on pitching and leadership (resigning of Tino).
For all of this talk about how money and free agent signings have harmed the Yankees, I really think the one free agent who really is perfect for this team is being overlooked, and thats Carlos Beltran. A young (28), well rounded (5 tool player), who could replace an aging Bernie, and who has a a reputation for being a peacefull and good teammate. In my opinion he would be just what the doctor ordered for the Yankees. Cashman..........find a way to viod Giambi's contract and sign Carlos.
I dont' know what the problem Yankee fans had with Giambi BEFORE the Steroid thing.
Seriously, when he signed with the Yanks, he was cmoing off two RIDICULOUS seasons with Oakland (188 and 202 *OPS+!!! 202!!!!!) He was simply the best hitter in the league. When did come to New York, the first two seasons he had *OPS+ of 174 and 151, which is incredibly good too. THEN he had the health problems last year.
To put it this way: Tino Martinez had a *OPS+ of 108 and 106 the first two years leaving the Yankees while Giambi had an *OPS+ of 174 and 151.
I dont' know what the problem Yankee fans had with Giambi BEFORE the Steroid thing.
Seriously, when he signed with the Yanks, he was cmoing off two RIDICULOUS seasons with Oakland (188 and 202 *OPS+!!! 202!!!!!) He was simply the best hitter in the league. When did come to New York, the first two seasons he had *OPS+ of 174 and 151, which is incredibly good too. THEN he had the health problems last year.
To put it this way: Tino Martinez had a *OPS+ of 108 and 106 the first two years leaving the Yankees while Giambi had an *OPS+ of 174 and 151.
what is OPS+, I don't think i've heard that stat used.
OPS and lgOPS - On-base percentage + Slugging and the league's on-base + slugging percentage (pitchers removed) with the same home field. This is a very good rough guide to a player's ability to get on base and also drive runners in. High OPS means lots of runs for the team.
OPS+ - Adjusted OPS, see below. Essentially OPS normalized to the league. Think of it as a rate above the league average expressed as a percentage
psOPS - The OPS of a league average player of the same position as the player with the same home field (currently being developed).
Adjusted OPS+
This value is calculated differently from the Total Baseball PRO+ statistic. I chose OPS+ to make this difference more clear. PRO+ as best I can tell is
PRO+ = 100 * ( OBP/lgOBP + SLG/lgSLG - 1)/BPF
Where lgOBP and lgSLG are the slugging and on-base percentage of a league-average player, and BPF is the batting park factor. This takes into account the difference in runs scored in a team's home and road games, so it doesn't depend on how good an offense or defense a team has.
My method is slightly more complicated, but I think it is more correct. The BPF is set up for runs and the way it is implemented in PRO+ applies it to something other than runs.
My method
Compute the runs created for the league with pitchers removed (basic form) RC = (H + BB + HBP)*(TB)/(AB + BB + HBP + SF)
Adjust this by the park factor RC' = RC*BPF
Assume that if hits increase in a park, that BB, HBP, TB increase at the some proportion.
Assume that Outs = AB - H (more or less) do not change at all as outs are finite.
Compute the number of H, BB, HBP, TB needed to produce RC', involves the quadratic formula. The idea for this came from the Willie Davis player comment in the Bill James New Historical Baseball Abstract. I think some others, including Clay Davenport have done some similar things.
Using these adjusted values compute what the league average player would have hit lgOBP*, lgSLG* in a park.
Take OPS+ = 100 * (OBP/lgOBP* + SLG/lgSLG* - 1)
Note, in my database, I don't store lgSLG, but store lgTB and similarly for lgOBP and lg(Times on Base), this makes calculation of career OPS+ much easier.
Two quick stories (skip down below dashes for Stan's opinion on Boras and MLB):
I used to own a 1982 Yamaha Vision. I bought it in the autumn for $500, fixed it up and tooled around all next summer on it, then put it on the market for $850 early next spring. I didn't want to sell it in the autumn. Nobody wants a bike in the fall. I had to store it in a shed, which wasn't as good as a garage but still covered from the elements. The bike had a few mechanical problems, most notably that it leaked coolant/water (it had a water-cooled engine) when it heated up. I thought it was an O-ring or gasket that was expanding as it warmed, causing the leaking, but I wasn't sure. Pulling it apart I could do although the repair was a little over my head. It also had a steel tank thata was a little rusted on the outside, and the battery/starter connection often missed and needed to be re-wired.
When I got calls after I put the bike in the paper, I made no bones about it: "It needs some work, I would take it to a licensed mechanic." The first person that came to look at the bike brought his "expert" friend. (Note to the board: dressing up like a teenage ninja mutant turtle and blowing the treads on your expensive tires does not an "expert" make.) It didn't matter to me, as I would rather lose a couple of bucks rather than try to sleep at night knowing I screwed somebody. Things seemed to go downhill in a hurry. For starters, it was raining and I didn't have time to clean up the bike before Abbott and Costello came by. The bike had a couple of cobwebs on it and hadn't been cleaned since last fall. I don't know about everyone out there, but I'd be subtracting dollars in my head and out loud on the spot if I were buying even though what I'd seen so far was largely cosmetic. No response. Then I tried to push-button start the bike, but couldn't get a response so told him that I'd have to push-start the bike in gear. When I shifted from neutral down into first, the cotter pin securing the shifter snapped and the threads stripped. That didn't scare them, either. Finally, one of the most surreal situations I've ever experienced occurred. The only smart move the "expert" pulled all day was to grab a strange gray "string" emanating from between engine parts. When he did, it pulled back, and a field mouse that had made its winter home there hopped out. It ran right between everyone, followed the curb down the street, and skipped into the woods 20 yards away. We all watching it run like the best sitcom director could only hope his cast would, and when it hopped into the woods all our eyes met and I just shrugged. Yet like roaches after atomic testing, they held fast. They obviously were determined that nothing was going to stop them from having this bike. I even tried to talk them out of it, but to no avail. They insisted, and didn't talk me down one dollar. They didn't even try. Needless to say, I received a call from him two days later. He said he couldn't get the bike started. That conversation didn't last too long.
The second story is one of my youth. My father has always been notoriously thrifty. When the moon was in the second house and all the gaseous planets were simultaneously in opposition and conjunction, he'd buy my younger brother and I whatever candy/gum/etc. we wanted at the supermarket. Just one item, though. A pack of gum, a candy bar - just one. Here existed two individuals separate in their construction: me, the prototypical glutton and my brother, who was equally dedicated to making his investment last as my father was to not spending his. I would eat my pack of Fruit Stripe in six minutes - a new land-speed world record - while my brother was contemplating what he would do with his second piece three days from now. At the ten minute mark, four minutes beyond the time the last bit of Zebra-striped lusciousness passed my lips, I was busy plotting how I was going to make his investment work for me. Having spent my tradeable currency and having a lifestyle unsuited to a nine-year-old with no real estate or other uninherited investments of my own, the problem was nothing if not insurmountable. In successive order, kindness, vocal persuasion, and physical persuasion all failed, and I was left candy-less and in the sights of my father's wrath.
-----------------------------
What's the lesson here? That nobody has forced the owners to pay Scott Boras's clients exorbitant sums of money. Just like my motorcycle-riding friends, they convince themselves they cannot do without a certain thing, then do whatever they need to get that thing. The sad (or funny, depending on your point of view) part is not necessarily that they spend too much per annum, but that they do it for an unfathomable number of years, effectively removing financial flexibility and hand-cuffing their organization in the future. Look in Webster's Collegiate under "Todd Helton" or "Mike Hampton.'
As for Beltran, at least the Mets can say they invested in a 27-year-old player. They still overpaid, but that's the nature of the high-profile free agent market. Everyone was going to overpay; it was inevitable. It might work out just fine for them. Teams with money can afford to make mistakes (we can't say how this ranks yet). Teams without money cannot afford to overpay and make mistakes on the free agent market, just like kids without free-spending parents cannot afford to eat all their candy at 186,000 mi/sec.
What's the lesson here? That nobody has forced the owners to pay Scott Boras's clients exorbitant sums of money.
That first story is excellent. Love it and you're right, I dont mind at all what Boras' clients get as free agents.
But the draft is different IMHO. If I've got the #3 pick in the draft then by all rights I should be able to get the #3 talent in the draft. Unless it's a Boras client who asks for an exhorbitant sum that I cant afford to pay. Then I have to settle for something lower. Of course Boras knows that someone will pay, and when the next team that can afford it comes up they select the #3 talent even though their draft pick may have been much lower. Not only do the rich teams get a leg up in free agency but now their draft picks are worth more to.
What's the lesson here? That nobody has forced the owners to pay Scott Boras's clients exorbitant sums of money. Just like my motorcycle-riding friends, they convince themselves they cannot do without a certain thing, then do whatever they need to get that thing. The sad (or funny, depending on your point of view) part is not necessarily that they spend too much per annum, but that they do it for an unfathomable number of years, effectively removing financial flexibility and hand-cuffing their organization in the future. Look in Webster's Collegiate under "Todd Helton" or "Mike Hampton.'
Todd Helton doesn't suck. Mike Hampton, however does. What a trivia question this is... Who is the highest paid pitcher of all time? Mike Hampton.
