Yankees win! Yankees win!

[M0oG0oGaiPan]

http://espn.go.com/blog/sweetspot/post/_/id/1253/yes-the-yankees-are-filthy-rich

 

[rh71]

And I'm not even a yankees fan, I just dislike the blind haters who look for excuses to discredit them. Homerism isnt with me.

You can't hide since we've got a better search feature now:
08-17-2001, 01:55 PM Train

BTW, im a Yankees fan nad have been since the mid 80's, I cheered for them back when they were bottom feeders as much as I do now as Champions.

So at what point did you stop being a Yankee fan after all those years?

 

[Fingolfin269]

You can't hide since we've got a better search feature now:
08-17-2001, 01:55 PM Train


So at what point did you stop being a Yankee fan after all those years?

Lol a working search is borderline dangerous.

 

[Train]

You can't hide since we've got a better search feature now:
08-17-2001, 01:55 PM Train


So at what point did you stop being a Yankee fan after all those years?

You didnt have to search. In this very thread, '94 strike. Haven't cared about baseball since.

 

[rh71]

^ if after 20 years it's true that you take no joy in the championship they just won, then I would applaud you. But I'm sure I won't have to.

 

[Train]

^ if after 20+ years it's true that you take no joy in the championship they just won, then I would applaud you. But I'm sure I won't have to.

I'll admit I got a LITTLE excited in 96 because I hadnt seen them win in my lifetime. I got disgusted (not with them) but with all my friends and everyone else saying I was a band wagon fan because I wasnt with the crowd in cheering against the yankees. (My friends are all either Tigers, Blue Jays, or Indians fans, and hate the yankees)

But after that I didnt even care when they won in 98 or 02, and can honestly say I didnt watch a single pro baseball game this season. not even in the playoffs.

 

[HopJokey]

Even if we had a salary cap in the MLB, what prevents the Yankees (or any other highly funded team) from spending a boatload on scouting for talent? They already have a huge advantage here and I don't see how you can prevent that part.

Maybe modify the drafting rules?

 

[SP33Demon]

It flew over MY head? Yet you didnt address anything in my last post.

Also, correlation != causation. Yankees are one team. How many times in the past 15 years did the second highest paid team get in? The 3rd?

You cant prove either way that the Yankees are good because they are paid more, or they are paid more because they are good. Or are both of these characteristics a product over ANOTHER cause, such as a front office that really wants to win? These issues of course arent addressed either.

And I'm not even a yankees fan, I just dislike the blind haters who look for excuses to discredit them. Homerism isnt with me.

What part of that [(13 of past 15 - 86.78%) and won 5 of 13 (38.46% - over 1/3 of them)] is a correlation? That's damning evidence of a causation, and if you read Moneyball you'd already know that making the playoffs relative to payroll has been proven to be causation. What other team makes the playoffs as much? None. What other team that has made the playoffs 5 times or more has a statistically significant higher % of winning a title? None. In fact, only 2 teams have even won two titles in the past 15 years vs NY's: Bosox - top 3 in payroll (2 of 9 playoff appearances - 22.2%), and the Marlins (2 of 2 playoff appearances - 100%, 1997 they were top 5 payroll but overall not enough data).

There will always be anomalies due to poor management (METS!) but it's already been proven by Moneyball that $ has very high % causative (not correlative) effect of a team's chance to making the playoffs. The fact that you dismiss it as a correlation shows that you choose to ignore it and/or haven't read Moneyball.

 

[Train]

What part of that [(13 of past 15 - 86.78%) and won 5 of 13 (38.46% - over 1/3 of them)] is a correlation? That's damning evidence of a causation, and if you read Moneyball you'd already know that making the playoffs relative to payroll has been proven to be causation. What other team makes the playoffs as much? None. What other team that has made the playoffs 5 times or more has a statistically significant higher % of winning a title? None. In fact, only 2 teams have even won two titles in the past 15 years vs NY's: Bosox - top 3 in payroll (2 of 9 playoff appearances - 22.2%), and the Marlins (2 of 2 playoff appearances - 100%, 1997 they were top 5 payroll but overall not enough data).

There will always be anomalies due to poor management (METS!) but it's already been proven by Moneyball that $ has very high % causative (not correlative) effect of a team's chance to making the playoffs. The fact that you dismiss it as a correlation shows that you choose to ignore it and/or haven't read Moneyball.

Your still missing the main point of the whole correlation/causation issue.

Are they paid more because they are good? Or good because they are paid more? Or are both of these the result of a 3rd characteristic? You can't say either which way.

 

[SP33Demon]

i lived in nyc for 34 years.
i moved to colorado 2 years ago.
that doesn't mean i cant or wont root for the yanks.
i also root for the giants too. and as much as i hate to say it, the islanders and the knicks.

i dont know a single colorado native who can say with a straight face they're a die hard Broncos, Rockies, Avalanch or Nuggets fan.

Colorado fans tend to be 'fair weather' fans. If their team is winning.. everyone loves them. Once they lose, they suck.

What I find to be very ironic is that you're talking about "fair weather" fans and didn't post in our MLB Postseason thread (45 pages) until Rivera came in, 6 outs away and then even felt the need to create this thread 25 minutes after that. Yet in the time before that while the playoffs were going on, you felt the need to post in threads about things like Dragonball Z, your World of Warcraft pet, "are you attracted to kids", and other stupid sht like if Arnold Schwarzenegger was pissed off or not.

I just love how the "true" fans come out of the woodwork when their team wins. Can you even name 2 guys from the bullpen?

PS: I could get used to this new search working.

 

[Phokus]

Your still missing the main point of the whole correlation/causation issue.

Are they paid more because they are good? Or good because they are paid more? Or are both of these the result of a 3rd characteristic? You can't say either which way.

You're missing the main point, when you have that much available for salary cap, your options on who you can sign increases significantly, unlike other teams. The only missing ingredient then is having a GM that's not an idiot who can get good value for the money they can spend.

 

[SP33Demon]

Your still missing the main point of the whole correlation/causation issue.

Are they paid more because they are good? Or good because they are paid more? Or are both of these the result of a 3rd characteristic? You can't say either which way.

WTF are you talking about? It's not a subjective topic, it's factual. "Good" is opinion, market value is fact. The Yankees consistently outbid way over market value to obtain top talent when others cannot. It's called a barrier to entry for small and mid market teams trying to make the playoffs. It has nothing to do with what defines top talent: statistics dictate that - not money. For example, is Cliff Lee "good" vs CC Sabathia because he beat CC twice in the World Series? CC will make 23.5 mil next year, and Lee 9. Lee is statistically better than CC and could easily double his salary if he played by NY. And when it's time for free agency in 2011, I wouldn't blame him one bit if he went to NY to double his salary. Face it, the system is broken and you cannot logically argue against it.

 

[Train]

You're missing the main point, when you have that much available for salary cap, your options on who you can sign increases significantly, unlike other teams. The only missing ingredient then is having a GM that's not an idiot who can get good value for the money they can spend.

That is only true on the assumption that more money CAUSES better team.

The Yankees won two world Series in the 10 years PRIOR to having the highest payroll (which started in 1999). You could look at that and say that winning brought about the money, not the other way around.

 

[BeauJangles]

Even if we had a salary cap in the MLB, what prevents the Yankees (or any other highly funded team) from spending a boatload on scouting for talent? They already have a huge advantage here and I don't see how you can prevent that part.

Maybe modify the drafting rules?

Yes, this is the biggest problem in MLB right now.

I posted earlier that I'd very much like to see the entire draft scrapped. Rather than giving teams first crack at certain players, teams should be assigned a specific dollar amount based on how they finished in the season (or maybe a weighted 2 year average). Any team, at any time, can negotiate with any player. The Yankees, who consistently finish well will have less money to spend on players than the Orioles, who consistently finish poorly. That being said, the Yankees can still negotiate with any player at any time, it's just that their resources would be limited to a fixed amount of money.

I like the quote I posted from an article discussing the Yankees "buying" championships, which basically says that all money can buy is general competitiveness, it cannot buy you a run to the World Series.

 

[BeauJangles]

That is only true on the assumption that more money CAUSES better team.

The Yankees won two world Series in the 10 years PRIOR to having the highest payroll (which started in 1999). You could look at that and say that winning brought about the money, not the other way around.

This is a very important point.

The Yankees did not start dramatically outspending the rest of baseball until '02. Even when they lead the league in payroll in 1999 and 1997, it was not by some boggling number. They were within a few million of the next team.

 

[SP33Demon]

That is only true on the assumption that more money CAUSES better team.

The Yankees won two world Series in the 10 years PRIOR to having the highest payroll (which started in 1999). You could look at that and say that winning brought about the money, not the other way around.

Your statistics are wrong again.

http://www.baseballchronology.com/Baseball/Years/1995/Payroll.asp

1995
1 New York Yankees $2,000,271 $58,165,252
2 Baltimore Orioles $1,498,623 $48,739,636
3 Cincinnati Reds $1,585,876 $47,739,109
4 Atlanta Braves $1,917,599 $47,023,444
5 Toronto Blue Jays $1,534,355 $42,233,500

1996
1 New York Yankees $1,882,417 $61,511,870
2 Baltimore Orioles $1,689,670 $55,127,855
3 Atlanta Braves $1,643,323 $53,797,000
4 Cleveland Indians $1,646,741 $47,686,907
5 Chicago White Sox $1,572,512 $44,827,833

1997
1 New York Yankees $2,303,437 $73,389,577
2 Baltimore Orioles $2,205,890 $64,611,399
3 Cleveland Indians $1,912,062 $58,865,056
4 Atlanta Braves $1,817,543 $53,111,000
5 Florida Marlins $1,793,766 $52,465,000

1998
1 Baltimore Orioles $2,761,464 $74,170,921
2 New York Yankees $3,217,914 $73,963,698
3 Texas Rangers $2,108,505 $62,755,368
4 Atlanta Braves $2,007,665 $61,840,254
5 Los Angeles Dodgers $1,763,528 $60,731,667

Your philosphical nugget of wisdom is actually illogical (did winning bring the money?). Look at how many "winners" have come to NY and NOT won in the past 8 years (see Rosters of 2001 - 2008 for more proof). Winning is a function of how much an owner can and does spend (assuming semi-competent management which precludes Omar Minaya) which is why NY has made the playoffs 13 of the past 15 years and won 5 of those 13. No other team is even close with playoff appearances (Bosox 9). Keep in mind that more money = more mistakes that can be made, especially come the trading deadline like when they took on ARod's salary when exactly 1 other team was willing to do that.

 

[Blackjack200]

For example, is Cliff Lee "good" vs CC Sabathia because he beat CC twice in the World Series?

:hmm:

 

[Train]

Your statistics are wrong again.

http://www.baseballchronology.com/Baseball/Years/1995/Payroll.asp

1995
1 New York Yankees $2,000,271 $58,165,252
2 Baltimore Orioles $1,498,623 $48,739,636
3 Cincinnati Reds $1,585,876 $47,739,109
4 Atlanta Braves $1,917,599 $47,023,444
5 Toronto Blue Jays $1,534,355 $42,233,500

1996
1 New York Yankees $1,882,417 $61,511,870
2 Baltimore Orioles $1,689,670 $55,127,855
3 Atlanta Braves $1,643,323 $53,797,000
4 Cleveland Indians $1,646,741 $47,686,907
5 Chicago White Sox $1,572,512 $44,827,833

1997
1 New York Yankees $2,303,437 $73,389,577
2 Baltimore Orioles $2,205,890 $64,611,399
3 Cleveland Indians $1,912,062 $58,865,056
4 Atlanta Braves $1,817,543 $53,111,000
5 Florida Marlins $1,793,766 $52,465,000

1998
1 Baltimore Orioles $2,761,464 $74,170,921
2 New York Yankees $3,217,914 $73,963,698
3 Texas Rangers $2,108,505 $62,755,368
4 Atlanta Braves $2,007,665 $61,840,254
5 Los Angeles Dodgers $1,763,528 $60,731,667

Your philosphical nugget of wisdom is actually illogical (did winning bring the money?). Look at how many "winners" have come to NY and NOT won in the past 8 years (see Rosters of 2001 - 2008 for more proof). Winning is a function of how much an owner can and does spend (assuming semi-competent management which precludes Omar Minaya) which is why NY has made the playoffs 13 of the past 15 years and won 5 of those 13. No other team is even close with playoff appearances (Bosox 9). Keep in mind that more money = more mistakes that can be made, especially come the trading deadline like when they took on ARod's salary when exactly 1 other team was willing to do that.

well then someones lying: from the cnn link in the other thread:
http://money.cnn.com/2009/11/05/news/economy/yankees_world_series/index.htm?postversion=2009110511

The Bronx Bombers have had the highest payroll among all Major League teams since 1999