The LoHud Yankees Blog

A New York Yankees blog by Chad Jennings and the staff of The Journal News


Cashman: “We’re still going to outspend everybody else”

Posted by: Chad Jennings - Posted in Misc on Mar 02, 2012 Print This Post Print This Post | Email This Post Email This Post

Yesterday, Hal Steinbrenner left no doubt that the Yankees plan to get their payroll below $189 million for the 2014 season. Today, Brian Cashman talked about the challenge of actually reaching that number.

On payroll flexibility in the past vs. payroll flexibility in 2014
“I met with Mark Teixeira in D.C. (in the winter of 2008). They had no interest in pursuing that. It’s something I had massive interest in. I kept staying on it, and it was ‘No, no, no.’ It felt like Kuroda this winter. (Ownership was saying) ‘No, we’re not going to stretch the payroll. Unless you move money, you can’t make that fit.’ At some point he made an adjustment. Going forward, especially in that particular year, that is not going to happen. This is something where there’s a strong motivation from a business reason because of how the new basic agreement is set up to get to that level for that year, no question. At the same time, it’s business as usual in terms of, the general manager’s job is to constantly bring to their ownership opportunities. My owner says yes more and his family has said yes on behalf of this franchise more than no when their GM asks for something. We’ve been very fortunate as a Yankee fan base and blessed for a long time by that. That, I think, will continue. But instead of being it being a set budget number that we’re trying to stay within, I think this is a more definitive lane that we’re going to have to bowl within. The safety lanes have now gone up for that year, and you can’t throw a gutterball on that particular year.”

On whether the new CBA hurts the Yankees more than other teams
“I don’t want to say it hurts the Yankees as much as, this is the landscape that everybody has to operate in. The only thing is, how does this landscape affect us with our current commitments? Decisions we made from the past will affect decisions in the short term going forward, until some of those contracts expire, or you move them at some point. A lot of those contrrcts, not that you want to trade them, either have full no-trades or 10-5 rights, so some of those circumstances you just have to hope they stay healthy and productive and they are finishing your career type contracts with the Yankees and you hope that you can maximize your potential with them all, but it will limit your array of choices on those contracts term years because those are legitimate commitments that affect the bottom line.”

On whether the Yankees can keep both Granderson and Cano beyond 2013
“I wouldn’t say. All these things are things that the market will dictate. I know the Cardinals wanted to retain Pujols, but the market took him to another city. That obviously happens. Use the Cardinals as an example; they retained Holliday and maximized the market on Holliday. They were unable to retain Pujols because Pujols maximized himself on the market and another club wanted to be the last team standing. That’s how this stuff can play out. You just can’t predict it. Obviously we love what Robinson Cano does for us, we love what Curtis Granderson does for us. We gravitate to players that we feel can be champions and take us to the next level.”

On Steinbrenner mentioning Betances and Banuelos as keys to making this work
“I would make it more global. I don’t disagree with Hal because those guys, they have higher upsides, higher ceilings, but they might not be the best. For instance, who’s to say Warren orPhelps don’t become (standouts)? Who’s to say the new kid Campos, who’s a baby, three years or four years from now doesn’t become something? We’ve got a lot of guys. Who’s to say Burawa isn’t another Robertson in his own way with the power arm that he’s got? The bottom line, Gene Michaels told us years ago, he said you just collect as many nuggets as possible and sift through it… Hal’s right about those two guys, but just because those are the two guys that are written about, doesn’t mean they’re going to be the guys.”

On whether a set budget actually makes his job easier
“It’s easier when you have parameters. It was very difficult when it was just a general (rule). It would change on a daily basis, which was, ‘Don’t lose the player at all costs.’ That wasn’t a good negotiating position. And if it’s very vocal, and at the same time it’s public and private, you’re in a position to basically get rolled. It’s a one-way negotiation. Having parameters allows you to walk away. Having parameters gives you the ability to say no, and mean it, versus fake a no or try to pretend something when everybody realizes, oh, they can’t lose this guy. It’s an impossible position to negotiate from.”

On the fact no one will believe it until they see it
“And for good reason. For years, we’ve acted a certain way, and it’s hard to change the perception. You see that we’ve been a lot more disciplined, a lot more conservative, a lot more deliberate. But you’ve also seen us deviate from that and make independent decisions that might be outside of the long-term plan, a short-term decision. Soriano, for instance, was a deviation from maybe what our initial groundwork was last year. Kuroda was a deviation this year. Teixeira, that winter at the end, even though some of these were internal debates and conversations throughout, but it shows that you know what? You can go in with an idea but they’re willing to adjust on the run at the same time based on a lot of factors.”

On whether they would think about cutting payroll without the new CBA
“Our payroll doesn’t need to be at this level. It’s at a certain level because of massive commitments that we’ve already made, I think most of which have been very functional and good investments, and have been thus far. But at the same time, look at the Minnesota Twins, look at the Tampa Bay Rays, look at a lot of clubs that are having massive success going about it a different way. And we can incorporate every way. I’ve referenced utilizing every tool in the toolbox. We’re still the Yankees. We’re still going to outspend everybody else. That’s not going to change. We’re still going to be there for our fan base, and try to make sure that every year is a year that they have legitimate hope that this could be a special season. That’s never going to change. But what has changed is not being afraid of trusting our scouting assessments. We’ve tried to hire the best scouts that we can possibly find… That’s roster management. That’s trusting your scouts, believing in them, being able to know what can work for you, what can’t work for you.”

Associated Press photo

 
 

Advertisement

291 Responses to “Cashman: “We’re still going to outspend everybody else””

  1. Irreverent Discourse March 2nd, 2012 at 3:52 pm

    Wow, this perspective is great. Seems like Cashman actually does think about what he is doing, imagine that :p

  2. Irreverent Discourse March 2nd, 2012 at 3:55 pm

    Also, Chad… you are absolutely horrible at spacing out your articles so the conversations the rest of us have don’t get completely disjointed. Posting 2 articles within 10 minutes of each other bookended by 6 hours gaps is not doing anyone any favors.

  3. Shame Spencer March 2nd, 2012 at 3:55 pm

    Brian reads the blog…

    Hey Brian, the blog thinks your mistress is ugly!

  4. Jerkface March 2nd, 2012 at 3:56 pm

    I hope they spend a lot more on scouting and development. Maybe get some new computers too. :twisted: The Yankees should have like 6 or 7 minor league teams. Sign up everyone and duke it out.

  5. Erin March 2nd, 2012 at 3:58 pm

    Wow, Cashman was certainly in a chatty mood today. 8O

  6. Nick in SF March 2nd, 2012 at 3:58 pm

    Re-post from two threads ago:

    We’re not going to apologize for Ruth, Gehrig, Dimaggio, Mantle, or the rest!

    And when we waste our money on Pavano and Igawa, go ahead and laugh, but we will keep trying to get back on top.

    This is the Yankee Way!

  7. Irreverent Discourse March 2nd, 2012 at 3:59 pm

    The Yankees should have like 6 or 7 minor league teams

    Is there some limit to each franchise having 1 team at each level…. or could they actually do this?

  8. LGY March 2nd, 2012 at 3:59 pm

    I hate to bring randy into this because he’s been nutty lately, but he is right about one thing.

    Some fans will go to extreme lengths not to criticize the Yankees and find ways to rationalize and then rally for everything they do.

    His Dave Eiland example is spot on. The guy is considered a complete moron around here now. I can’t remember the last time someone said something positive about him. When Eiland was with the Yankees you had the vast majority of this forum supporting him and even several like SJ arguing how great of a PC he is.

    People are trying way to hard to rationalize and support this 189M mandate. This is not a positive development for the fans. The only people this benefits is the Steinbrenner family.

  9. Nick in SF March 2nd, 2012 at 4:01 pm

    ” Nick, which is consistent with me not advocating changing the system.”

    Then you are not lost as a rational being.

  10. Irreverent Discourse March 2nd, 2012 at 4:02 pm

    Chip – You are right, it’s not entirely about how much you spend… what you spend it on certainly does matter… but if I can spend $200 picking out a bunch of tomatoes, and you can spend $40 picking out a bunch of tomatoes… there is a pretty good chance we both end up with the same number of ripe ones regardless of how hard you try to pick the right ones.

    I think my analogies are getting better. nick? Grade me!

  11. blake March 2nd, 2012 at 4:03 pm

    The Yankees will continue to outspend everyone IF other teams don’t choose to spend 189 million also.

  12. Nick in SF March 2nd, 2012 at 4:03 pm

    LGY: a lot of people think Eiland punched AJ and many of them consider that to be a positive.

    Best of luck to him.

  13. BryanV21 March 2nd, 2012 at 4:04 pm

    I like the $189m goal because it shows a different thinking in Yankeeland. One that is about player development, as well as big spending. But LGY does have a good point… perhaps some of us (me included) aren’t supporting this for the right, or even good, reasons.

  14. Jerkface March 2nd, 2012 at 4:04 pm

    Is there some limit to each franchise having 1 team at each level…. or could they actually do this?

    There is no limit to the number of minor league affiliates a team can possess, but because teams generally sign a partnership deal with a minor league team that already exists, there is a limited supply of teams as the leagues establish themselves and their own schedule.

    If I were the Yankees, I’d buy up some unused stadiums in a geographical area and start my own league. Hell they could lease the affiliates to other teams.

  15. Wave Your Hat March 2nd, 2012 at 4:05 pm

    repost-

    stuckey had a comment in the last thread (now, two threads ago) that was part of a lot of back and forth – I think he may have been responding to Face. Below is the comment he was responding to, and stuckey’s response:

    ““Who doesn’t want to be the favorite? Or imagine their team winning the world series at the start of the season? Who doesn’t want the best players? The best talent? The best management?”

    It isn’t about wanting or not wanting those things.

    Its about the equity of the means of getting them and about the quality of victory in a system weighted in your favor.”

    I understand that response. It goes to the “purity of the turf”, the notion that it is important to compete and win on a level playing field. Money corrupts that level playing field, so to the extent we can mitigate money’s harmful effects, we should do it. Even if that mitigation hurts the team we root for, because first, the only award worth winning is the pure award, and second, when the team we root for wins anyway, victory will be all the sweeter being pure.

    The problem is, that’s not the world we find ourselves in. Baseball has a medieval economic structure, it is parceled out into various protected fiefdoms and the lord within each fiefdom gets the disposal of all the revenue within the fiefdom. And the lords of baseball in their wisdom, or folly, say Kansas City can have a team, but only two teams can play in New York City. So all these arguments about purity of competition, or how capitalism allows this or that, come up against the rock of reality which is that baseball is neither pure nor capitalistic.

    And given that reality, the money from the Yanks’ fiefdom can go into the Steinbrenners’ pocket, or it can go into on the field production. Now I am sure the Steinbrenners would like a good chunk of it to go in their pocket. But as a fan, I could care less about the Steinbrenners pocket. I want them to spend it on the product. Why wouldn’t I? It isn’t my money, but the Yanks are the team I root for.

  16. Irreverent Discourse March 2nd, 2012 at 4:05 pm

    People are trying way to hard to rationalize and support this 189M mandate. This is not a positive development for the fans

    Sure it is, just not Yankee fans. Stop thinking it’s all about you and what you want your team to win… and you’ll realize that this change was not made to help the Yankees, it was made to hinder their spending ability.

    What we are rationalizing is that the Yankees will still be better than everyone else against those that think they are doomed for failure because they can’t possibly make the playoffs at $180mil.

    What you are doing is participating in neither side of the discussion.

  17. stuckey March 2nd, 2012 at 4:06 pm

    “You have effectively said you will root equally hard for the Yankees no matter what they do.”

    You are a huge fan of the team with a 200M payroll, look forward to being a huge fan of a 189M payroll and would likely be on the edge of your seat in the 9th inning rooting hard for a 400M payroll team.

    How can you sell this competitive equality stuff when the inequality of the Yankee payroll doesn’t impact your fandom?”

    I’m not trying to sell it. I’ve let myself be caught up in an argument with someone who reads what I wrote and translates it into what he wants to hear.

    That’s MY fault though. Can’t blame anyone else.

    And before you criticized me for it and asked a perfectly valid question, I think I did say that it might deprogram me, and that I’d probably enjoy it less.

    Let me try to be succinct.

    For fans preoccupied with the Yankees being able to compete in 2014-2015, I suggest jumping off that bridge when we get to it.

  18. Irreverent Discourse March 2nd, 2012 at 4:06 pm

    The Yankees will continue to outspend everyone IF other teams don’t choose to spend 189 million also.

    And if they decide to do that, good. I hope they all do.

  19. MTU March 2nd, 2012 at 4:06 pm

    I support 189 as a temporary measure.

    To get under the cap to reset things.

    I hope it is not meant to be a long term budget goal.

  20. grouchonyy March 2nd, 2012 at 4:07 pm

    This new system will lead to a contraction of the minors. With limits on spending for both the domestic draft and international signings,there will not be enough quality minor leaguers to go around. High Schoolers not taken within the first couple of rounds will go the college route. college players will be the heart of the draft but most of these will be jettisoned after one year.

    Will there be a need for two DSL teams with the 2.9 million limit? I think not, unless the players there work for essentially chump change. Players with real potential will be quickly filtered to the US instructional leagues which will need warm bodies to make up for the loss of high school draftees.

  21. Shame Spencer March 2nd, 2012 at 4:07 pm

    Jerkface March 2nd, 2012 at 4:04 pm

    Is there some limit to each franchise having 1 team at each level…. or could they actually do this?

    There is no limit to the number of minor league affiliates a team can possess
    ———————-

    Buy the Mets!!

    And Erin – I was thinking the same thing…. Cash is feeling pretty cozy in the Yankees front office… I hope randy’s watching..

  22. Nick in SF March 2nd, 2012 at 4:08 pm

    ID: D- for the tomato analogy. The market didn’t impose any $40 limit on your tomato budget.

    Buy some Darvish Tomatoes, they’re priced differently.

  23. blake March 2nd, 2012 at 4:08 pm

    “People are trying way to hard to rationalize and support this 189M mandate. This is not a positive development for the fans. The only people this benefits is the Steinbrenner family.”

    I agree in general….but I think it can be a positive if the Yankees use the tax money they save to grow their farm system with better scouting and development….better facilities….etc….and I can see it as a positive if the new cap forces them to become smarter and more efficient.

    However if they don’t get smarter and Hal and Hank just pocket the extra money…..then no it doesn’t help anything and we as fans don’t have to feel good about it.

  24. Shame Spencer March 2nd, 2012 at 4:08 pm

    repost:
    Shame Spencer March 2nd, 2012 at 3:54 pm

    The business side of the game is endlessly fascinating. I am looking forward to getting to the season when a lot of this talk just becomes noise for a while, but I wanted to thank Jerkface for posting that CBA bit. I would honestly never take the time to research half of the info I find here on the blog, so a general thank you to all for being generally intelligent and helpful posters.

  25. Best To Ever Do It March 2nd, 2012 at 4:09 pm

    MTU March 2nd, 2012 at 4:06 pm

    I support 189 as a temporary measure.

    To get under the cap to reset things.

    I hope it is not meant to be a long term budget goal.

    ———————

    It wouldn’t surprise me if it was. Cash and Hal have been dying to pull things in for yrs.

  26. Erin March 2nd, 2012 at 4:09 pm

    Nick in SF March 2nd, 2012 at 4:03 pm
    LGY: a lot of people think Eiland punched AJ and many of them consider that to be a positive.

    **************

    OMG :lol:

  27. arjay March 2nd, 2012 at 4:10 pm

    “Montero is 0-1. That trade was such a steal for the Yankees.”

  28. Irreverent Discourse March 2nd, 2012 at 4:11 pm

    nick in sf – Unfair grade, I request you re-evaluate! The premise was that a $40mil team and $200m team have the same chance of success. This analogy shows that to be at the least inconclusive, more likely false. I understsand that the $40m *could* spend more money, but they don’t. That’s why they are the $40 team and not the $60 team.

    Or am I just reading this wrong and a C is the highest grade you can give out, since you blow the curve away with your own analogies? :)

  29. MTU March 2nd, 2012 at 4:11 pm

    Best-

    They can pull it in all they like.

    As long as the on-field product does not suffer.

    ;)

  30. Irreverent Discourse March 2nd, 2012 at 4:12 pm

    nick in SF – And your “the $40 team could spend more money” answer doesn’t fly, because so can the $200 team.

  31. Nick in SF March 2nd, 2012 at 4:13 pm

    ” If I were the Yankees, I’d buy up some unused stadiums in a geographical area and start my own league. Hell they could lease the affiliates to other teams.”

    And they can stream the whole league live on the internet, quenching the untapped demand of this gazillion dollar industry. But they might be so distracted by the new Stream Ball league that they forget about the Yankees. Hmmmm.

  32. pat March 2nd, 2012 at 4:14 pm

    “This is something where there’s a strong motivation from a business reason because of how the new basic agreement is set up to get to that level for that year……”

    Do the last 3 words of that quote make some feel better?

  33. Best To Ever Do It March 2nd, 2012 at 4:14 pm

    MTU March 2nd, 2012 at 4:11 pm

    Best-

    They can pull it in all they like.

    As long as the on-field product does not suffer.

    ;)

    ————————-

    In their minds finishing with 92 wins might mean the product didn’t suffer. I can see it now “Hey we barely missed the playoffs and our kids took a step forward this yr”

  34. LGY March 2nd, 2012 at 4:14 pm

    LGY: a lot of people think Eiland punched AJ and many of them consider that to be a positive.

    Best of luck to him.

    ———–

    :lol:

  35. BryanV21 March 2nd, 2012 at 4:14 pm

    $189 million is still more than any team, besides the Yanks, spent last season (Philly was 2nd with a $173m payroll). Sounds like some people are making this into a bigger effect than it really is.

  36. Shame Spencer March 2nd, 2012 at 4:15 pm

    blake March 2nd, 2012 at 4:08 pm

    “People are trying way to hard to rationalize and support this 189M mandate. This is not a positive development for the fans. The only people this benefits is the Steinbrenner family.”

    I agree in general….but I think it can be a positive if the Yankees use the tax money they save to grow their farm system with better scouting and development….better facilities….etc….and I can see it as a positive if the new cap forces them to become smarter and more efficient.

    However if they don’t get smarter and Hal and Hank just pocket the extra money…..then no it doesn’t help anything and we as fans don’t have to feel good about it.
    ——————–

    As usual, spot on blake. The problem I have with a lot of this argument is that one side gets reduced to being whiny, entitled Yankee fans. Its not that we can’t see the benefits of conforming to the new CBA structure, but there has to be some healthy level of cynicism associated with any organization that has the type of revenue the Yanks do and then use the word ‘budget.’ I’ve been posting for a while about how I wish they would spend more on their minor league coaching staff… if the new CBA creates that result I’d be nothing short of thrilled, regardless of the big club’s payroll.

  37. Wave Your Hat March 2nd, 2012 at 4:16 pm

    “I agree in general….but I think it can be a positive if the Yankees use the tax money they save to grow their farm system with better scouting and development….better facilities….etc….and I can see it as a positive if the new cap forces them to become smarter and more efficient. ”

    blake-

    Given the constraints of the draft and the IFA rules, and the fact you can’t have more teams than the number of minor leagues, I think there’s a pretty tight limit on how much you can put into development. And who knows if the cap is going to effect how smart and efficient they are. I mean, shouldn’t they already be smart and efficient? Have they changed the people in their organization?

    I think the cap is just a negative for Yankee fans. One we will have to live with, the way the new CBA is structured no one is going to defy the cap for long.

  38. Irreverent Discourse March 2nd, 2012 at 4:17 pm

    However if they don’t get smarter and Hal and Hank just pocket the extra money…..then no it doesn’t help anything and we as fans don’t have to feel good about it.

    It would be the first time in like 30 years a Steinbrenner actually “pocketed” money from the franchise so let’s not assume this is the most likely thing to happen.

    It’s high time that the Yankee “revenue” not be the sole reason they are competitive and their decisions hold more weight. If you fear this, you were probably a fan of their money more than their actual baseball decisions.

  39. stuckey March 2nd, 2012 at 4:17 pm

    Wave, I appreciate the thoughtful response, more thoughtful than I’ve allowed myself to be trying to keep up in this discourse.

    “I could care less about the Steinbrenners pocket. I want them to spend it on the product. Why wouldn’t I?”

    Understood.

    My involvement in this really isn’t focused on that question, but an offshoot of it.

    I don’t begrudge the Yankees making more profit, just not in my nature. But I’m not expending energy on the issue.

    What I DO think is happening, is fans are applying superficial causation to a criticism in support of this view you just expressed.

    The idea if the Yankees don’t spend more, they can’t be as good, or enjoy much of an advantage….I think this argument is predicated on bad math, and is based on resentment over the issue you identified.

    “If the Yankees aren’t willing to spend (as much, which really isn’t true since 2005, but I digress) so therefore they can’t be as good, and we the fans are the victims.”

    There spending has been static since 2005 and they have maintained the level we expect.

    If someone wants to call me a Yankee apologist for believing they still can for the foreseeable future, they can. I’m guess I’m giving them the ammunition.

    But like I say, I have 7 years of static spending on my side of the argument. I don’t think I’m making it up outta thin air.

  40. BryanV21 March 2nd, 2012 at 4:18 pm

    Trust the front office? Yikes, that’s not an easy thing to do. But Spencer is right… that’s what we have to do.

  41. Nick in SF March 2nd, 2012 at 4:19 pm

    ID: those tomatoes aren’t better just because you paid more and the same goes for your analogy.

    The system doesn’t need to be reconfigured so that $40 farmers always enjoy the best salads and salsas.

  42. Chip March 2nd, 2012 at 4:19 pm

    I don’t think the number will hurt the Yankees too much.

    First of all they only need to get there for one year.

    Second only one pitcher in their rotation is making any serious money after this season. Assuming a rotation of Sabathia, Nova, Pineda and two from the group of Hughes, Betances, Banuelos, Warren, Phelps – you’re looking at essentially an average of maybe $6 mil/starter.

    Where it does hurt the Yankees is that it makes contracts that they signed in good faith – good contracts like CC, Tex, Jeter – even Alex, much more punitive.

  43. Yankee Trader March 2nd, 2012 at 4:22 pm

    Asked this earlier.
    Chad-
    Could the Yankees renegotiate the existing contract of A-Rod, with his approval, in a way that would extend the years, not the money, which would lower the AAV, and enable them to surround him with good players while staying under the LT?

  44. Irreverent Discourse March 2nd, 2012 at 4:23 pm

    nick – OK you totally missed it then. Re-writing.

    If there is a pile of tomatoes, with equal amounts of ripe and un-ripe tomatoes. I can blindly pick 200 of them and you are only going to pick 40… I have a 50% chance of picking ripe tomatoes and should end up with roughly 100 of them. No matter how careful you are (or if you cheat and look at the pile and only pick ripe tomatoes), you can only end up with the 40. If I put any effort at all into selecting my tomatoes, now I have completely trumped your ability to “compete” with my pile of ripe tomatoes.

    Insert baseball players and spin.

  45. UnKnown March 2nd, 2012 at 4:23 pm

    http://espn.go.com/new-york/ml.....eason-plan

    Awesom article by Stark on the new Playoff system. Lengthy read but well worth it. Really makes sense and answers a lot of questions that I had about the new system.

    Overall my take is that I like the addition of the Wild Card, but because the schedules were already made for this year I would’ve waited until next year to implement it. Way to many variables can extremely effect the postseason now that the extra WC is going to start this year.

  46. Wave Your Hat March 2nd, 2012 at 4:23 pm

    “The idea if the Yankees don’t spend more, they can’t be as good, or enjoy much of an advantage….I think this argument is predicated on bad math, and is based on resentment over the issue you identified. ”

    stuckey-

    Let me clarify. I don’t think the Yanks can’t be as good under the cap, but I do think they are significantly less likely to be as good under the cap. I think this is why the cap is there. I think the cap means there will be periods when the Yanks aren’t that good, in fact, although there will be more periods when they are good.

    Now, there’s nothing new in this. That’s the way life in baseball always was. The period 1996-2013 is the exception. It’s just that for Yankee fans, 1996-2013 was pretty darn good.

  47. BryanV21 March 2nd, 2012 at 4:23 pm

    I think it’s silly to think the Yankees would sacrifice winning for making money. Not because I know what Hal is thinking, but because Yankee fans make the value of a win in NY too high to ignore.

    Yankee fans are too “big” on winning, so if the team were to fall below 89 wins then Hal and Co. will lose quite a bit of money. It’s the opposite of a team like the Cubs, where fans will show up no matter how many wins the team gets.

    So if you think getting the payroll down is a sign of them not caring about winning you’re wrong. Flat-out wrong.

  48. CB March 2nd, 2012 at 4:24 pm

    What an absolute load of nonsense we’ve heard from Hal and Cashman over the past few days.

    The self-imposed regulatory environment of the industry has changed in ways that have incentivized the Yankees to divert resources from investment in the development of their core product and into increasing profit margins.

    Their a business. That’s their prerogative. But to try to create this complex intellectual argument for why this is “good” for the product itself is just cynical PR. It’s pure spin. That’s all they are trying to do.

    I wrote about this many times here about the Pineda trade. As fans we kept judging it in terms of baseball issues.

    But a huge driver for that trade was simply the business side. That trade was clearly made as a pathway to get below 189M. It was a trade that had to do with operating margins.

    It looks like there’s a good chance Cole Hamels is going to hit the market next winter. Add that player and the Yanks have a great chance to set the foundation for their next dynasty.

    But the cards are on the table. That’s unlikely to happen unless the rotation blows up and there’s an emergency.

    And it seems far less likely than it did at the end of last season that the Yanks will bring back both Cano and Granderson.

    Of course they have few if any close to ready position player prospects to fill those gaps.

    This is purely a strategy about operating margins and how profitable they can make an already hugely profitable business.

    If you don’t own equity in this business there is nothing you gain from this strategy. And it’s not publicly traded so it’s not as if maximizing share holder return to the public is even remotely an issue.

    If the Yankees are going to do this – and it’s completely within their rights to do so – then just stop the ridiculous spin and just be up front about it. This is nonsense.

  49. Jerkface March 2nd, 2012 at 4:26 pm

    Insert baseball players and spin.

    You guys really stink at making analogies, no offense.

  50. Irreverent Discourse March 2nd, 2012 at 4:27 pm

    WYH – The cap stops them from being able to knee-jerk something like the CC/Teixeira/Burnett offseason for immediate fixes. Over time it should not effect their overall ability to keep the team competitive.

    It just won’t be as big an advantage as it was.

    You may run into a season every once in a while that the Yankees may not be favored to make the playoffs… which would be the first or second time in what… almost 20 years?

    It doesn’t mean they are really innately more or less likely to make the playoffs. It just means they can’t construct teams the way they have been trying to, and completely disregarding player development (which was basically 2000-2007) will not fly anymore.

  51. GreenBeret7 March 2nd, 2012 at 4:27 pm

    Yankee Trader March 2nd, 2012 at 4:22 pm
    Asked this earlier.
    Chad-
    Could the Yankees renegotiate the existing contract of A-Rod, with his approval, in a way that would extend the years, not the money, which would lower the AAV, and enable them to surround him with good players while staying under the LT?

    ————————————————————————————————————————-

    There’s nothing stopping NYYs extending the contract by a year at $1 mil to re-adjust the AAV

  52. Irreverent Discourse March 2nd, 2012 at 4:27 pm

    jerkface – I think you really stink at understanding them, because you are always too concerned with semantics.

  53. stuckey March 2nd, 2012 at 4:28 pm

    “Some fans will go to extreme lengths not to criticize the Yankees and find ways to rationalize and then rally for everything they do. ”

    During the course of this discussion I’ve said the biggest mistake the last 10 years was Arod.

    The first time ranking somewhere down the Top 10, the second time being the clear #1.

    Burnett was a mistake, Igawa was a mistake. Pavano and Wright were mistakes.

    Montero MIGHT be a big one. I’m just in wait-and-see mode.

    I think its marketing, but I think the whole “if we don’t win the WS its a failure” motto was, is and will continue to be a mistake if they continue to utter it.

    I’m not sure perpetually retooling (which doomed the KNicks for a decade) is a choice I’d make if I had it to make.

    I think Y.M.C.A. was tired in 1999 and the pie has been spoiled since ’09.

    I think some fans when left with no means to criticize an argument will take aim at those making it and question their sincerity.

  54. Shame Spencer March 2nd, 2012 at 4:28 pm

    Irreverent Discourse March 2nd, 2012 at 4:17 pm

    However if they don’t get smarter and Hal and Hank just pocket the extra money…..then no it doesn’t help anything and we as fans don’t have to feel good about it.

    It would be the first time in like 30 years a Steinbrenner actually “pocketed” money from the franchise so let’s not assume this is the most likely thing to happen.

    It’s high time that the Yankee “revenue” not be the sole reason they are competitive and their decisions hold more weight. If you fear this, you were probably a fan of their money more than their actual baseball decisions.
    ———————————-

    ID, c’mon now, really?

    I’m a fan of winning. The Yankees spend a ton of money and win a ton of games largely as a result. And we’re not suppose to like that?

    Why is it such a bad thing to be a fan of the Evil Empire?

    Fans of the mom and pops love beating us because we’re the Evil Empire. Why would we want to take that joy away from them? ;)

  55. Irreverent Discourse March 2nd, 2012 at 4:28 pm

    The self-imposed regulatory environment of the industry has changed in ways that have incentivized the Yankees to divert resources from investment in the development of their core product and into increasing profit margins.

    How can you start off such a long winded assesment of this with a completely false statement like that?

  56. Jerkface March 2nd, 2012 at 4:31 pm

    I think you really stink at understanding them, because you are always too concerned with semantics.

    No its a bad analogy. The Yankees don’t pick more players than the Royals. A better example is the tsukiji fish market, where fresh sushi grade tuna is auctioned off to prospective sushi buyers. Each restaurant is in the same market, making sushi, competing for the same materials, fish, but represent different ownership and business groups. Big restaurants can buy $200 worth of tuna. It might not be good tuna necessarily, or it might be really good tuna now but it won’t be in a day when they are still using it. The $40 dollars worth of tuna your tiny restaurant bought might be medium grade, but a lot more of it, or maybe 1 really nice piece of tuna that you’re trying to leverage into increasing your profit so you can buy more tuna.

    Your tomato analogy just blows, stop making bad analogies. I understand them fine, but you make a bad analogy and then try to defend it as a ‘pure ideal’ or something when it doesnt work that way! Analogies dont work that way!

  57. Nick in SF March 2nd, 2012 at 4:31 pm

    ID: No. You need to divorce yourself from this artificial construct of $40 or 40 tomatoes, it’s not a real limitation that any system mandates. Your cheap tomato picker is also cashing welfare checks and getting food stamps on top of that, plus the draft system allows him to pick the best tomato seeds and grow his own if he wants to. And if he can’t hack it, let Yuri Petrovich take over and he’ll get plenty of damn tomatoes.

  58. Jerkface March 2nd, 2012 at 4:32 pm

    Could the Yankees renegotiate the existing contract of A-Rod, with his approval, in a way that would extend the years, not the money, which would lower the AAV, and enable them to surround him with good players while staying under the LT?

    The players union and mlb doesnt really allow for restructuring deals that lower aav. You could extend him, but not change a contract to be worth less.

  59. Irreverent Discourse March 2nd, 2012 at 4:32 pm

    nick in sf – what the heck are you talking about. nevermind.

  60. CB March 2nd, 2012 at 4:32 pm

    Root for our profit margins. Great message.

  61. Shame Spencer March 2nd, 2012 at 4:33 pm

    Just an aside because its come up a few times: When we signed Pavano, it really wasn’t a mistake… He was coming off a great year, had a good history, and we needed pitching. It just looked awful when he, like, never pitched.

  62. Jerkface March 2nd, 2012 at 4:33 pm

    @joepawl

    Fire Cashman! RT @RationalPastime: Montero 2-run jack. Mariners 7-1. #Spring Training

  63. stuckey March 2nd, 2012 at 4:33 pm

    I’d like to thank CB for reminding us that baseball is a commercial enterprise and often businesses are not utterly transparent in their communication with their customers.

  64. LGY March 2nd, 2012 at 4:33 pm

    Stuckey

    I’m not talking about criticizing things in hindsight. That was the whole point of my Eiland example.

    If the Yankees miss the playoffs in 2014 I’m sure this forum will have no problem criticizing the Yankees for lowering payroll.

    For *now* though some fans are simply incapable of criticizing the Yankees decision to get under 189M.

  65. Jerkface March 2nd, 2012 at 4:34 pm

    Just an aside because its come up a few times: When we signed Pavano, it really wasn’t a mistake… He was coming off a great year, had a good history, and we needed pitching. It just looked awful when he, like, never pitched.

    As I’ve said quite a few times, the Yankees have invested a lot of money into the pitching side of things, they’ve just done a poor job of choosing what to allocate it to. Their decisions often turned out to be bad in hindsight, but its not like they weren’t trying.

  66. Irreverent Discourse March 2nd, 2012 at 4:34 pm

    jerkface – So you ignored the first analogy which is exactly what you just said to complain about the second one? Get real.

    You said that the Royals have a reasonable chance to make the playoffs, and I have easily shown with the tomatoes that no matter how careful the Royals are at selecting what players they employ… they may get lucky once but there is no sustainable model of success against someone spending 5 times as much money as you.

  67. CB March 2nd, 2012 at 4:35 pm

    “How can you start off such a long winded assesment of this with a completely false statement like that?”

    What I wrote is 100% accurate.

    And regarding “long winded” – you may want to reread the remarkably inance, endless arguments you get into here day after day if you want to discuss “long winded.” Comment after comment after comment which amounts to arguing just for the sake of arguing.

  68. BryanV21 March 2nd, 2012 at 4:35 pm

    I remember Martin’s agent saying he’d be willing to structure Martin’s new contract in order to help the team get down to $189m in 2014. But I haven’t read on how that could happen. It seems that the AAV would be the same no matter what. It’s not like incentives are not part of the AAV at season’s end. Or signing bonuses are not included.

    Help?

  69. LGY March 2nd, 2012 at 4:35 pm

    There needs to be some catch phrase for the terrible analogies on here like there is with the Lohud Fallacy.

  70. rizzo8118 March 2nd, 2012 at 4:36 pm

    montero just hit his first bomb of the spring! too bad its not for us….

  71. BryanV21 March 2nd, 2012 at 4:36 pm

    Why SHOULD fans criticize the team for wanting to get down to $189 million?

  72. Irreverent Discourse March 2nd, 2012 at 4:37 pm

    Comment after comment after comment which amounts to arguing just for the sake of arguing.

    As opposed to what everyone else does here? Come on, don’t be like that.

    You have ABSOLUTELY NO WAY to prove they are making this move for profit. If they reinvest every penny into player development, international scouting, the stadium, the facilities… and don’t pocket a penny, they have lowered the payroll, increased the value of other areas of the franchise that improve player perfomance and you are just standing here with egg on your face.

    Why make the extremely negative assumption in the first place?

  73. Eroc March 2nd, 2012 at 4:37 pm

    Great post, CB

    It is quite comical to see how ans are eating this up, thinking it is some good thing for the franchise – they are letting Hal/Cash off the hook so easily?

  74. Nick in SF March 2nd, 2012 at 4:37 pm

    ID: the foundation of a good analogy is a good underlying point. Your analogy can’t do much if your underlying point is weak. It’s just lipstick on a pig.

  75. Irreverent Discourse March 2nd, 2012 at 4:37 pm

    LGY – The analogy is going to be called “i thought i had another way to relate this to you, but it turns out that you are just dense.”"

  76. Jerkface March 2nd, 2012 at 4:37 pm

    You said that the Royals have a reasonable chance to make the playoffs, and I have easily shown with the tomatoes that no matter how careful the Royals are at selecting what players they employ… they may get lucky once but there is no sustainable model of success against someone spending 5 times as much money as you.

    Sorry, I forgot to append that in my analogy, the sushi restaurant spending $40 on fish could spend 200$ on fish and then try to leverage the increase in revenue to bring in more customers. You keep analogizing that the royals only have 40 to spend, which isnt the case, and even if it is they should gtfo.

    Teams should not get an equal shot at a championship just for showing up.

  77. BryanV21 March 2nd, 2012 at 4:37 pm

    “montero just hit his first bomb of the spring! too bad its not for us…”

    Yeah, because the Yanks needed that HR in order to win today. And winning today has big implications on the divisional race.

  78. stuckey March 2nd, 2012 at 4:38 pm

    “For *now* though some fans are simply incapable of criticizing the Yankees decision to get under 189M.”

    I am.

    Because I genuinely believe my conclusions about the issue.

    You seem to be suggesting criticism is the correct view and if you’re not critical then you’re by default incapable of criticizing the Yankees EVER.

  79. Irreverent Discourse March 2nd, 2012 at 4:39 pm

    nick in sf – So you are saying that my point that the Yankees have a better chance to make the playoffs than the royals do because they spend more money is… wrong? And that because it’s so much more money, it matters what choices the lesser team makes?

    The foundation of a good analogy is the person reading it actually following the context.

  80. Jerkface March 2nd, 2012 at 4:39 pm

    I remember Martin’s agent saying he’d be willing to structure Martin’s new contract in order to help the team get down to $189m in 2014. But I haven’t read on how that could happen. It seems that the AAV would be the same no matter what. It’s not like incentives are not part of the AAV at season’s end. Or signing bonuses are not included.

    Help?

    He can’t. Maybe he wants a longer deal at a slightly lower AAV which nets Martin more money.

  81. m March 2nd, 2012 at 4:39 pm

    I don’t think it’s so much about profit margins as it is from getting out of the luxury tax for at least a year. When you’ve personally paid 90% of the taxes collects to date, a sum that has totalled $206M, you’ll fully understand the need to get under the threshold to avoid an even higher back-breaking rate.

  82. rizzo8118 March 2nd, 2012 at 4:40 pm

    you must hate your life buddy!!

  83. stuckey March 2nd, 2012 at 4:40 pm

    “montero just hit his first bomb of the spring! too bad its not for us….”

    Montero has power?

  84. mick March 2nd, 2012 at 4:40 pm

    The LoHud Fallacy of the Predetermined Outcome.

  85. Irreverent Discourse March 2nd, 2012 at 4:40 pm

    Teams should not get an equal shot at a championship just for showing up.

    Who said they should?

    Teams with a $100mil advantage in payroll over 75% of the league should not be complaining that they can’t spend as much anymore because it was ruining parity in baseball.

  86. UnKnown March 2nd, 2012 at 4:40 pm

    Jerkface March 2nd, 2012 at 4:33 pm
    @joepawl

    Fire Cashman! RT @RationalPastime: Montero 2-run jack. Mariners 7-1. #Spring Training

    ——–

    There was also this though,

    Mike Axisa ? @mikeaxisa
    And the Yanks said he could catch! RT @gbakermariners: Montero just dropped high popup behind plate. Routine play, so charged with error…

    Take the good with the bad, also now I hear he got hurt today.

  87. BryanV21 March 2nd, 2012 at 4:41 pm

    “He can’t. Maybe he wants a longer deal at a slightly lower AAV which nets Martin more money.”

    So instead of $36 million over 3 years, do $36 million over 4 years instead? That makes sense, thanks.

  88. m March 2nd, 2012 at 4:42 pm

    And as a Yankee fan you want your money going to the team not to MLB. The amount that would otherwise be spent on LT can be used by the Yankees. Even resetting the clock would be immensely beneficial.

  89. pat March 2nd, 2012 at 4:42 pm

    JimBowdenESPNxm
    Jesus Montero hits a long Home Run to RC….then takes foul ball off the mask and had to leave the field dazed but appears okay

  90. Best To Ever Do It March 2nd, 2012 at 4:43 pm

    BryanV21 March 2nd, 2012 at 4:36 pm

    Why SHOULD fans criticize the team for wanting to get down to $189 million?

    ——————————–

    The Yankees have always been a team that had one big advantage over everyone else and that was/is money. Unlike the Mets who are handcuffed by bad deals the Yankees don’t blink an eye. They are putting faith in their farm to not only produce but to become key fixtures in the roster while doing so in the biggest media market in the country.

  91. CB March 2nd, 2012 at 4:43 pm

    “As opposed to what everyone else does here? Come on, don’t be like that.”

    First of all – you insult me for absolutely no reason and based on nothing I directed at you and then you have the gaul to come up with weak sauce like “Come on , don’t be like that.”

    Give me a break. Stop being so self-serving. You – as you often do – started with ad hominem insults – rather than discussing an argument.

    In other words, you’ve just engaged in one of the major reasons why this blog isn’t nearly as fun a place to talk about baseball as it used to be.

    You used a personal insult for absolutely no reason. So you need to reconsider things.

    Regarding the issue of issue of margins – the only evidence that’s “required” is math and basic accounting. Think about it for a while between getting into fights here and you’ll figure it out.

  92. Irreverent Discourse March 2nd, 2012 at 4:43 pm

    The Yankees are the fat guy too stupid to realize he need to stop eating and MLB just took away his all you can eat buffet.

    Wooo more good analogies no one will understand!

  93. Best To Ever Do It March 2nd, 2012 at 4:43 pm

    pat March 2nd, 2012 at 4:42 pm

    JimBowdenESPNxm
    Jesus Montero hits a long Home Run to RC….then takes foul ball off the mask and had to leave the field dazed but appears okay

    ———————————————-

    Crap

  94. mick March 2nd, 2012 at 4:43 pm

    Why is Hal wrong?
    Year after year of watching the Yanks spend and spend, and g-d forbid, not win every year forced Hal into hiding when it came to becoming the big elephant in the room.
    He was always about fiscal responsibility while Dad spent like a drunken sailor.
    Now it’s his turn and this is the way he wants it. Can’t say I blame him.
    Would you rather have Hank running the show?

  95. austinmac March 2nd, 2012 at 4:44 pm

    Pat,

    I also noticed Cashman’s use of the words “that year”. That is a clear signal, I believe, once reset, they can be more flexible. That helps, if true.

  96. BryanV21 March 2nd, 2012 at 4:44 pm

    “The Yankees have always been a team that had one big advantage over everyone else and that was/is money. Unlike the Mets who are handcuffed by bad deals the Yankees don’t blink an eye. They are putting faith in their farm to not only produce but to become key fixtures in the roster while doing so in the biggest media market in the country.”

    But even if they were at $189 million last season, they still would have had the largest payroll in MLB by about $16 million (Phillies spent about $173 million). And the Yankees at $189m would still be way higher than the average team payroll. So the money advantage would still be there. So that criticism doesn’t hold up.

    Anybody else?

  97. Irreverent Discourse March 2nd, 2012 at 4:45 pm

    CB – Did I insult you? How about you don’t make stuff up and we’ll have a real converation. OK?

    I am not insulting anyone, you are just assuming I am which means to mean you aren’t reading any of my posts.

    So, is this just more uninformed nonsense from you then?

    “Long-winded” is not an insult. It was a long post repeating the same point over and over again. That is the liter definition of the term “long winded” so maybe you just need to calm down for a minute.

  98. stuckey March 2nd, 2012 at 4:45 pm

    People need to look at Pavano’s career.

    http://www.baseball-reference......ca01.shtml

    Pavano was signed on the premise he finally that “that year”, then one where he finally put it together.

    His overall body of work was not as strong as you may remember.

    He was signed on the assumption he had turned a corner in 2004.

    He may have, and his reasons for not working out may be unrelated to this, but it is no sure bet Pavano performs if healthy.

    It was risky and the Yankees took the risk because they could.

  99. LGY March 2nd, 2012 at 4:45 pm

    I am.

    Because I genuinely believe my conclusions about the issue.

    You seem to be suggesting criticism is the correct view and if you’re not critical then you’re by default incapable of criticizing the Yankees EVER.

    ———–

    No, I’m saying there are times when criticism is the correct view and some are incapable of doing so until the results are readily apparent like with Eiland or Igawa.

  100. Best To Ever Do It March 2nd, 2012 at 4:46 pm

    BryanV21 March 2nd, 2012 at 4:37 pm

    “montero just hit his first bomb of the spring! too bad its not for us…”

    Yeah, because the Yanks needed that HR in order to win today. And winning today has big implications on the divisional race.

    ——————————————–

    They won’t need him now but next yr and the yr after definitely.

  101. Jerkface March 2nd, 2012 at 4:47 pm

    So instead of $36 million over 3 years, do $36 million over 4 years instead? That makes sense, thanks.

    No, instead of 36 over 3 years he gets 42 over 4 years. Or something similiar. You don’t pay him the same amount for more years (he’d be dumb to take that), but pay him slightly less per year but give him the extra year so he makes more guaranteed.

  102. Nick in SF March 2nd, 2012 at 4:47 pm

    ID, you’re not the first to settle on the “you’re all to stupid to understand how smart I am!!!” argument.

    Anyway, Maryland shore tomatoes are better than anything you’ll find in Kansas City, but in KC they know how to turn those tomatoes into great BBQ sauce. Get your recipe right and you roll into thethe salad bar with George Brett and Hal McRae.

  103. BryanV21 March 2nd, 2012 at 4:47 pm

    “They won’t need him now but next yr and the yr after definitely.”

    Can I borrow that crystal ball, which tells you they will need those HRs? I’m curious on whether I’m going to get this job I interviewed for the other day.

  104. Melk Man March 2nd, 2012 at 4:47 pm

    “montero just hit his first bomb of the spring! too bad its not for us…”

    It’s going to be painful watching his career unfold. Damn Hal and Damn Cashman and their damn budget

  105. Irreverent Discourse March 2nd, 2012 at 4:48 pm

    CB – Regarding the issue of issue of margins – the only evidence that’s “required” is math and basic accounting. Think about it for a while between getting into fights here and you’ll figure it out.

    And the gall to assume that you understand the inner workings of the franchise you don’t work for?

    They stand to save almost $150mil by making it under the cap in 2014, and you don’t think that’s justified because you are an obsessive fan? That’s only slightly immature.

    If anyone has said today that the Yankees are making this move to get under $189 to “get better’ I must have missed it.

    Your assumption that they are going to line their toilets with gold because of the money they are saving just doesn’t make sense. They were raised by their father, and their father did nothing but re-invest int he franchise. So they can’t do that on payroll anymore, big woop… there are other areas that are equally important.

  106. BryanV21 March 2nd, 2012 at 4:48 pm

    “No, instead of 36 over 3 years he gets 42 over 4 years. Or something similiar. You don’t pay him the same amount for more years (he’d be dumb to take that), but pay him slightly less per year but give him the extra year so he makes more guaranteed.”

    No, I didn’t mean it like I said it… my mistake. I dumbed it down for some people, and you are not “some people”. Sorry.

  107. Shame Spencer March 2nd, 2012 at 4:49 pm

    BryanV21 March 2nd, 2012 at 4:36 pm

    Why SHOULD fans criticize the team for wanting to get down to $189 million?
    ——————-

    Because its like when your public works department cheers about cutting the budget but you’re still paying taxes at the same rate.

    The crux of a lot of this comes down to how cynical you are about big business, quite frankly. Some here believe the money will go right back to the product on some level… some are skeptical. Its just that simple.

  108. Irreverent Discourse March 2nd, 2012 at 4:49 pm

    nick in sf – I just don’t see what’s being missed with the tomatoes :p I think it follows the situation to a T and the only way you guys have picked it apart is by changing what I actually meant by it.

    Keep in mind we are only still discussing it because I was entertained by your grading nonsense yesterday so I guess I apologize for engaging you further.

  109. LGY March 2nd, 2012 at 4:50 pm

    They stand to save almost $150mil by making it under the cap in 2014, and you don’t think that’s justified because you are an obsessive fan? That’s only slightly immature

    ——–

    Can I see the math on this?

  110. Chip March 2nd, 2012 at 4:50 pm

    The Yankees are essentially going to 189 mil through five contracts coming off the books: Kuroda, Swisher, Burnett, Rivera and Soriano.

    Burnett is just dead money.

    Given the arms the Yankees have they likely will replace Kuroda ($10mil), Rivera ($15mil) and Soriano ($14 mil) with guys making at or around the league minimum.

    That should still leave the team plenty of money to retain Cano, Granderson (though at 33 I’m not sure I would re-sign him to a long term deal) and Martin (assuming they only offer him $5 – $7 mil/year).

    They can use some of their minor league assets to add either a 3b (moving Alex to DH) or RF and still have enough money left over to sign a good free agent.

  111. mick March 2nd, 2012 at 4:50 pm

    NYS has a salad bar?

  112. Best To Ever Do It March 2nd, 2012 at 4:50 pm

    But even if they were at $189 million last season, they still would have had the largest payroll in MLB by about $16 million (Phillies spent about $173 million). And the Yankees at $189m would still be way higher than the average team payroll. So the money advantage would still be there. So that criticism doesn’t hold up.

    Anybody else?

    ——————————-

    But they weren’t at that last yr that’s the point. Them having a 200+ million dollar allows more room for error. We have to rely on these guys making the right/smart decisions. Doesn’t mean they can’t but they have to do it first.

  113. CB March 2nd, 2012 at 4:51 pm

    “I don’t think it’s so much about profit margins as it is from getting out of the luxury tax for at least a year.”

    M,

    Where else is that money going? There are very few places. This is just a matter of accounting.

    The Yankees have very favorable debt arrangements on the stadium so I really doubt they are going to need the money to urgently service debt.

    The money is not going to be reinvested to augment the major league product.

    Could they use all of that money to augment other operations? I guess so. But I see no evidence of this. They are spending less on the draft than they did a few years ago. They’ve shown some willingness to expand their scouting, minor league operations, etc. but not that much. And that’s an operational area which isn’t large enough to absorb all of that cash anyway.

    They Yankees are just going to become more profitable. That’s it. That’s the bottom line.

    This isn’t complicated. They Yankees are just trying to make it so through their spin.

    If the Steinbrenners want to increase their profits so they can do things like buy more horses or increase their grand kids trust funds – that’s fine. They are a business. But spare us with these psuedo-philosophical arguments.

    The Yanks are actually trying to get the fanbase to sympathize with their “problems.” It’s just cynical.

  114. stuckey March 2nd, 2012 at 4:51 pm

    CB, serious question.

    How confident are you in the management of a team that doesn’t take a hard look at cost efficiency?

    Are you arguing the Yankees have excelled in this area since 2003 and should stay the course?

  115. Best To Ever Do It March 2nd, 2012 at 4:52 pm

    Damn Hal and Damn Cashman and their damn budget

    —————————————-

    Damn Cashman he’s the one that has had trouble developing/acquiring a number 2 over the past couple of seasons.

  116. Nick in SF March 2nd, 2012 at 4:52 pm

    ” Keep in mind we are only still discussing it because I was entertained by your grading nonsense yesterday so I guess I apologize for engaging you further.”

    Your apology gets an F.

    Lighten up!

  117. PittsburghYankeeFan March 2nd, 2012 at 4:53 pm

    CB–you know a lot of baseball, but I’m going to disagree with you on this one.

    This is not about profit margins. It’s about hard versus soft caps on salaries, and secondarily about maintaining player-ownership piece.

    The Yankees could spend $300-400 million on salaries if they wanted to, and still maintain a decent margin given all the streams of income that they have. They would likely win the WS every year more likely the not. The rest of baseball, which hates them right now, would hate them even more.

    A hard cap would be put into place, which benefits nobody. The players would strike.

    By moving towards a soft cap, the Yankees maintain their flexibility to go over it as needed (no hard cap), the players and their agents are happy (no hard cap), and the fans remain happy (no baseball strike, and the Yankees still field the best team that they can).

    I think Cashman was very upfront to the media and the fans today in a way few GMs are these days, and he should be appreciated for it.

    The model looks like “be as smart as the Rays, with $120 million more payroll and as much development $$$$ as you need.”

    As a long time fan, I can live with that.

  118. PittsburghYankeeFan March 2nd, 2012 at 4:53 pm

    I meant “peace” not “piece”

  119. CB March 2nd, 2012 at 4:53 pm

    ““Long-winded” is not an insult.”

    You’ve spent way too much time fighting with people on this blog if this is what you think.

    You can use whatever words you want but you don’t get to make up their meaning.

  120. Jerkface March 2nd, 2012 at 4:54 pm

    They stand to save almost $150mil by making it under the cap in 2014, and you don’t think that’s justified because you are an obsessive fan? That’s only slightly immature.

    They stand to save about ~20 million in 2014. They might save ~60 million if they stay under 189 for 3 straight years.

  121. BryanV21 March 2nd, 2012 at 4:54 pm

    “The crux of a lot of this comes down to how cynical you are about big business, quite frankly. Some here believe the money will go right back to the product on some level… some are skeptical. Its just that simple.”

    So it’s wrong of me, and others, not to be that cynical about a team that has put more revenue back into the team (percentage wise) than any other team? It may be true, but that doesn’t mean we’re wrong to believe that. So that doesn’t mean we should be critical, it just means those that are critical aren’t wrong to do so.

    So the question still stands… why should we all be critical?

    “But they weren’t at that last yr that’s the point. Them having a 200+ million dollar allows more room for error. We have to rely on these guys making the right/smart decisions. Doesn’t mean they can’t but they have to do it first.”

    You missed the point entirely. I’ll try it again… the Yankees will still have a major advantage in money spent on payroll, regardless if it’s $220m or $189m.

  122. Chip March 2nd, 2012 at 4:55 pm

    LGY -

    Don’t get me wrong – I don’t like the idea of the Yankees having to get under this arbitrary number at all – but I think it’s very plausible and unless it costs them Cano I can suck it up for one year.

    Now mind you – if Randy Levine gets involved and gives a huge FA contract to Mark Reynolds next winter that handcuffs the team I will lose my poop.

  123. Best To Ever Do It March 2nd, 2012 at 4:55 pm

    The model looks like “be as smart as the Rays

    —————————————

    Can they be as smart as the Rays though?

  124. Jerkface March 2nd, 2012 at 4:55 pm

    The Yankees are essentially going to 189 mil through five contracts coming off the books: Kuroda, Swisher, Burnett, Rivera and Soriano.

    No. Many people do not understand where the Yankees need to be at 189. Its not opening day. Its in december. After everyone on the 40 man is tallied, any trades are counted, performance bonuses assessed, and after benefits are paid.

    To get under 189 the team is going to be in the 160-170 range going into 2014, which is a far cry from where they have started out the past few years.

  125. Yankee Trader March 2nd, 2012 at 4:55 pm

    I only heard part of this in an interview with Francona.
    It sounds like the winner of the wildcard will stay at home and open the series against the team with the best record???

  126. stuckey March 2nd, 2012 at 4:55 pm

    “No, I’m saying there are times when criticism is the correct view and some are incapable of doing so until the results are readily apparent like with Eiland or Igawa.”

    Okay, so what it the results say the opposite.

    Let’s put it on the record. What has to happen in 2012-??? for you to say the results proved my criticism unfounded?

  127. Shame Spencer March 2nd, 2012 at 4:56 pm

    BryanV21 March 2nd, 2012 at 4:54 pm

    “The crux of a lot of this comes down to how cynical you are about big business, quite frankly. Some here believe the money will go right back to the product on some level… some are skeptical. Its just that simple.”

    So it’s wrong of me, and others, not to be that cynical about a team that has put more revenue back into the team (percentage wise) than any other team?

    ———————–

    I said nothing of the sort.

    I was just explaining the general sides of the argument and why some may fall on one or the other.

  128. MTU March 2nd, 2012 at 4:56 pm

    Mac/m-

    I’m of the same opinion as you two.

    Temporary measure to reset the tax.

    Time will tell.

    ;)

  129. mick March 2nd, 2012 at 4:56 pm

    The Rays were smart enough to be the worst team in baseball for many years.

  130. Chip March 2nd, 2012 at 4:56 pm

    Best To Ever Do It March 2nd, 2012 at 4:52 pm

    Damn Hal and Damn Cashman and their damn budget

    —————————————-

    Damn Cashman he’s the one that has had trouble developing/acquiring a number 2 over the past couple of seasons.
    —————–

    Pitching isn’t what’s going to cost money going forward. They will likely have one pitcher on the roster making over $10 mil by the start of the 2014 season (Sabathia)

  131. CB March 2nd, 2012 at 4:57 pm

    As I’ve said several times already – the Yankees are a privately held concern. If they want to increase their margins they are free to do so.

    Just spare us the cynical spin.

    That’s my point.

  132. Shame Spencer March 2nd, 2012 at 4:58 pm

    Best To Ever Do It March 2nd, 2012 at 4:55 pm

    The model looks like “be as smart as the Rays

    —————————————

    Can they be as smart as the Rays though?

    ———————-

    Can the Rays with the World Series?

  133. Chip March 2nd, 2012 at 4:58 pm

    Jerkface March 2nd, 2012 at 4:55 pm

    The Yankees are essentially going to 189 mil through five contracts coming off the books: Kuroda, Swisher, Burnett, Rivera and Soriano.

    No. Many people do not understand where the Yankees need to be at 189. Its not opening day. Its in december. After everyone on the 40 man is tallied, any trades are counted, performance bonuses assessed, and after benefits are paid.

    To get under 189 the team is going to be in the 160-170 range going into 2014, which is a far cry from where they have started out the past few years.
    —————

    I don’t believe you’re correct about the 40. I think it is major league contracts – so unless there are minor leaguers signed to major league deals (Andrew Brackman for example) they don’t count towards payroll.

  134. Best To Ever Do It March 2nd, 2012 at 4:58 pm

    I’ll try it again… the Yankees will still have a major advantage in money spent on payroll, regardless if it’s $220m or $189m.

    ————————————–

    The gap between them and second place will still be there but that doesn’t mean the off field talent won’t suffer. I’ve seen fans say we’re losing X number of players in the next couple of seasons. Yes we are but those players have to be replaced.

  135. Jerkface March 2nd, 2012 at 4:58 pm

    It sounds like the winner of the wildcard will stay at home and open the series against the team with the best record???

    ALDS is 2-3 format this year, dumb.

  136. BryanV21 March 2nd, 2012 at 4:58 pm

    “No. Many people do not understand where the Yankees need to be at 189. Its not opening day. Its in december. After everyone on the 40 man is tallied, any trades are counted, performance bonuses assessed, and after benefits are paid.

    To get under 189 the team is going to be in the 160-170 range going into 2014, which is a far cry from where they have started out the past few years.”

    Really good point, but I think you’re accounting for too much in incentives and the team adding players mid-season. So it’s totally true the team will have to get under $189m to START the season, but I don’t think they have to get way down to $170m.

    It does raise another thing… that the Yankees will not be able to add a big contract at the mid-way point. They can’t trade for a guy in a walk-year of a big deal, like they may do this year with a player like Ethier this season.

  137. Shame Spencer March 2nd, 2012 at 4:58 pm

    “To get under 189 the team is going to be in the 160-170 range going into 2014, which is a far cry from where they have started out the past few years.”

    Please continue posting this so people understand…..

  138. Irreverent Discourse March 2nd, 2012 at 4:59 pm

    LGY – I don’t remember where I read the exact numbers, but basically if they don’t reset the penalty in 2014 then the $35mil in pure payroll+tax obligations could take them well over $100mil in savings in as little as 2 seasons.

  139. Best To Ever Do It March 2nd, 2012 at 4:59 pm

    Shame Spencer March 2nd, 2012 at 4:58 pm

    Best To Ever Do It March 2nd, 2012 at 4:55 pm

    The model looks like “be as smart as the Rays

    —————————————

    Can they be as smart as the Rays though?

    ———————-

    Can the Rays with the World Series?

    ——————

    Yankees have only won one WS since the Rays sprung up a couple of seasons ago. The Rays could win the WS.

  140. Rice Pudding Flavoured Relief Pitcher March 2nd, 2012 at 4:59 pm

    Wait wait wait … There’s no way in hell Yankees fans are still feeling regret over this Montero trade right ?

  141. Jerkface March 2nd, 2012 at 5:00 pm

    I don’t believe you’re correct about the 40. I think it is major league contracts – so unless there are minor leaguers signed to major league deals (Andrew Brackman for example) they don’t count towards payroll.

    (b) the sum of the yearly Salaries (as determined in accordance
    with Section E below and as allocated among Clubs in
    accordance with this Section C) attributable to that Contract Year
    of all Players under a Uniform Player’s Contract with the Club
    for that Contract Year (including optionally assigned contracts);
    and

    Including optionally assigned contracts, which means everyone on the 40. Please, Chip, you should trust me on baseball CBA minutia by now :)

  142. BryanV21 March 2nd, 2012 at 5:00 pm

    Chip – the luxury tax does go by the 40-man roster, not the 25-man/active roster.

    “I was just explaining the general sides of the argument and why some may fall on one or the other.”

    Sorry, I can’t keep up with all the names. I think I mixed you up with somebody else.

  143. GreenBeret7 March 2nd, 2012 at 5:00 pm

    Nick in SF March 2nd, 2012 at 4:37 pm
    ID: the foundation of a good analogy is a good underlying point. Your analogy can’t do much if your underlying point is weak. It’s just lipstick on a pig.

    ————————————————————————————————————————-

    You’d better check your mailbox for a letter bomb. Erin and Erica will not be pleased about you talking about Ms Piggie like that.

  144. Irreverent Discourse March 2nd, 2012 at 5:00 pm

    jerkface – Confirmed they are doing 2-3? Bud is the worst. Nothing like half-assing and rushing things that change the results of the entire season!

  145. blake March 2nd, 2012 at 5:01 pm

    “Fire Cashman! RT @RationalPastime: Montero 2-run jack. Mariners 7-1. #Spring Training”

    :(

  146. Shame Spencer March 2nd, 2012 at 5:01 pm

    Yankees have only won one WS since the Rays sprung up a couple of seasons ago. The Rays could win the WS.

    ——————————

    The Rays have never won the World Series. I will buy into the Rays system when they remain competitive consistently and actually win something.

  147. Wave Your Hat March 2nd, 2012 at 5:02 pm

    CB-

    I agree with your points, obviously, except that I can’t blame the Steinbrenners for getting under the soft cap. The stick is just too big, and the carrot too juicy. It was designed that way by the league, in my opinion as an anti-Yankee (and anti-salary) rule.

    I just find it interesting that there are Yankee fans who don’t see the writing on the wall.

  148. BryanV21 March 2nd, 2012 at 5:02 pm

    “Confirmed they are doing 2-3? Bud is the worst. Nothing like half-assing and rushing things that change the results of the entire season!”

    I don’t agree with the extra WC team, but on this you’re totally correct. Make the change… fine. But at least do it the right way, instead of rushing it like this.

  149. Best To Ever Do It March 2nd, 2012 at 5:02 pm

    Irreverent Discourse March 2nd, 2012 at 5:00 pm

    jerkface – Confirmed they are doing 2-3? Bud is the worst. Nothing like half-assing and rushing things that change the results of the entire season!

    ————————–

    I’m still angry he came back for more yrs.

  150. Yankee Trader March 2nd, 2012 at 5:02 pm

    Jerkface is right the LT is assessed at the end of the season

  151. Shame Spencer March 2nd, 2012 at 5:02 pm

    More importantly, I will never understand why we must compare ourselves to teams like the Rays and Royals to feel good about ourselves.

  152. UnKnown March 2nd, 2012 at 5:02 pm

    Jerkface March 2nd, 2012 at 4:58 pm
    It sounds like the winner of the wildcard will stay at home and open the series against the team with the best record???

    ALDS is 2-3 format this year, dumb.

    ——–

    Extremely dumb, but with the way the schedule for the postseason is laid out a 2-2-1 format with an extra off day to travel back to the home field city for Game 5 is not possible. If the 1 vs. 4 ALDS series goes 5 games the winner does not have an off day from Game 5 to Game 1 of the ALCS. So the dates are limited. Not sure what they are going to do if it rains at all through the month of October. It’s a huge mess…

    They should’ve waited till next year to do the new system.

  153. Shame Spencer March 2nd, 2012 at 5:03 pm

    Yankee Trader March 2nd, 2012 at 5:02 pm

    Jerkface is right the LT is assessed at the end of the season
    —————————-

    Yep…. better try and keep Alex on the bench so he doesn’t get all those HR bonuses lol….

  154. blake March 2nd, 2012 at 5:03 pm

    Hal likely loves the new CBA….he’s been wanting to cut payroll for awhile and this gives him cover to do it.

  155. BryanV21 March 2nd, 2012 at 5:03 pm

    When the Rays have burned through all those top picks they earned while being bad, and still remain in the top 3 of the AL East, then I’ll buy into their way of thinking. Until then, give me the Yankee way of developing guys like Hughes, Gardner, Cano,etc while spending on guys like CC, Tex, etc.

  156. Erin March 2nd, 2012 at 5:03 pm

    Team Bonding Break:

    PhilHughes65 Pumped for the game with @ColinCurtis425 and @CC_Sabathia Don’t worry I won’t try and convert CC to a Bolts fan

    OK, resume arguing.

  157. G. Love March 2nd, 2012 at 5:04 pm

    CB – Great post & I agree with you completely.

    The Yankees are walking into territory they’ve never walked in during my lifetime. There was never a section of Yankee history when George owned the team that was about maximizing profits over building the perfect beast.

  158. Jerkface March 2nd, 2012 at 5:04 pm

    Really good point, but I think you’re accounting for too much in incentives and the team adding players mid-season. So it’s totally true the team will have to get under $189m to START the season, but I don’t think they have to get way down to $170m.

    The Yankees have ended seasons in the 220 range the past 5 years. Throw in the 10 million in benefits and the 40 man and you can see where I am being realistic.

    You have 6 million for 15 40 man players not on the 25. This is just using a flat 400k salary. 10 million in benefits. You have to include postseason allotments.

    189 – 16 million = 173 before we worry about A-rod’s bonus, postseason allotment, or trading midseason.

  159. BryanV21 March 2nd, 2012 at 5:05 pm

    LOL! Who says the Yankees can’t build the best team with a $189m payroll. Man! Some of you people act like going down to $189m is on par with the $75 million payrolls we see year in and year out. It’s not like the Yankee payroll is going down by that much.

  160. austinmac March 2nd, 2012 at 5:06 pm

    I well understand the Yankees wanting to save tens of millions of dollars. If they can go under the limit for that year, it sounds as if they will loosen the purse strings. Make no mistake, losing players like Granderson, Swisher and Martin with either no replacements in sight is a big risk of a down period. I will certainly hope good replacements can be found.

    As a fan, I like being able to acquire players who increase the chance of winning. It won’t be fun be watch others continue signing them while losing our favorites. Color me spoiled. Unashamedly.

  161. Irreverent Discourse March 2nd, 2012 at 5:06 pm

    You’ve spent way too much time fighting with people on this blog if this is what you think.
    You can use whatever words you want but you don’t get to make up their meaning.

    CB – I don’t fight with anyone, I have discussions. If people can’t handle those discussions they probably shouldn’t be posting here. If you read it as an insult that’s a you problem. Sorry. You’ve now insulted me 3 times by your standards, is this helping move this conversation forward?

    Your view that they are going to “profit” off of this move is a personal belief not backed by anything. They could just as easily invest that money in other areas of the franchise, which is exactly what they should be doing anyway. You assuming that they won’t do this and then ranting about it for 30 lines does no one any good.

  162. Best To Ever Do It March 2nd, 2012 at 5:06 pm

    Shame Spencer March 2nd, 2012 at 5:01 pm

    Yankees have only won one WS since the Rays sprung up a couple of seasons ago. The Rays could win the WS.

    ——————————

    The Rays have never won the World Series. I will buy into the Rays system when they remain competitive consistently and actually win something.

    ———————–

    They haven’t done it yet but that doesn’t mean you can’t buy into the system. Before the Giants beat the Pats the first time did anyone buy into Tom and Eli.

  163. Bret The Hitman March 2nd, 2012 at 5:06 pm

    If Cole Hamels or Matt Cain hits the market, the Yankees won’t be whimpering about 2014 or floating the 189 million dollar figure.

    Profit margins are important and any business needs to be conscious about costs…but the profitability of another dynasty trumps all.

    This new profit margin thing isn’t about putting a freeze on all spending nor is it about sticking with the exact roster we have multiple years until 2014. It’s just their way of curbing the demands of agents and players…it’s just their way of negotiating without a specific client sitting at a table before them. It’s just long-term, generic negotiation. It’s a goal, not a requirement but certain players are must-have in order to uphold the winning tradition that generates income.

    I would put Cole Hamels in that category…Matt Cain as well.

  164. Jerkface March 2nd, 2012 at 5:06 pm

    @leokitty: montero is definitely a better hitter than pineda but i think pineda is a better pitcher

  165. Best To Ever Do It March 2nd, 2012 at 5:07 pm

    Until then, give me the Yankee way of developing guys like Hughes, Gardner, Cano,

    ————————————–
    Hughes?

  166. BryanV21 March 2nd, 2012 at 5:08 pm

    “The Yankees have ended seasons in the 220 range the past 5 years. Throw in the 10 million in benefits and the 40 man and you can see where I am being realistic.

    You have 6 million for 15 40 man players not on the 25. This is just using a flat 400k salary. 10 million in benefits. You have to include postseason allotments.

    189 – 16 million = 173 before we worry about A-rod’s bonus, postseason allotment, or trading midseason.”

    That “220″ includes the 15 players not on the 40-man. The team right now is at around $195 million without those 15, nor without the incentives being handed out.

    BTW, those not on the active roster will not make the league minimum of $480,000, or even the $400,000 you mentioned. A player has to be in MLB to make that much. They don’t make nearly that much in the minors, especially the majority of the players on the 40-man who are not in AAA or on contracts like the one Brackman was.

    So that “173″ is more like 180.

  167. Best To Ever Do It March 2nd, 2012 at 5:08 pm

    When the Rays have burned through all those top picks they earned while being bad, and still remain in the top 3 of the AL East

    ————————

    Here we go again with the top picks remark

  168. stuckey March 2nd, 2012 at 5:08 pm

    “As I’ve said several times already – the Yankees are a privately held concern. If they want to increase their margins they are free to do so.

    “Just spare us the cynical spin.”

    CB, I agree the Yankees are likely motivated by increased margins, but I think it is also cynical to believe at they can’t concurrently be taking a genuine, hard look at at their cost efficiency and what their expenditures in multiples far above their competition has meant to their bottom line and on-the-field goals.

    I suspect asking you what you honestly expect in terms of transparency will lead nowhere, so I’ll stick to this:

    Do you think it’s possible for the rational of the last few days to genuinely co-exist with increased margins motivation, and that their rhetoric is more selective as opposed to pure fiction?

  169. Irreverent Discourse March 2nd, 2012 at 5:09 pm

    CB – Maybe you using the word profit is the problem, when you really mean resources. The Yankees are gong to maximize their “costs” so they can effectively operate under the new CBA… they are not “mazimizing profits”, that only serves to give t the negative connotation you need to further your point (self fulfilling “points” are not good). Giving away millions of dollars a year to the luxury tax pool is STUPID business when it clearly has not gained them any advantage in the playoffs. They merely make them and win or lose just the same.

  170. BryanV21 March 2nd, 2012 at 5:10 pm

    “Hughes?”

    I’m sorry, since when his Hughes “done” or “finished”? I thought he was being looked at as a starter this season, with upside at least in the “mid-rotation” area.

  171. CB March 2nd, 2012 at 5:10 pm

    “I agree with your points, obviously, except that I can’t blame the Steinbrenners for getting under the soft cap. ”

    Wave,

    I want to be real clear here. I’m not in any way blaming the Steinbrenners.

    They Yankees are a privately held, family business. The owners are now operating in a regulatory environment where the “sticks” and “carrots” you so aptly describe have become amplified.

    In many ways they are simply behaving as rational actors to the new incentives in place. Those incentives have altered the grain of what utilities they seek to maximize.

    As a fan I’m not going to be happy about this. I have no interest in rooting for the Yankees enahnaced profitability. But I more than understand their right to do so. They own the team. End of story.

    My main point speaks to the second point you made:

    “I just find it interesting that there are Yankee fans who don’t see the writing on the wall.”

    The Steinbrenners are free to maximize profits. But this whole charade to obfuscate the truth is just cynical spin. That’s the part I really find distasteful.

  172. MTU March 2nd, 2012 at 5:10 pm

    WYH-

    IYO, what exactly is that “handwriting on the wall” ?

    Just curious to see if we are on the same page.

    TIA.

  173. BryanV21 March 2nd, 2012 at 5:11 pm

    “Here we go again with the top picks remark”

    Look at the players giving them the most in MLB and prove me wrong.

    Wow!

  174. Irreverent Discourse March 2nd, 2012 at 5:11 pm

    Isn’t the real problem here that the way the Yankees were operating, pushing their payroll north of $200mil and ignoring the luzury tax penalties? That they were basically being “really stupid” for the last few years and are now trying to real in the stupidity since the penalties for being stupid are not increasing?

  175. Best To Ever Do It March 2nd, 2012 at 5:11 pm

    BryanV21 March 2nd, 2012 at 5:10 pm

    “Hughes?”

    I’m sorry, since when his Hughes “done” or “finished”? I thought he was being looked at as a starter this season, with upside at least in the “mid-rotation” area.

    —————————————

    Mid rotation? He was suppose to be the ace of the staff

  176. Jerkface March 2nd, 2012 at 5:11 pm

    BTW, those not on the active roster will not make the league minimum of $480,000, or even the $400,000 you mentioned. A player has to be in MLB to make that much. They don’t make nearly that much in the minors, especially the majority of the players on the 40-man who are not in AAA or on contracts like the one Brackman was.

    The optionally assigned contracts are valued at league minimum. Because you ‘purchase’ the contract, thus paying them league minimum, then optionally assign them to the minors.

  177. GreenBeret7 March 2nd, 2012 at 5:12 pm

    If the Colts cut Peyton Manning loose, i wonder if the Bears go after him. They haven’t had a legitimate quarterback since Billy Wade and George Blanda.

  178. Irreverent Discourse March 2nd, 2012 at 5:13 pm

    That’s the part I really find distasteful.

    Is it not equally distasteful to assume that they are making the move to “line their own pockets” and not because it is a sound financial decision?

  179. BryanV21 March 2nd, 2012 at 5:14 pm

    “Mid rotation? He was suppose to be the ace of the staff”

    LOL, yes, but being a mid-rotation starter is not a bad thing. That still helps quite a bit. Stop looking at what a player WAS projected for, and start looking at what they are worth NOW. You’d make a really bad fantasy baseball owner.

    “The optionally assigned contracts are valued at league minimum. Because you ‘purchase’ the contract, thus paying them league minimum, then optionally assign them to the minors.”

    I don’t believe that’s correct, as I’ve read that one reason you can’t figure out the payroll exactly is because those minor leaguers will not make that much money. But I don’t have the links to prove it to you or me, so I’ll just go with “that may be right, so I’ll back off”.

  180. Best To Ever Do It March 2nd, 2012 at 5:14 pm

    BryanV21 March 2nd, 2012 at 5:11 pm

    “Here we go again with the top picks remark”

    Look at the players giving them the most in MLB and prove me wrong.

    Wow!

    ———————————-

    Was Shield a 1st round pick, what about Crawford when he was there, what about what about Hellickson, etc.

  181. austinmac March 2nd, 2012 at 5:15 pm

    Bret,

    I see no way the Yankees would be involved in Hamels, Cain or any other expensive contract except perhaps Cano. Their free agencies come at a time they will not spend big. I would be shocked.

    No bets, however. I prefer you to be right.

  182. Best To Ever Do It March 2nd, 2012 at 5:16 pm

    GreenBeret7 March 2nd, 2012 at 5:12 pm

    If the Colts cut Peyton Manning loose, i wonder if the Bears go after him. They haven’t had a legitimate quarterback since Billy Wade and George Blanda.

    ————————

    Bears have Cutler. He’s no where near Peyton but teams like that aren’t going to dump their guy.

  183. BryanV21 March 2nd, 2012 at 5:16 pm

    “Was Shield a 1st round pick, what about Crawford when he was there, what about what about Hellickson, etc.”

    Anybody can cherry-pick players or stats to prove a point, but overall you can’t tell me that top picks like Evan Longoria have not made a huge difference for a team that doesn’t spend big on free agents.

  184. BryanV21 March 2nd, 2012 at 5:17 pm

    btw, Crawford was a 2nd round pick… a high 2nd round pick. So their advantage was still a big one.

  185. MTU March 2nd, 2012 at 5:18 pm

    Matt Moore was an 8th round selection.

    ;)

  186. Best To Ever Do It March 2nd, 2012 at 5:18 pm

    BryanV21 March 2nd, 2012 at 5:14 pm

    “Mid rotation? He was suppose to be the ace of the staff”

    LOL, yes, but being a mid-rotation starter is not a bad thing. That still helps quite a bit. Stop looking at what a player WAS projected for, and start looking at what they are worth NOW. You’d make a really bad fantasy baseball owner.

    —————————-

    Why play fantasy baseball when the real thing is more fascinating.(No disrespect to anyone who plays fantasy sports). What is Hughes worth exactly? We’re talking about a pitcher who has had a few bright moments but still waiting for him to put it together.

  187. Jerkface March 2nd, 2012 at 5:20 pm

    I don’t believe that’s correct, as I’ve read that one reason you can’t figure out the payroll exactly is because those minor leaguers will not make that much money. But I don’t have the links to prove it to you or me, so I’ll just go with “that may be right, so I’ll back off”.

    It says so in the CBA?

    the sum of the yearly Salaries (as determined in accordance
    with Section E below and as allocated among Clubs in
    accordance with this Section C) attributable to that Contract Year
    of all Players under a Uniform Player’s Contract with the Club
    for that Contract Year (including optionally assigned contracts);

  188. GreenBeret7 March 2nd, 2012 at 5:20 pm

    Jay Cutler isn’t all that much. Numbers have gone down in 3 straight years.

  189. Wave Your Hat March 2nd, 2012 at 5:21 pm

    “IYO, what exactly is that “handwriting on the wall” ?”

    The environment post-2013 will not be as happy an environment for Yankee fans as the period 1996-2013 was. The Yanks will labor under a significant disadvantage (when compared to 1996-2013) through 2016 because of ARod’s and Tex’s contracts (probably). The Yanks won’t be able to spend their way out of injuries and poor judgment.

    In short, while the Yanks will still have more money than most teams, they won’t be in the dominant position they were from 1996 through today. They will remain successful, but with less successthan they have had.

  190. Best To Ever Do It March 2nd, 2012 at 5:21 pm

    BryanV21 March 2nd, 2012 at 5:16 pm

    “Was Shield a 1st round pick, what about Crawford when he was there, what about what about Hellickson, etc.”

    Anybody can cherry-pick players or stats to prove a point, but overall you can’t tell me that top picks like Evan Longoria have not made a huge difference for a team that doesn’t spend big on free agents.

    ——————————————-

    “Anybody can cherry-pick players or stats to prove a point”

    You asked for examples and I gave them

    True Longoria is a huge plus for the team but ppl not just on here but in general always shoot down the Rays by saying of course they have done well look at all their top picks.

  191. BryanV21 March 2nd, 2012 at 5:21 pm

    “Why play fantasy baseball when the real thing is more fascinating.(No disrespect to anyone who plays fantasy sports). What is Hughes worth exactly? We’re talking about a pitcher who has had a few bright moments but still waiting for him to put it together.”

    Hughes is not done! The guy’s not 32 years old or anything. Stop letting the past cloud what the future could hold.

    BTW, saying that somebody should play the real thing instead of fantasy is about the dumbest thing I’ve heard. At least it’s the one of the worst responses I’ve heard lately.

  192. Best To Ever Do It March 2nd, 2012 at 5:22 pm

    GreenBeret7 March 2nd, 2012 at 5:20 pm

    Jay Cutler isn’t all that much. Numbers have gone down in 3 straight years.

    —————————–

    True but would Peyton even want to play in Chicago?

  193. m March 2nd, 2012 at 5:22 pm

    Too bad Price was gone by the time it was the Yankees turn.

  194. stuckey March 2nd, 2012 at 5:23 pm

    “I just find it interesting that there are Yankee fans who don’t see the writing on the wall.”

    Wave, I can only speak for myself, but I see the writing on the wall, I just don’t care.

    For the last 24 hours I’ve seen people defiantly defend the Yankees being the Evil Empire. They want the Yankees to run roughshot over everyone in their path.

    …expect the fans.

    They want the Evil Empire to rape and pillage other kingdoms but be really, really benevolent sovereigns to their loyal subjects.

    “Be evil FOR us, not TO us” is the expectation I suppose.

    Well, okay, good luck with that one :-)

  195. LGY March 2nd, 2012 at 5:23 pm

    I just listened to Kay’s interview of Hal.

    Today I can say for certain Hal did indeed consult a PR person, because Kay has another career in slow pitch softball.

  196. GreenBeret7 March 2nd, 2012 at 5:24 pm

    Manning will go with however pays him and gives him a chance to play.

  197. BryanV21 March 2nd, 2012 at 5:25 pm

    “the sum of the yearly Salaries (as determined in accordance
    with Section E below and as allocated among Clubs in
    accordance with this Section C) attributable to that Contract Year
    of all Players under a Uniform Player’s Contract with the Club
    for that Contract Year (including optionally assigned contracts);”

    Where does that say that all players on the 40-man roster make the MLB league minimum when figuring out the payroll for Luxury Tax purposes?

    You said since a team purchases a player’s contract they make the league minimum. That’s true, but the Yankees only purchase a player’s contract when bringing them up from the minors. And even then the player makes a pro-rated amount of the league minimum. So if a AAA guy gets called up at mid-season, and stays with the team the rest of the year, they will make $240,000 + what they made in the minors the first half of the year.

    I don’t see where that says all players on the 40-man make $480,000.

  198. Wave Your Hat March 2nd, 2012 at 5:25 pm

    “Wave, I can only speak for myself, but I see the writing on the wall, I just don’t care.”

    Fair enough. I can’t understand not caring, but I’m just one guy.

  199. CB March 2nd, 2012 at 5:25 pm

    “The Yankees are walking into territory they’ve never walked in during my lifetime. There was never a section of Yankee history when George owned the team that was about maximizing profits over building the perfect beast.”

    G.Love,

    The business model George set up was one in which most of the financial returns accrued would come in the for of expanded equity value of the team rather than year to year margins.

    That model was wildly successful for him and it allowed him to align the team with his passions.

    But as with other sports owning families – like the Glazers – sports is no longer a secondary source of wealth. It is the primary source of the family’s wealth.

    And when a patriarch passes on this kind of asset to his children cash often becomes an issue. It’s one thing to have wealth locked up in an illiquid form when you are the sole owner. But when that has to get passed on and “divided” to multiple children and grandchildren it’s really not nearly as simple or easy anymore.

    This happens all of the time.

    So none of this is really surprising.

    The new CBA basically has a salary cap in it. How this got by the players – no idea. Horrible move for them. But it is what it is. It’s changed the incentive structure for the Yankees. That’s what it was meant to do. And it’s working.

    But yeah – this is uncharted territory now.

    I could see this coming with the Pineda trade. If they pass on Hamels or not resign cano and granderson (which I’m not guaranteeing in any way, just thinking its’s the most consistent, logical extension of this strategy) then that we’ll have seen this strategy come to true fruition in the near term operations of the franchise.

    As a fan I find very little to be happy with.

    At some point “winning” the business side of the game became a rooting end point for a certain set of baseball fans. I have little interest in that.

    As long as the Yankees are a viably run business with acceptable debt structure relative to their revenues and use their funds intelligently to put the best team possible on the field I’m happy. But that’s a minimal threshold.

    They can do so if they want. But I’m not going to be sitting here rooting for their increased profitability.

  200. Irreverent Discourse March 2nd, 2012 at 5:25 pm

    jerkface – You remember the question I asked you yesterday about AAV? What you just posted doesn’t seem to indicate what you said it did.

    It seems to say that the single year obligations determine if you are “over the cap”, then at that point the AAV obligations of all your contracts determine your cap number and penalty.

  201. Wave Your Hat March 2nd, 2012 at 5:26 pm

    Got to run. Have fun.

  202. BryanV21 March 2nd, 2012 at 5:26 pm

    Per River Avenue Blues….

    “The remaining 15 players on the 40-man roster will cost less than the league minimum since they’ll earn a different salary in the minors”

    You can read their payroll breakdown here – http://riveraveblues.com/2012/.....our-64412/

  203. Irreverent Discourse March 2nd, 2012 at 5:27 pm

    LGY – Did you think that someone employed by Hal was going to grill him with tough or controversial questions in an interview?

  204. Jerkface March 2nd, 2012 at 5:28 pm

    You said since a team purchases a player’s contract they make the league minimum. That’s true, but the Yankees only purchase a player’s contract when bringing them up from the minors. And even then the player makes a pro-rated amount of the league minimum. So if a AAA guy gets called up at mid-season, and stays with the team the rest of the year, they will make $240,000 + what they made in the minors the first half of the year.

    I don’t see where that says all players on the 40-man make $480,000.

    The value of an optionally assigned contract is its purchase price of the league minimum.

  205. Jerkface March 2nd, 2012 at 5:29 pm

    Here you go ID:

    A Uniform Player’s Contract with a term of more than one (1)
    championship season (“Multi-Year Contract”) shall be deemed to
    have a Salary in each Guaranteed Year equal to the “Average Annual
    Value” of the Contract (plus any bonuses subsequently included
    by operation of Section E(4) below). “Average Annual Value” shall
    be calculated as follows: the sum of (a) the Base Salary in each
    Guaranteed Year plus (b) any portion of a Signing Bonus (or any
    other payment that this Article deems to be a Signing Bonus) attributed
    to a Guaranteed Year in accordance with Section E(3) below
    plus (c) any deferred compensation or annuity compensation costs
    attributed to a Guaranteed Year in accordance with Section E(6)
    below shall be divided by the number of Guaranteed Years.

    The sum of yearly salaries as explained in Section E, which is where the above comes from

  206. Best To Ever Do It March 2nd, 2012 at 5:29 pm

    “Hughes is not done! The guy’s not 32 years old or anything. Stop letting the past cloud what the future could hold.”

    Because the past tells us what Hughes has done in his career. He’s had some good moments but his career has been a mixed bag at this point.

    “BTW, saying that somebody should play the real thing instead of fantasy is about the dumbest thing I’ve heard. At least it’s the one of the worst responses I’ve heard lately.”

    When I said the real thing is more fascinating I meant I prefer to watch baseball rather than getting involved in fantasy baseball. Besides you’re the one that brought it up not me.

  207. Crawdaddy March 2nd, 2012 at 5:29 pm

    “If the Yankees are going to do this – and it’s completely within their rights to do so – then just stop the ridiculous spin and just be up front about it. This is nonsense.”

    CB,

    It would be pretty stupid for the Yankees to admit that they just want to increase their profit margins. It’s true that some of us more knowledgeable fans have an understanding of what’s really taking place here, but for the majority of their fanbase, they might buy this spin which is good PR move for them.

    I’ve been screaming for two years now that they haven’t done enough in the draft or IFA market. Sure, it looks like they’re getting better at scouting talent and acquiring under the radar talent, but the last big IFA signing was Sanchez in 2009. IMO, there is a lot of truth that the failures of the 2007 draft has affected later draft budgets. It has always been my belief that Hal and his siblings have put the squeeze on their baseball operation people, by decreasing their amateur budgets while still maintaining a high major league payroll. To me, that’s shortsighted on their part.

    Anyhow, I expect Cashman and others that work for he Yankees to continue this spin because that’s their job to do so, otherwise, they wouldn’t be employed long by the Steinbrenner family.

  208. BryanV21 March 2nd, 2012 at 5:29 pm

    Sorry, but the wording you gave does not tell me I, nor Mike at River Ave Blues, is wrong. I won’t go as far as to say you’re wrong, as I don’t know with 100% certainty, but I’m going with what I said before.

  209. Ys Guy March 2nd, 2012 at 5:31 pm

    ” My owner says yes more and his family has said yes on behalf of this franchise more than no when their GM asks for something. We’ve been very fortunate as a Yankee fan base and blessed for a long time by that.”

    we have been fortunate and more people should appreciate that, imo…

  210. Best To Ever Do It March 2nd, 2012 at 5:31 pm

    GreenBeret7 March 2nd, 2012 at 5:24 pm

    Manning will go with however pays him and gives him a chance to play.

    ————————–

    He’s going to play in cold Chicago weather with a bad neck?

  211. Jerkface March 2nd, 2012 at 5:31 pm

    In reality, those last 15 players will end up making something like $4-5M combined,

    So they’ll make 1-2 million less than I said? These are bloggers trying to understand the same thing I’m looking at. As I read it, they will count their league minimum salary. I’m not a lawyer nor an account privy to the final payroll that teams submit, so I could be incorrect, but that is my reading of it.

  212. MTU March 2nd, 2012 at 5:31 pm

    WYH-

    Thanks for your take.

    I just wanted a clarification of what you meant.

    I’m not sure I agree with your final conclusion though.

    Perhaps their judgement has improved significantly as an organization ?

    As an example, I cite their patience with Banuelos and Betances.

    The Yankees I am familiar with from recent times would not be waiting till next year to utilize them.

    They are behind the curve a bit on position guys but the pipeline is strong and hopefully will bear significant fruit in a few more years, i.e. Williams, Santana, Sanchez, Murphy, Campos, etc.

    I also think Romine can help if given sufficent time to develop.

    If the goal to get under the cap is temporary which I believe it is then the money spigot will open again somewhat after that time.

    There is a bit of a transition here. That’s how I see as of now.

    Sorry for the long post. I always respect your opinion.

    Not nearly as pessimistic as you seem to be.

    :)

  213. CB March 2nd, 2012 at 5:32 pm

    “The environment post-2013 will not be as happy an environment for Yankee fans as the period 1996-2013 was. The Yanks will labor under a significant disadvantage (when compared to 1996-2013) through 2016 because of ARod’s and Tex’s contracts (probably). The Yanks won’t be able to spend their way out of injuries and poor judgment.

    In short, while the Yanks will still have more money than most teams, they won’t be in the dominant position they were from 1996 through today. They will remain successful, but with less successthan they have had.”

    Wave,

    Great summary. Very much agree.

    The real cherry on top of all of this of course was Hank shackling the franchise with Alex’s contract and now ownership becoming laser focused on a total salary target.

    That’s a very difficult combination to balance.

    I always knew the payroll structure would come down, but I hoped it would do so in ways which maximized flexibility given the huge liabilities the team had already signed up for, often foolishly.

    How bad does Soriano’s deal look now?

    They just waste money like that and a year later they’re repeating the mantra of 189M over and over.

  214. BryanV21 March 2nd, 2012 at 5:32 pm

    “When I said the real thing is more fascinating I meant I prefer to watch baseball rather than getting involved in fantasy baseball. Besides you’re the one that brought it up not me.”

    And with this I’m done with you. To think that somebody has to choose between playing fantasy baseball or watching it is dumb… dumb… DUMB.

    And my comment about you being a bad fantasy player deals with the fact that you go by what a player will or won’t do, not what they did in the past. Which is an idea shared by every fantasy “expert” I’ve ever read.

  215. blake March 2nd, 2012 at 5:32 pm

    I think the Yankees will do what it takes to keep Cano if he stays on his current path….but there will be collateral damage from that especially if they allow him to reach free agency.

    Im expecting them to let Swisher walk, pass on Hamels, and probably pass on Miguel Montero…..they are putting their eggs in the young pitching they’ve gathered to get below the 189 threshold …..hopefully it pans out and hopefully the lineup can fend off father time long enough for their position player prospects to develop.

  216. stuckey March 2nd, 2012 at 5:32 pm

    “At some point “winning” the business side of the game became a rooting end point for a certain set of baseball fans. I have little interest in that.”

    Ironic, because I’ve been saying the exact same thing for 24 hours.

    Much time has been spent justifying the equity in the current system by saying the Yankees deserve their advantage by being a superior business model.

    It has been ALL about turning their business model muscles into on-field advantage in unlimited fashion.

    Better be prepared for a fight CB, because some folks here don’t take kindly to that as a point of crititicism.

  217. BryanV21 March 2nd, 2012 at 5:35 pm

    I think $4m is high for those on the 40-man that will not see significant time in MLB. The average AAA salary is like $50,000.

  218. CB March 2nd, 2012 at 5:36 pm

    “It would be pretty stupid for the Yankees to admit that they just want to increase their profit margins. ”

    Craw,

    Sure. But it would be almost equally stupid for me as a fan to believe them.

    The Steinbrenners own the team. They are free to do with it as they will.

    But as I fan I have the right to disagree with the direction they are going in. This isn’t just close your eyes and fall in line.

    It’s just so obvious what’s going on. Their spin on the situation is cynical.

    They can do it. But by no means do I have to like it.

  219. MTU March 2nd, 2012 at 5:36 pm

    blake-

    That’s sort of how I see it.

    After 14 the spigot is open again.

    At least for a while.

    Need a bit of luck in the meantime.

    ;)

  220. Jerkface March 2nd, 2012 at 5:36 pm

    Bryan,

    My reasoning behind this is that teams have to offer contracts to players on the 40 man. They can offer whatever they like, but it must be offered. So when the player is optionally assigned they do not lose that contract.

    I can see why you or Mike Axisa would go the other way.

  221. tomingeorgia March 2nd, 2012 at 5:37 pm

    This is not fun. Going to see the River Dogs in April. THAT will be fun. As well as the games this weekend.

  222. BryanV21 March 2nd, 2012 at 5:37 pm

    Sorry, I can’t find a definitive answer to the AAA player’s salary. I’m reading it could be higher than that $50,000. Possible $70,000.

  223. Crawdaddy March 2nd, 2012 at 5:38 pm

    “The Steinbrenners are free to maximize profits. But this whole charade to obfuscate the truth is just cynical spin. That’s the part I really find distasteful.”

    CB,

    This is what I don’t get from you. Do you actually think it’s smart for them to admit the truth about maximizing profits to the most demanding fanbase in American sports? I can understand why cynical spin is distasteful to you, but I think it would be dumb for them to just come out an admit that it’s all about maximizing profits when they’re trying to keep attendance and television ratings up. It’s entirely possible that by not admitting the truth, that they get lucky with some of these young pitchers/players and they turn out to be studs and don’t miss a beat in the coming years with a less than 200M payroll without upsetting their demanding fanbase by admitting the truth.

  224. blake March 2nd, 2012 at 5:38 pm

    MTU,

    They never listen to us anyway ;)

  225. Irreverent Discourse March 2nd, 2012 at 5:39 pm

    I don’t understand why they would suddenly need to “profit more” off of the Yankees. It’s more likely that their hand has been forced by the ridiculous amount of money they would have to pay in 2014 and going forward if they don’t reset the tax penalty.

    Their desire for “profits” is being made up by posters here.

  226. BryanV21 March 2nd, 2012 at 5:40 pm

    “Bryan,

    My reasoning behind this is that teams have to offer contracts to players on the 40 man. They can offer whatever they like, but it must be offered. So when the player is optionally assigned they do not lose that contract.

    I can see why you or Mike Axisa would go the other way.”

    The only time I’ve seen the words “the Yankees have purchased the contract of Player X…” is when they call them up to MLB. Not when they acquire them and send them to the minors. And who’s to say they have to offer them a contract that equals the MLB minimum?

  227. Crawdaddy March 2nd, 2012 at 5:40 pm

    “Sure. But it would be almost equally stupid for me as a fan to believe them.

    The Steinbrenners own the team. They are free to do with it as they will.

    But as I fan I have the right to disagree with the direction they are going in. This isn’t just close your eyes and fall in line.

    It’s just so obvious what’s going on. Their spin on the situation is cynical.

    They can do it. But by no means do I have to like it.”

    CB,

    I gotcha now! I think we’re on the same page here. I don’t like it either, but it’s their business.

  228. GreenBeret7 March 2nd, 2012 at 5:41 pm

    CB March 2nd, 2012 at 5:25 pm
    “The Yankees are walking into territory they’ve never walked in during my lifetime. There was never a section of Yankee history when George owned the team that was about maximizing profits over building the perfect beast.”

    ————————————————————————————————————————-

    I’m not so sure GMS wouldn’t agree with Hal. Paying out $100 mil in one year and losing top picks in the bargain to other owners with more money than you to use that to bid against the Yankees was not something GMs was happy about. There’s enough players (pitching in particular) that NY can unload to get the Yanks under. The only way they’ll let players of value (Martin, Granderson, Swisher) go is if they have farm replacements ready to go. There certainly nothing on the market over the next two year that are better. M. Montero and Napoli will never hit the market and there aren’t any better or cheaper corner outfielders than Swisher on the market, either.

  229. BryanV21 March 2nd, 2012 at 5:41 pm

    You’ve got reason to be cynical about the owners just taking the extra money and running, and you’ve got reason to believe owners will put that saved money back into the team.

    Great… it sounds like you need to move on, because you’re not getting anywhere trying to change each other’s minds. And you probably won’t anyway.

  230. Best To Ever Do It March 2nd, 2012 at 5:41 pm

    “And with this I’m done with you. To think that somebody has to choose between playing fantasy baseball or watching it is dumb… dumb… DUMB.”

    SMH I can’ tellyou’re bored and just looking for a fight where did I say anyone had to choose between the two. There are fans on here that play fantasy and I don’t force them to choose between the two.

  231. blake March 2nd, 2012 at 5:42 pm

    Two things on Cash’s to do list

    1) lock Cano up
    2) aquire a young and cost controlled bat that can play the outfield corners or 3B.

    Both of these things will help the longterm situation and budget going forward…..

  232. Jerkface March 2nd, 2012 at 5:43 pm

    The only time I’ve seen the words “the Yankees have purchased the contract of Player X…” is when they call them up to MLB. Not when they acquire them and send them to the minors. And who’s to say they have to offer them a contract that equals the MLB minimum?

    The rules of baseball. Minor leaguers do not make the league minimum, but being on the 40 man is special stuff for a player.

    Teams ‘purchase the contract of’ when players are first added to the 40 man, not when they are called up.

    Example: The Nationals purchased the contract of catcher Wilson Ramos from Triple-A Syracuse on Wednesday and placed catcher Wil Nieves on the temporary leave list

  233. BryanV21 March 2nd, 2012 at 5:43 pm

    I can’t help myself. Pointing out the idiocy of some is a pasttime of mine…

    You said you don’t play fantasy baseball because you prefer the real thing. That implies that one must choose between one or the other.

    I do both, so why can’t you?

  234. stuckey March 2nd, 2012 at 5:44 pm

    “I could see this coming with the Pineda trade. If they pass on Hamels or not resign cano and granderson (which I’m not guaranteeing in any way, just thinking its’s the most consistent, logical extension of this strategy) then that we’ll have seen this strategy come to true fruition in the near term operations of the franchise.

    “As a fan I find very little to be happy with.

    “At some point “winning” the business side of the game became a rooting end point for a certain set of baseball fans. I have little interest in that.”

    ____________

    I have to ask, CB… this passage strikes me as a little contradictory. How you an express disinterest in the “winning” the business side when you speak of acquiring Cole Hamels as if the line starts behind the Yankees for his services.

    You well know that means flexing muscles other teams don’t have, including the team he’d be leaving.

    Strikes me as assuming the Yankees can outbid one of the other 3 richest teams on the game, which happens to be his incumbent team is very much being a fan of the their business side.

    Seems more like you don’t like the changes to their business side, which is not the same thing.

  235. BryanV21 March 2nd, 2012 at 5:45 pm

    “The only time I’ve seen the words “the Yankees have purchased the contract of Player X…” is when they call them up to MLB. Not when they acquire them and send them to the minors. And who’s to say they have to offer them a contract that equals the MLB minimum?

    The rules of baseball. Minor leaguers do not make the league minimum, but being on the 40 man is special stuff for a player.

    Teams ‘purchase the contract of’ when players are first added to the 40 man, not when they are called up.

    Example: The Nationals purchased the contract of catcher Wilson Ramos from Triple-A Syracuse on Wednesday and placed catcher Wil Nieves on the temporary leave list”

    The Nats purchased the contract of Ramos from Syracuse because Ramos is going to be placed on the 25-man/active roster in MLB. Ramos was already on the 40-man roster.

  236. Crawdaddy March 2nd, 2012 at 5:45 pm

    “Their desire for “profits” is being made up by posters here.”

    Listen, only the Steinbrenners and Cashman know the real truth so we’re left to formulate our own opinions regarding what’s about to take place. I don’t have a problem with you thinking one way, but that doesn’t mean you’re right either. Who knows for sure? Only those select individuals in the actual know do, but as a fan, I can state my opinion here whether you agree with or not.

  237. Irreverent Discourse March 2nd, 2012 at 5:46 pm

    Crawdaddy – You are right, who knows either way. Why am I the one being singled out and not the person who started the conversation then? I wasn’t even talking to you.

  238. Best To Ever Do It March 2nd, 2012 at 5:47 pm

    BryanV21 March 2nd, 2012 at 5:43 pm

    I can’t help myself. Pointing out the idiocy of some is a pasttime of mine…

    You said you don’t play fantasy baseball because you prefer the real thing. That implies that one must choose between one or the other.

    I do both, so why can’t you?

    ———————-

    I’m not into it. I have nothing against it. I have friends that do it and don’t mind that they do. You’re the thing going all out to defend fantasy sports.

  239. pat March 2nd, 2012 at 5:47 pm

    If this is just about maximizing profit, shame on Hal but I think it might be more about where the money doesn’t go rather than just puting more in their pocket.

    From a business perspective, it seems the desire to get under threshold is about more than maximizing profits or else why wait for 2014 and not just slash payroll now?

    I’m sure someone will correct me if I’m wrong but I believe 2014 will be the first time the Yankees can control what other teams can receive in revenue sharing money by bringing their payroll under threshold.

    Taking that money out of some teams pockets as well as taking the 50% of luxury tax money that goes to fund player benefits out of all teams pockets cuts into every teams budget. That will force teams to invest their own money to maintain the status quo or reduce their payroll to maintain the status quo.

  240. m March 2nd, 2012 at 5:48 pm

    ID,
    Agreed. I think it’s more about avoiding something (ridiculous taxes) than wanting to line their pockets even more.

    If they get it down to $189M, you can bet they’ll start spending again. And we’re talking tens of millions not fifty that they’re trying to trim. Plus, the threshold will increase year to year.

    Basically they just need to get out from under Arod’s contract. That frees up some room right there

  241. LGY March 2nd, 2012 at 5:48 pm

    M. Montero and Napoli will never hit the market and there aren’t any better or cheaper corner outfielders than Swisher on the market, either

    ——–

    “I’d love to be here, but I’ll test the market,” Napoli said. “Every player plays to get to free agency. But it’s not something I’m going to worry about. That’s why I have my agent.”

    “The Arizona Diamondbacks and catcher Miguel Montero say they have ended talks on a multiyear contract until after this season, when he will be a free agent.”

  242. Crawdaddy March 2nd, 2012 at 5:48 pm

    “Crawdaddy – You are right, who knows either way. Why am I the one being singled out and not the person who started the conversation then? I wasn’t even talking to you.”

    Why you being defensive with me? We’re just talking here with opposite and same opinions being expressed here.

  243. CB March 2nd, 2012 at 5:49 pm

    GB7,

    That very well could be the case. There are new rules in place that clearly give the Yankees strong financial reasons to get under the cap. Even George may have responded in that fashion.

    The point I was making is that given these rules the business model of the yankees is changing. That’s it. My main point there. It’s different than it was in the past.

  244. Irreverent Discourse March 2nd, 2012 at 5:49 pm

    The assumption that they are just doing this to “line their pockets’ is completely absurd. It is significantly more likely that they are doing this because they are literally giving money away for no good reason and to no great benefit every season, and in 2014 that penalty will skyrocket.

    The idea that they “need to make more money off of the yankees” is an insane concept considering what YES is worth.

    Some how I became the bad guy for suggesting that.

  245. GreenBeret7 March 2nd, 2012 at 5:50 pm

    Damned those cheap Steinbrenner pigs anyway. It’s our money and I say “Spend until it hurts”.

  246. BryanV21 March 2nd, 2012 at 5:51 pm

    “I’m not into it. I have nothing against it. I have friends that do it and don’t mind that they do. You’re the thing going all out to defend fantasy sports.”

    LOL. I’m not defending them, I’m saying you don’t have to choose between playing them and watching the real thing. You can do both. Therefore you’re statement saying you’d rather play the real thing is pointless, and frankly dumb.

    There.

  247. BryanV21 March 2nd, 2012 at 5:51 pm

    Regardless of anything fantasy, you’re responses are laughable at best.

  248. LGY March 2nd, 2012 at 5:51 pm

    Stuckey

    CB is not using “winning” the business side in the same manner you are.

    The exact opposite, in fact.

  249. Crawdaddy March 2nd, 2012 at 5:51 pm

    “Some how I became the bad guy for suggesting that.”

    Why are you the bad guy? There are those that share your opinion too. There are some that don’t and there is probably some that agree with certain points coming from both sides of this discussion.

  250. blake March 2nd, 2012 at 5:51 pm

    LGY has asked this before …….but it isto an interesting question….how were they planning on budgeting for Felix Hernandez if the Mariners had said yes to a trade for him?

  251. Best To Ever Do It March 2nd, 2012 at 5:52 pm

    BryanV21 March 2nd, 2012 at 5:51 pm

    “I’m not into it. I have nothing against it. I have friends that do it and don’t mind that they do. You’re the thing going all out to defend fantasy sports.”

    LOL. I’m not defending them, I’m saying you don’t have to choose between playing them and watching the real thing. You can do both. Therefore you’re statement saying you’d rather play the real thing is pointless, and frankly dumb.

    There.

    ————————————-

    Watch not play at least get what I said right :D

  252. Crawdaddy March 2nd, 2012 at 5:54 pm

    “LGY has asked this before …….but it isto an interesting question….how were they planning on budgeting for Felix Hernandez if the Mariners had said yes to a trade for him?”

    Blake,

    Now is an excellent question which is why I wish I was a fly on the wall during the Yankee organization’s discussions.

  253. BryanV21 March 2nd, 2012 at 5:54 pm

    I’m not going to spend more time getting your quotes exactly right, as I’ve already wasted enough time responding in the first place.

    And I like that you don’t argue whether they are dumb. lol

  254. CB March 2nd, 2012 at 5:54 pm

    Where did this evil “lining their pockets” issue come from?

    That’s not the connotation I’m using “profits” in. I’m not making any value judgement on that.

    As I’ve said over and over – the Steinbrenners won the team. It’s private. They are going to do with it what they will.

    I’m discussing profits in it’s definition. It’s a basic issue of finance – accounting and cashflow.

    That’s it.

    Revenue has to go somewhere. There are only so many buckets it goes in.

  255. Irreverent Discourse March 2nd, 2012 at 5:55 pm

    CB – I tried to ask you about that earlier, but you were concerned with other things.

  256. BryanV21 March 2nd, 2012 at 5:55 pm

    Jerkface – I have to take off but it’s cool talking to you. Sorry if I ever came off as disrespectful. I love trying to figure out payroll and such, so I can get too “into” things. See you around.

  257. Best To Ever Do It March 2nd, 2012 at 5:56 pm

    BryanV21 March 2nd, 2012 at 5:54 pm

    I’m not going to spend more time getting your quotes exactly right, as I’ve already wasted enough time responding in the first place.

    And I like that you don’t argue whether they are dumb. lol

    ————————-

    This could have ended a long time ago. We were talking about Hughes and you went on a fantasy sports crusade for no reason.

  258. blake March 2nd, 2012 at 5:57 pm

    If they are serious about 189 then a Felix Hernandez trade coukd have been a disaster when you consider the money and players involved……they would have had an awesome 1-2 punch…..but no farm system and no financial flexibility .

  259. Irreverent Discourse March 2nd, 2012 at 5:57 pm

    CB – The self-imposed regulatory environment of the industry has changed in ways that have incentivized the Yankees to divert resources from investment in the development of their core product and into increasing profit margins.

    You also said that, which severely implies that they are not reinvesting in anything but their pockets.

  260. blake March 2nd, 2012 at 6:00 pm

    The Steinbrenners can do whatever they want with their money…..but as a fan I just want them to win…..and so if they pass on Cole Hamels……or replace Nick Swisher with Rick Ankiel or somebody next year then I don’t have to feel good about it……

  261. GreenBeret7 March 2nd, 2012 at 6:00 pm

    CB March 2nd, 2012 at 5:49 pm
    GB7,

    That very well could be the case. There are new rules in place that clearly give the Yankees strong financial reasons to get under the cap. Even George may have responded in that fashion.

    The point I was making is that given these rules the business model of the yankees is changing. That’s it. My main point there. It’s different than it was in the past.

    ————————————————————————————————————————-

    Yes, but, unlike in the past, GMS was changing, too. back in the mid-70s, He’d sign anybody he thought could help, whether it made sense or not. By the mid- 2000s he had changed to going after one high priced name. In the 90s, he gets Randy Johnson AND Beltran and then, both Guerrero and Sheffield. He was changing in order to downsize and still put a winning team on the field. The re-signing of Rodriguez didn’t really affect anything after 2007. They still went out in 2008 and signed nearly half a billion dollars worth of ball players. NYYs made a mistake on Soriano and in the future, I don’t think Hal S, will get that involved in selecting players nor will he allow Levine to get involved. They may approve contracts but selecting what players they want may be a thing of the past.

  262. Best To Ever Do It March 2nd, 2012 at 6:00 pm

    blake March 2nd, 2012 at 5:57 pm

    If they are serious about 189 then a Felix Hernandez trade coukd have been a disaster when you consider the money and players involved

    ———————————-

    Which begs the question why did Cashman throw everything he could at trying to acquire the king if the 189 budget is something they are serious about?

  263. DONNYBROOK March 2nd, 2012 at 6:01 pm

    Cashman doing “damage control” regarding Hal’s stressing the $189 Mill by 2014 is hilarious. Yankee Universe is obviously in an uproar at the prospect of George’s Mighty Yankees turning into a nickel-and-dime operation that stresses $$$ over winning. Hal pulled a Hank with his comments about the 2014 budget goal, and compounded that mistake by wandering into the Hughes weight issue, and also put a ton of pressure by naming the young kids he is depending on to subsidize his 2014 budget. Hal Gekko needs to lay low and allow Cashman to finish his song-and-dance routine. Hal just flat-out stepped in it, and Cashman is now manning the pooper scooper.

  264. CB March 2nd, 2012 at 6:01 pm

    blake,

    That’s a good question. Hard to know exactly but cuts would have come from somewhere. I’d guess Swisher would definitely be gone after this season. They would likely have tried to dump Soriano’s salary even if it meant eating some money short term.

    I could also see them potentially trading Granderson.

  265. Irreverent Discourse March 2nd, 2012 at 6:03 pm

    Hal pulled a Hank with his comments

    I don’t know… Hals comments were perfectly fine and nothing like the atrocities that spew from Hank. Only overzealous fans bugged out about the comments, anyone that can look at the situation logically knows both Hal and Cashman’s comments make perfect sense.

  266. blake March 2nd, 2012 at 6:03 pm

    “Which begs the question why did Cashman throw everything he could at trying to acquire the king if the 189 budget is something they are serious about?”

    I really don’t know….doesn’t add up but that was the report. If you’ll give the Mariners your top prospects and pay Felix 20 million a year……then why wont you pay Cole Hamels 20 million?

  267. Crawdaddy March 2nd, 2012 at 6:03 pm

    “The Steinbrenners can do whatever they want with their money…..but as a fan I just want them to win…..and so if they pass on Cole Hamels……or replace Nick Swisher with Rick Ankiel or somebody next year then I don’t have to feel good about it……”

    Passing on Cole Hamels might be the right move though depending on what we see from Yankee pitchers this year and how their scouts have evaluated them. As to Swisher, he’s replacable.

  268. CB March 2nd, 2012 at 6:04 pm

    “The Steinbrenners can do whatever they want with their money…..but as a fan I just want them to win…..and so if they pass on Cole Hamels……or replace Nick Swisher with Rick Ankiel or somebody next year then I don’t have to feel good about it……”

    Agree. I’m not going to sit here and root for their operating margins. I want the team to stay solvent and financially healthy. But I have little interest in their rate of return.

  269. GreenBeret7 March 2nd, 2012 at 6:05 pm

    something in an article the other day about why Roberto Kelly was traded for Paul O’Neill. The reason given was that Kelly refused to move out of center field for Bernie Williams.

  270. m March 2nd, 2012 at 6:05 pm

    Whether it’s lining their own pockets or goes into payroll or scouting or minor league development, the Yankees get to decide where it goes. If it goes to luxury taxes, then probably close to none of it provides any real benefit to the Yankees themselves. 100% vs. close to 0%? Easy choice.

    I’m surprised it took so long for them to put their foot down. But I suspect this has much more to do with resetting the rate than trying to comply with the wishes of the league.

  271. stuckey March 2nd, 2012 at 6:05 pm

    “CB is not using “winning” the business side in the same manner you are.

    “The exact opposite, in fact.”

    Different, but not opposite.

    Yankees generating more revenue to be deeper in the black and the Yankees generating revenue to expand payroll are not the opposite of each other, they’re offshoots of the same foundation.

    Its about what you do with the revenue.

    I know the discussion I’ve been involved in LGY. Intense defense from prideful fans of the notion the Yankees earned their on-field advantage by being a superior business model.

    CB at first dismissed those fans, but at the same time (to me) seem to indicate a preference for the Yankees to simply make Hamels theirs, and we both know the means by which that would happen.

    Unless I’m misunderstanding (always open to that possibility) then my question TO CB stands.

  272. Best To Ever Do It March 2nd, 2012 at 6:05 pm

    blake March 2nd, 2012 at 6:03 pm

    “Which begs the question why did Cashman throw everything he could at trying to acquire the king if the 189 budget is something they are serious about?”

    I really don’t know….doesn’t add up but that was the report. If you’ll give the Mariners your top prospects and pay Felix 20 million a year……then why wont you pay Cole Hamels 20 million?

    ———————————————–

    Exactly it doesn’t make sense at all but I’m sure someone will find a way ;)

  273. Irreverent Discourse March 2nd, 2012 at 6:05 pm

    But I have little interest in their rate of return.

    So if the Yankees don’t lower their payroll and spend upwards of $300 to $400mil on their payroll because of the tax penalties, you don’t think that would effect their operation or ability to sign players of need when they are actually needed?

  274. Bret The Hitman March 2nd, 2012 at 6:05 pm

    Swisher – he gone!

  275. blake March 2nd, 2012 at 6:06 pm

    CB,

    Hate to say it….but their best strategy might be to shop Granderson to another contender next winter for some cost controlled position players…..that just seems un Yankee like but its something they probably should at least think about……

  276. CB March 2nd, 2012 at 6:06 pm

    Taking off for the day. Have a good weekend everyone. Enjoy spring training.

  277. GreenBeret7 March 2nd, 2012 at 6:07 pm

    Why in God’s name would you want to exchange Swisher for Ankiel? He can’t even win a full time spot with KC, Atlanta or Washington.

  278. stanzy March 2nd, 2012 at 6:07 pm

    I still don’t see why this is such a problem for some people. Look at it this way: If the Yankees don’t get under the threshold, their lux tax rate hits 50%. That means if the market puts an FA’s value at about $20M/yr, the Yankees have to value him at $30M/yr (and that doesn’t even take into account the fact that NY is a high income tax state, which is another real disadvantage the Yanks face against teams like Texas and TB). Not only that, it makes even the marginal, fill-out-the-40-man, players 50% more expensive. Considering a 5-year deal for that player, the Yankees have to weigh committing an extra $50M over what any of the competition would have to commit. It doesn’t matter how much you might think the Yankees “make enough money,” paying a $50M premium is not something anyone would do lightly. If they can get under for *just one year*, that $20M-for-$30M player becomes something more like a $20M-for-$23M player – and then they’re still looking at committing at least (’cause the rate goes up each year they’re over) $15M more than the competition.

    The other benefit to such a (self-imposed) cap is that should keep Hank from committing $250M+ to an aging player for 10 years, or Levine from feeling the need to “make a splash” and spend $35M on a need that doesn’t exist. My guess is Cashman is relishing this approach, even though it ostensibly makes it harder for him to g out and get whomever he want.

  279. CB March 2nd, 2012 at 6:08 pm

    Blake,

    Last comment – agreed. If the 189M strategy is concrete then they will likely need to seriously consider trading Granderson.

    As unpalatable as that sounds – it very well turn out to be for the “best” under given constraints.

    Take care.

  280. Crawdaddy March 2nd, 2012 at 6:10 pm

    A good discussion despite emotions getting a little hot.

  281. blake March 2nd, 2012 at 6:11 pm

    Have a good one CB

  282. LGY March 2nd, 2012 at 6:11 pm

    Yankees generating more revenue to be deeper in the black and the Yankees generating revenue to expand payroll are not the opposite of each other, they’re offshoots of the same foundation.

    Its about what you do with the revenue.

    I know the discussion I’ve been involved in LGY. Intense defense from prideful fans of the notion the Yankees earned their on-field advantage by being a superior business model.

    ——-

    That’s not what CB was talking about with his winning the business side comment.

    He’s talking about those fans that have become obsessed with with winning with a lower payroll or making “savy” signings like John Smoltz and Brad Penny.

  283. DONNYBROOK March 2nd, 2012 at 6:11 pm

    - ID -
    The Head Honcho of a large Corp is Never as specific as Hal was in that 6 minute chit-chat. That was just plain dumb on Hal’s part, and shows why Hal referenced spreadsheets, and budgets. The man has NO practical experience in his current role, which was obvious yesterday. The after-shocks are obvious even on this Blog.

  284. luis March 2nd, 2012 at 6:12 pm

    CB,

    Hello everyone, About your argument, i think you are right. Back in the 80′s the Leones del Caracas team ( Venezuela’s Yankees ) was owned by two people, eventually they died…..ten years later they sold the team….the reason….. too many relatives, some interested in the team some not so much, but all of them wanted money.

    You are spot on, they no longer want their equity in the team, they need profits to keep the different brothers and systers happy…. Pat M maybe right, there might a sell of the team by the end of this decade.

  285. Jerkface March 2nd, 2012 at 6:16 pm

    Bryan,

    Yea looks you’re right. I’ve only ever seen that in regards to adding a player to the 40 man, mostly I just see ‘recall from’ in terms of optioning up to the majors. The players must still be offered a league minimum contract though even if they get optioned and don’t actually get the money.

  286. stuckey March 2nd, 2012 at 6:18 pm

    “That’s not what CB was talking about with his winning the business side comment.

    “He’s talking about those fans that have become obsessed with with winning with a lower payroll or making “savy” signings like John Smoltz and Brad Penny.”

    How is that in principle different than fans “obsessed” with winning with a higher payroll and making superior resources, 50% taxation every dollar singing guys like Hamels?

  287. mick March 2nd, 2012 at 6:20 pm

    bad news on carl crawford?

  288. Irreverent Discourse March 2nd, 2012 at 6:21 pm

    donnybrook – I’m pretty sure Hal isn’t concerned about a bunch of over-zealous fans that picking apart every single printed word in pinstripes.

  289. LGY March 2nd, 2012 at 6:21 pm

    How is that in principle different than fans “obsessed” with winning with a higher payroll and making superior resources, 50% taxation every dollar singing guys like Hamels?

    ———–

    Because one principle is about wanting to see your team win baseball games. The other is wanting your team to be perceived a certain way.

  290. Bronx Jeers March 2nd, 2012 at 6:22 pm

    Since the luxury tax was instituted in 2003 the Yanks have paid over 200 million or roughly 90% of all fees collected throughout MLB. Do we not believe that this has had an effect on their bottom line? See if you can find out what their operating income has been over that timeframe. I bet you you’ll be surprised.

    I don’t blame the Steins for not wanting to give away that money anymore.

  291. ron March 2nd, 2012 at 6:24 pm

    After 2017,nobody is under contract for the yankees,and after 2016,only arod is left.

    Salaries are coming down,except for the elite players.
    The yankees will still outspend every team,and pay players less,while using the lt as the excuse.

    The yankees are just going to get better bargains for players because other teams are not going to pay either,and the yankees will say they have to stay competitive.

    Matter of fact,i bet cano,and granderson give the yankees some kind of discount,or it will cost the yankeesa little less,if they sign them,because of the new rules.

    No team,except for 1 or 2 comes near 189 million anyways,so the yankees still have an advantage.

    The difference between 189 million,and 225 million is only 36 million.

    Take away all the yankees wasted money,and it’s business as usual,for the most part.


Sponsored by:
 

Search

    Advertisement

    Follow

    Mobile

    Read The LoHud Yankees Blog on the go by navigating to the blog on your smartphone or mobile device's browser. No apps or downloads are required.

Advertisement

Place an ad

Call (914) 694-3581