Yankee Economics 101

Christmas Day Open Thread
A lover spurned

With the world economy in turmoil, the Yankees have spent money with seemingly no regard for the markets, and they’ve taken their fair share of criticism for it. Some other owners think they can’t compete with the Yanks’ millions. Other commentators think the Yanks are showing an insensitivity to the struggles of most Americans during a recession.

Maury Brown succinctly summed up this spending. “The total base salaries of A-Rod ($32 million), Jeter ($20 million), Teixeira ($20 million), and Sabathia ($14 million) for 2009 will be $86 million,” Brown writes, “or more than the Opening Day payrolls of more than half the league last year (Brewers, Indians, Giants, Reds, Padres, Rockies, Rangers, Orioles, Diamondbacks, Royals, Twins, Nationals, Pirates, Athletics, Rays, and Marlins).”

On the flip side, however, are those who see the Yankees’ spending as the perfect storm at the right time. The Yanks cleared a lot of money off their books this year, and they are simply replacing those contracts in the most efficient way possible. They’ve signed pieces they need, and even Peter Gammons offers up praise for the Yanks’ approach. Meanwhile, as Cliff Corcoran noted earlier tonight, the Yanks are basically replacing their 2008 free agents dollar for dollar.

Take a look at the chart Corcoran drew up:

Player 2008 cost 2009 cost Net
Jason Giambi 21 5 (buyout) 16
Bobby Abreu 16 16
Andy Pettitte 16 16
Mike Mussina 11 11
Carl Pavano 11 1.95 (buyout) 9.05
Ivan Rodriguez 4.3* 4.3
Kyle Farnsworth 3.7* 3.7
Total Credits 76.05
Mark Teixeira 25 (25)
CC Sabathia 23 (23)
A.J. Burnett 16.5 (16.5)
Wilson Betemit/Nick Swisher 1.165 5.3 (4.135)
Alex Rodriguez 29 33 (4)
Robinson Cano 3 6 (3)
Damaso Marte 0.667* 3.75 (3.083)
Chien-Ming Wang 4 5 (1)
Total Debits (79.718)
Total Net (3.668)

He adds some commentary (emphasis mine):

As you can see, even after signing CC Sabathia, Mark Teixiera, and A.J. Burnett, the Yankees’ commitments for 2009 are still within $4 million of their 2008 payroll. That number will increase. Coming off a career year, Xavier Nady will earn a few million more via arbitration (Brian Bruney and Melky Cabrera are also arb-eligible, but unlikely to get significant raises), and there’s still a chance that the Yankees will add payroll via a one-year deal for Andy Pettitte or an alternate fifth-starter or a veteran center fielder. There are also automatic incremental raises due to the team’s pre-arbitration players based on major league playing time. Even still, the net change in team payroll will be negligible relative to the massive dollar figures connected to those three new contracts.

In the end, the Yankee spending seems to look bad, but they’re not doing much more than filling holes with large contracts. It’s sort of crazy to realize that the Yankees now have the top four contracts in the game, but a free agent class similar to the one we’ve seen in 2008 doesn’t come along that often. The last time this much talent was available for only money was in 2000 when Manny Ramirez, Alex Rodriguez and Mike Mussina signed some of the wealthiest deals around.

I certainly understand why some people may be uncomfortable with the spending, and why some Yankee fans — my dad included — may view it as ostentatious spending. But it’s part of the system. The Yankees are replacing old contracts with new ones, and they’re doing it with the resources they have and can spend. Until or unless someone comes along to limit that spending, the Yankees will keep on doing what they do best, come economic hell or high water. It always has been and always will be a business, and the Yanks are at the top of the game in that regard.

Christmas Day Open Thread
A lover spurned
  • pat

    You can bash peoples brains in with logic and facts all you want but it won’t change any minds. People have always and will always hate the yankees and these contracts do nothing but reinforce it. For the rest of time the words “yankees” and “buy championships” will flow from the mouths of haters worldwide.

    • http://www.riveraveblues.com Ben K.

      To be fair, that is what they’re trying to do. It just depends upon whether or not you think that’s a bad thing.

      • pat

        Well from an extremely biased point of view I think it’s a great thing. On the same hand though can’t you make an argument that any team who signs a free agent is trying to buy a championship? It’s just ridiculous because other teams can dole out these gigantic free agent contracts, hampton zito schmit kbrown etc. yet nobody says a peep about them. It’s only a high crime when the yankees spend money despite the glaring fact they make the most by far. It’s this double standard that makes me completely unapologetic and intolerant towards haters. Eff you I was lucky enough to be born a yankee fan you root for the GD toronto blue jays go cry about it.

        • mustang


    • Tim Sherman

      Only an idiot would utter the words “buy championships”. Anyone who has any sense understands that contracts are based on past performance and potential. They don’t guarantee anything. Haters will hate the Yankees no matter what they do or don’t do, so it really has absolutely zero effect except to give Yankee fans a good laugh. So keep on hating, I am loving it.

  • LeftyLarry

    What Yankees did was smart and appropriate.Got younger and much more talented.
    Yankees however will be shocked as to how bad the economy is going to be in NY over the next few years.Same way NY was ahead of the rest of the country last 10 years, it’ll be hurt worse in this Real Estate and Wall Street related crash than the rest of the country.We’re at “tip of the iceberg” phase, people who were let go still have savings from those big bonus years and that money runs out in a year.
    I think Mets ownership understands this and they were hurt in the Madoff fiasco also.
    Yankees probalby know it too.I think this spending spree is an attempt to just stay even with last years team revenue, not to hope to make a bigger return for them.

  • john

    Buy outs don’t count against payroll. I mean, did Dice-K’s 51 million dollar posting fee count against Boston’s ’07 payroll. Also CC’s ’09 salary is 14 million as Signing bonuses also do not count.

    All this according to ‘Cot’s Baseball Contracts.’

    • Bronx


      Buyout, Posting Fee, and Signing Bonus don’t count againest payroll, luxury tax either.

      CC’s signing bonus partially paid within 2008.

  • JDW

    The Yankees have been overspending for poor play for five years now. Just because they didn’t INCREASE their 200 million dollar payroll doesn’t suddenly make them virtuous. It was disgusting then and it is disgusting now – just with better players. When most people see a situation clearly and most people can immediately recognize something stinks we should trust that, yes, something DOES stink. A pundit here and pundit there will try to convince us the smell really isn’t THAT bad. Yet too many of us still find the smell repugnant and off-putting. Many of us play fantasy baseball. Not one of us would enter an auction league where 1 or 2 teams have five times the money to bid on players during a draft. We would rightly regard that as unfair. In that league, if we did join, we’d certainly quit after the first round when a single team had purchased A-Rod, Santana, K-Rod, Reyes, and Hanley Ramirez. We’d recognize unfairness quickly and refuse to participate. We’d probably even call it cheating. Yet the Yankees aren’t cheating? Steroid users have been blasted for an unfair advantage – for cheating. How is the Yankees having a payroll on steroids NOT cheating?

    • http://www.riveraveblues.com Ben K.

      Steroid users were breaking a rule. Are the Yankees breaking a rule? If not, I don’t see how you can say they are cheating.

    • whozat

      When most people see a situation clearly and most people can immediately recognize something stinks we should trust that, yes, something DOES stink.

      Your reasoning is circular. You’re assuming that the people who “see [the] situation clearly” are the ones that “recognize something stinks,” and then use the fact that people think it stinks to show that those are the people seeing it clearly.

      The reality is that the situation is much more complex than most people realize; they look at raw payroll numbers and say it’s unfair. They usually don’t know about luxury tax, or revenue sharing. They don’t bother to think about how their team benefits when a big market team comes to town and draws people to spend money in their team’s ballpark.

    • DCStack

      I think the use of the word “disgusting” is very telling. Are the Mets or Red Sox $140 million payrolls disgusting? How about the Angels, Dodgers, or White Sox $120 million payrolls? Or the Phillies or Blue Jays $100 million payrolls? Where do you draw the line at disgusting? My guess is that your “disgusting” line is always just south of the Yankees payroll.

      Baseball is more egalitarian than most industries. Is it disgusting that RC can’t compete with Coke? Or that Audi can’t compete with Toyota? Of course not. You are only disgusted by the Yankees payroll because you are emotionally tied to some other team and you incorrectly believe that having a financial advantage – an advantage that has been earned over the course of a century – is somehow unfair.

      • Mike P

        The Yankee’s financial advantage hasn’t really been earned, it’s just lucky from birth. It’s also been well managed- particularly the first stadium was light years ahead of everyone. You can say it’s unfair, the same way Paris Hilton’s wealth is unfair. The thing is it’s no one’s fault. New York is what it is, not because of the Yankees. And other teams as you point out have advantages too, they just haven’t used them to the same extent.

        • Bo

          You didn’t see the NY Giants or Brooklyn Dodgers gain that type of wealth. You haven’t seen the Mets.

          GS bought this franchise for what? 10 mill back in 73?

          The stadium was a dump. It was in the Bronx of all places and hadn’t won in years.

          Its been good biz mgmt.

          • Mike P

            Right, I agree it’s been good management. But what I was trying to say is that good management goes a lot further if you happen to be in New York. You can’t polish a turd, however good you are at trying.

      • ryan

        Yankees over pay for their team. Every player under contract, aside from Cano and the 1 yr contract to wang, is being greatly over paid. Cost of living, the pressure of playing in NY, the intruding media are some of the reasons for this. FA’s taking advantage of the yanks known wealth is yet another reason for their high payroll. I agree when the yanks want something there’s a very good chance they are gonna go out and spend as much as they have to getting it. Players know this well and even someone who wants to play for NY and be a yankee is gonna make them overpay. People seem to forget that players are athletes and business men as well. I expect to be paid more working for Audi than I do working for KIA.

  • JeffG

    For me, it always boils down to I’d rather see the money in the players hands opposed to the owners/executives who run the teams. The Steinbrenners have for years invested in their players. The Redsox pay their star player 12 million a year? Is that better? Do we need Hendry to keep more money in his pocket or would we rather see Texiera make another 12 million and get paid according to what the market says he’s worth?
    If they want to talk salary cap they should be talking a cap on how much a team/ownership can pocket. You’ll never hear owners argue for that.

    • Mike P

      I disagree with the first point but whole heartedly agree with the second. I don’t think we should accept sky high ticket prices as an inevitable consequence of market forces. Baseball may be a business but it is also a monopoly, unique in its legality. The owners are priviliged to work in that environment and should respect that without fans their monopoly is nothing, and give a little back in the form of a fairer pricing policy.

      Taking that view, it’s impossible to argue for a salary cap. As you say it would only put money in the owners’ pockets. If you want to limit salary, give team payrolls an upper/lower limit with respect to revenue. It’s generally good business to keep payroll within 40% of revenue, and say 30% to remain competitive in the MLB. Any unspent payroll allowance would then have to go in some sort of plan, not supernormal profits for owners using their monopoly.

      At the moment, the Yanks’ payroll is obsene. But so are the profit levels of the Florida Marlins, who would be crushed in a more competitve market. I don’t know the facts, but I’m sure the Yankees’ profits aren’t nearly in proportion to their revenue advantage relative to other teams.

      • Mike P

        To clarify: I meant above 30% of revenue, not within, when refering to competitive payroll.

      • JeffG

        Believe it or not, before I edited the above post (deleting out two paragraphs) I had a reference to caping ticket prices, and that line of thinking lead me down the road to doing away with ownership as a whole. In the end, I felt like I was veering toward a comunist silly post so I decided to keep it to what I left – a slight on owners who do not care about thier product from a fans perspective rather a means of creating a good margin.
        I do hear what you are saying about ticket prices… guess that’s where TV is going to have to play a bigger role in my Yankee viewing. Sad no doubt.
        Question: Did they do the FUJI Pack promotion this year or did I just miss it? Last year I probably got around ten games for $70ish x 2 for the pair (even included Joba’s first start).

  • http://headshotsonly.wordpress.com The Third Yip-Yip

    As John said a few posts above, you can lop off $9 million of CC’s pay (signing bonus) and that brings the actual payroll down about $12 million from last season.

    • JRVJ

      Plus, Cliff Corcoran’s chart did not take into account the money paid to Latroy Hawkins last year (Hawkins was DFA’d, but the Yanks still had to cover a good chunk of his salary).

    • The Honorable Congressman Mondesi


      You cannot “lop off” $9 million of CC’s pay because it’s a signing bonus. They spent that money, it doesn’t disappear just because it’s called a signing bonus.

      Sorry for the brevity of this response, but this topic has been discussed around here ad nauseum.

      • JRVJ

        I haven’t been involved in this discussion in the past, but a signing bonus seems like an accounting concept somewhat similar to depreciation.

        If that’s the case, it shouldn’t be booked all in one year.

        • The Honorable Congressman Mondesi

          For official payroll (luxury tax etc.) purposes a signing bonus is evenly apportioned over the guaranteed years of a contract.

          But, in reality, the signing bonus is/has been paid for 2009. Whether you tax it all in 2009 or not is irrelevant. People want to say “well the Yankees didn’t spend as much as some might think because part of it was a signing bonus so the payroll is only ‘x'”, but that’s a fallacy. When it’s taxed is irrelevant and the fact that it’s not on the official payroll for 2009 is irrelevant, the money was still spent and you don’t get to say you have an extra $9 million lying around just because that portion of CC’s salary for 2009 is called a signing bonus.

  • mustang

    To me it would be more of crime if the Yankees ownership pocketed the money. For years I have heard of how the Twins owner has so much more money then the Steinbrenner’s and yet look at how his team is run.
    The scary part for MLB should be that the Steinbrenner’s now are not only willing to spend, but are also willing to develop. Bottom-line the Yankees will be hated regardless because they are the Yankees.

    • mustang

      One more point there has been 8 different World Series Champions since the last time the Yankees won. All eight of those years the Yankees have had the highest payroll. So spending the most doesn’t necessarily get you a ring.

      • Bo

        Ask the dodgers, orioles, tigers, mets etc if high payrolls lead to wins.

    • The Honorable Congressman Mondesi

      While I agree with your general point (that owners should invest/reinvest in their teams), I have a problem with one point that I hear often from Yankees fans… Yes Carl Pohlad (Twins owner) is the richest owner in baseball (I think), yes the owners of some teams are more wealthy than the Steinbrenners, but I don’t necessarily think it’s fair to expect that those owners should/must spend as much on their teams as the Steinbrenners do. They SHOULD spend money generated by their team on their team, but they shouldn’t necessarily be expected to spend wealth accumulated by other means on their teams. And, in that sense, the Yankees DO have more money to spend than the other teams, because the Yankees generate more money than the other teams do.

      • mustang

        Good point.

  • john

    Based on what I’ve read, which may or may not be relevant, the Yankees projected 2009 opening day payroll is $191 million.

    Assuming: Bruney, Melky and Nady are awarded 2, 1, and 6 million respectively.

    If you pro-rate the signing bonuses given to Tex and CC (5 and 9 million), you have $193 M.

    Surprisingly, if the Yankees were somehow able to trade Matsui, and didn’t sign Andy, their ’09 payroll would be $180 million despite signing CC, AJ, and Tex.

    I almost tend to think I must be wrong because that seems absurd. But that’s what I’ve been reading.

    • ryan

      It’s very confusing. I came up with 195 when i Did it myself. That’s whout signing pettitte.

  • http://Greg Greg P

    I could wax philosophical about this issue and find numbers to both support or discredit either side, but my emotional reaction is this: Winning a WS with almost all homegrown players with minimal FA activity would be a bit sweeter, but it will still be really sweet to win it with this assembled group.

    • ‘The’ Steve

      The beauty of the Cashman plan is that we’re finally doing BOTH, signing free agents AND developing homegrown talent. That gives us a good mix of the young, hungry rookies and the tried and true vets.

      I think there’s something to be said for players who come through your system. Fans support them more, they are trained to play the game the way you want it to be played, and there’s less of the “NY” factor. We’ve seen HOF players come here and bomb out, a player who comes up through the farm doesn’t know anything else but the way things are in NY.

  • MS

    As somebody stated on ESPN, “What are the Yankees suppose to do, pocket the money?” The Yankees happen to have $80 mil. coming off the books, are they suppose to not use it. The Yanks will most likely increase their payroll by $10-20 mil. I would hope all teams will do that. If they don’t than they shouldn’t own a team. These hard economic times don’t apply to these rich owners.

  • Ryan S.

    Is having the largest payroll and revenue stream in the league an advantage?

    Yes, of course.

    Is it an unfair one?

    No, it is not.

    The Yankees don’t make the rules, and its not like the money they spend is coming out of any other teams’ pockets – quite the opposite, actually, as the more the Yanks spend, the more both the league and individual teams make. Fielding a team of all-stars doesn’t make us cheaters … it just makes us the biggest of the big market teams. I think this year’s offseason acquisitions has just magnified a single aspect of the Yanks, our very large payroll.

    We had the perfect storm this year for spending so much money this winter, both in terms of finances and in a pure baseball sense. Financially we had $80M+ coming off the books, a brand new stadium, and an overall business model that relies on us fielding a very competitive team every year (note: we’re not the only team with this type of business model!). Baseball wise we are facing an exceptionally good free agency market that contained premiere players that addressed our 2 most glaring deficiencies coming into the offseasons:

    Sabathia – A young, stud ace (and a lefty to boot) that we were starting to plan our team around over a year before we could even make him an offer. This guy was an essential part of our plans and we had to do whatever it took to get him – hence the absurd contract the gentleman got from us.

    Burnett – High upside pitcher, basically the biggest risk / reward guy out there. He’s the guy the actual players on the team wanted the FO to get.

    Teixeira – An unexpected bonus. We made the guy a market value offer (apparently it wasn’t even the highest) and refused to go up any higher than that. Every other team gave us the opportunity to get him by bemoaning their own chances, and Boston simply overplayed their hand, hoping to shave a couple million bucks a year off of a Boras client. We really didn’t think we’d get the guy, and the only reason we decided to take an honest shot was because we’d still be on pace to be under the 2008 budget and guy could not have been a better fit for the type of player we needed, seriously.

    Those 3 acquisitions were all made with a long term outlook and took heavily into account the weak future free agency markets, especially in regards to Teixeira. The Yankees are ready to embrace the new style of baseball that every other team seems to be trending towards that includes a heavier emphasis on home grown talent. In the upcoming years, we will continue to supplant aging, expensive free agents with young, cheap, prospects. We will of course continue to utilize the free agency, but as Cashman’s plan comes into full blossom, the discrepancy in salary levels between us and other big market teams will noticeably decrease. The 3 expensive free agents we signed were the bridge we needed to transition into an overall cheaper, more efficient, model while still remaining extremely competitive and amongst the top teams every year.

    The Yankees committing themselves to win is not a new trend. It should be celebrated or hated but with due respect . 8 teams get to make it to the playoffs, and after that, all bets are off – salaries do not matter. Its healthy for the sport, and its straight up damn good entertainment, for the Yanks to be one of those 8 teams every year, but that’s all a big salary can help you out with. Winning October baseball is a totally different thing … and this proves it: who would you rather have as the third baseman on your team if you were in the playoffs … Alex Rodriguez, or Scott Brosius?

    In closing, all of this Yankee hate and the attempts being made to cheapen the joy of being a fan is a knee-jerk reaction. Those who say the way the Yankees are behaving are risking alienating small/mid market fans from baseball – there’s no evidence to indicate anything like that. Besides that’s a responsibility of that market’s teams to keep their fans interested. We do our part by filling the seats of the stadiums we visit.

  • ryan

    I have a question… I could be wrong …but didn’t the last time the yankees win a World series their payroll reflect 98 million. Since the era of “buying a champoinship” have the yanks won a ring?No. Out of the last 5 Champions Boston has won twice. Im no psychic but I’d venture to say that Boston spent a significant amount during those yrs, far more than the yanks paid to “buy a championship”. My question is this, Who has bought more championships? Yanks or Boston? Does anyone have those numbers for boston’s salaries during those years they won as compared to the last time the yanks won a championship?

  • Bo

    I for one would much, much rather a team puts the money back into the team and players than in the owners grandkids trust funds.

    Pure jealousy.

    The more wins a team has the better its brand does. They should teach grad school biz courses based on George’s eco model.

  • Bruno

    2008 Payroll > 2009 Payroll. How are people (Millwaukee’s owner) NOT smart enough to see this?!?

    • Ed

      If you don’t sign any free agents, you’ve got two choices: Admit you don’t want to spend big money, or complain about the teams that do. One approach makes your fans dislike you, the other approach makes fans of the teams with money dislike you.

  • emac2

    Hearing Manny mentioned as part of the 2000 class got me thnking about what the Red Sox have learned.

    They seem to have “learned” that you don’t hand out huge deals. On the other hand if they hadn’t signed the evil Manny Ramirez to the monster deal they would still be waiting for that first title in almost a century.

    I wonder if they have learned enough to make sure they never do win again.

  • Grover

    The new stadium and those beautiful and expensive sky boxes, significant revenue sharing savings and the availability of legitimate top end free agents, Burnett withstanding, made the moves logical. Shouldn’t they be able to spend more than last year by significant measure?

    Unless they are going to pay Swisher or Nady $5.4M or $6M(?) to ride the pine, there is at least one trade coming. Who and where for what?

    • Should be working

      One can only speculate at this time. Assuming a trade is even comming. Im sure they have a plan and we can really only just sit back, hypotheticalize (dont believe its a real word) and just wait and see.

  • Steve S

    i have to say something because these pundits and critics are completely off base. This concept that the Yankees have reacted poorly in the current economic climate is ridiculous and the anger stems from the quality of players they are signing, as opposed to the dollars being spent. Im glad the owners of other teams expected the Yankees to drop their payroll in light of the recession. So now the Yankees owe to duty to them to operate their business model based on what they think is appropriate?? Come on, some of these guys do not even operate the baseball team as their sole livelihood. The Yankees are a profitable business and they help subsidize all the other teams in the league, and the bulk of that-revenue sharing, is not based on how much they spend but on the revenue they bring in.

    So with all of that, they somehow believe the Yankees, in the process of moving into a $1.3B stadium, would tell their fans, after missing the playoffs for the first time in thirteen years, that they needed to drop the payroll because the country is in a recession. We all know this city and the large chunk of Yankee fans, especially those who come to the staidum, are fickle. Remember back in 1991-1992, they couldnt sell more than 25,000 seats. This isnt the Cubs where they sell out regardless of the quality of the team. The Yankees business model is simple, they are increasing prices for tickets, based on a new venue but they also are supplementing that by putting the best possible product on the field because their bottom line is dependent on their relevance and their ability to win. New York isnt Cleveland or Colorado, they cant just build a stadium and put out a subpar product and collect the gate. They need to have a good team field, which they had but now they have a great team, which to me is even more logical given the current economic crisis. You need to ensure they you have the hot ticket, the new stadium helps, the team ensures it.

    Its ridiculous to even call this ostentatious because they have no obligation to the rest of baseball to operate to their detriment because of what others believe they should run their business. Not to mention, the Washington Nationals are taking the same approach. They are offering massive contracts to try and make their team relevant, why arent they being criticized in current economic crisis? I havent seen any teams really take an approach to cut costs, except for the Padres.

  • Virginia Yankee

    What the Yankees have done thus far with their signings and payroll is both smart baseball and smart economics –

    I argue frequently that they have not enough.
    — I see risks
    — age/injury/decline for Matsui, Damon, Jeter, Wang, Posada
    — unproven performancefor Cabrerra, Gardner, Chamberlain, Hughes, Cano (dazzling moments for each – but we need to see a full season of production)

    One might argue that it is a game and one of the pleasures is seeing how all of this plays out


    BASEBALL and the YANKEES need to field a superior product especially in tough economic times — PATRONS/FANS that are lost is this economic cycle may not come back given the variety of alternatives available

    The Yankees had holes they had to fill for several years into the future to be competitive. As a business the Yankees and baseball could not afford to wait

    To maintain a billion dollar plus franchise spending $200M on the players is more than resonable

    To produce posiitve cash flow delivering a superior product for the discretionary dollar is a requirement

    The other major leagues team need the Yankees to fill their stadiums and the airwaves.

    Baseball needs the Yankees the way golf needs Tiger Woods.

    The Yankees must not fail — their approach does not ensure WS sucess but I think it supports the Baseball Product and provides assurance against failure

    Baseball has been in the past and will be the next few years a refuge from our troubles

    More than in past decades baseball is economically accessible to virtually everyone on TV, Cable, Satellite — The Yankees have enormous influence on the market – they help make the game available

  • BillyBall

    2010 and 2011 free agent classes are weak. These moves were made not only for next 2 years but next 8 years. The Yankees will be comprised of big time players that make big time money and homegrown players. The key is that these homegrown players develop and fill in the spots proficiently in order to bring home another Championship or God willing a dynasty.

  • Tom

    It makes me so mad when people say this crap. When I heard the Marlins Pres. complaining I’m thinking this is coming from the guy who had a payroll less then $20 million. Pocketing the revenue sharring and luxary tax check he got from MLB rather then putting it back into the team.

    What makes teams like the Yankees, Cubs, Cowboys, Lakers, Red Wings, etc so popular is they put out a good product. They field teams with players the fans want to pay to see.

    Don’t blame the Yankees for smart business, blame your team for lack of it.

    Yanks are great for baseball. Tell me the Pirates didn’t love having the Yankees in town last season for 3 sold out games or the Royals.

  • Bob

    The Yankees are like the homerun hitter who is using steroids while the rest of the teams arent using it.
    I dont know how the Yankees can be proud of beating teams that dont have nearly a comparable payroll.

    MLB should separate teams by payroll because at least 1/3 of the teams have no hope of competing and medium-range teams hit a glass ceiling.

    Overall, MLB has become a joke with this payroll setup. It is not truly a Major league anymore with the disparity in payroll.