Open Thread: Henry wants MLB to overhaul revenue sharing system


One of the rights of the offseason is talk about how unfair baseball is with respect to big market clubs vs. small market clubs, and every so often some executive from a small market team will bemoan the fact that they can’t compete financially with the Yankees. For the most part, the other side of the coin – all of the big market teams that forfeit millions to smaller market teams – never gets talked about, however Red Sox owner John Henry came out and said the revenue sharing system needs an overhaul.

Allow me to quote:

“Change is needed and that is reflected by the fact that over a billion dollars have been paid to seven chronically uncompetitive teams, five of whom have had baseball’s highest operating profits,” Henry responded in an e-mail. “Who, except these teams, can think this is a good idea?”

Henry added, “While the Red Sox are in the 16th largest media market we’ve found a way to be very competitive even though we are funding other teams. At the end of the day, the small market clubs still cannot begin to compete with the Yankees and have a very hard time competing with the teams that are struggling to pay them so much. Consequently, a system that directly impacts competition has to replace the current system, that hoped to, but ultimately did not cure competitive imbalances.”


The Red Sox principal owner reiterated that baseball’s free market system should continue and that teams should be able to operate as they please but that those who spend a lot will pay a lot of payroll taxes. “If the Yankees and the Mets spend a billion dollars plus of their investment dollars to build new ballparks, they should be allowed to keep their revenues from that,” Henry wrote. “But if they want to spend $200,000,000 annually on payroll they should be heavily taxed directly on that – and if they want to spend more than that, they should be even more heavily taxed. So should all clubs who spend heavily on payroll – to the extent necessary – to bring the system into balance.”

Ah yes, the poor Red Sox in the 16th biggest largest market have done a great job remaining competitive despite facing such an uphill battle. Great story, compelling and rich. Truly inspiring.

Back to reality. One thing we have to acknowledge is that there are more ways to use revenue sharing money than signing big league free agents. Tampa and Florida have built perpetually productive farm systems through the draft, assuredly with some help of that revenue sharing money. In fact, you can argue this is exactly how the revenue sharing cash should be spent. Building a foundation for the team with a continually replenishing source of talent. Of course, it’s much easier said than done.

Henry also makes a good point about how the current revenue sharing system screws over the Yankees:

“Baseball has determined that the best way to deal with the Yankees is to take as much of their revenue as possible. I see that in direct opposition to the ideals this country was built on. Baseball is a business and should be treated as such. Baseball is also a sport that needs competitive balance in order to prosper. Taxing their revenues and other “large markets” in the way it is presently done, is simply confiscation on an order of magnitude never seen in any industry in America,” Henry said.

As for the perceived lack of competitive balance, I don’t really think it’s a huge problem. By my count, 23 of the 30 teams have made the playoffs within the last ten years, and 15 different teams (half the league!) have appeared in the World Series in that time. Giving the Royals more money probably won’t stop them from wasting $48.35M on Jose Guillen, Kyle Farnsworth, and Willie Bloomquist. At some point the crutch of being a small market team has to be removed, and blame has to be shifted to management.

I’m not going to get into talk about a salary cap, because it’s ridiculous. The reason a cap works in the NFL is because every team can afford to spend to the max. If you want to do that in baseball, you’d have to set the cap at like, $50M. A floor doesn’t help either, it just means small market teams would have to put more money in the pockets of fringe players to make payroll. It’s just not feasible.

Anyway, that’s my competitive balance rant for the day. Use this puppy as your open thread for the night. The Knicks take on the Suns at home, but otherwise you’re on your own for entertainment. Anything goes, just be cool.

Categories : Open Thread


  1. Doesn’t Henry usually wait until January or so to issue his annual WATB statement? Must be planning on a pretty bare winter in Boston if they’re trotting the excuses out on the 1st of December.

  2. Drew says:

    /Teix Jinx’d

    Is anyone else a whole hell of a lot less interested in Duchscherer now that he was offered Arb? I guess I should’ve seen this coming but for some reason I didn’t.

  3. JobaWockeeZ says:

    Hey John Henry is back from the dead I see! The last time he talked was the curse of MT. I love how his Twitter completely remained silent after the Yanks started to trash the Sox.

    So John Henry let me call 911 so you can go on this.

    I don’t recall you bitching when you won with the second biggest payroll in 2007. Now you’re acting as if you are pinching for pennies like the Marlins. You aren’t a small market team.


    Now of course some of his points have merit to it and it would be nice seeing the Royals, Orioles and the Nats to stop sucking but as said they need smarter management.

  4. Evil Empire says:

    What does RAB think about Pedroia moving over to SS? It actually sounds like a potentially good idea to me, but … I don’t really know what I’m talking about so that doesn’t mean much.

    If they do decide to go that route, I just hope O-Dog gets offered arb so they’d still be screwed out of a draft pick.

    Actually, where do we find out who has gotten offered arb? Or is that information not out until after midnight?

    • JobaWockeeZ says:

      A lot of Sox fans hate the idea. Apparently a couple years back he sucked but that’s when he said he was trying to get “bigger.” (ROFL nice work) So he won’t be as good defensively as a SS.

      • Evil Empire says:

        Well if Pedroia is only moderately below average (maybe say, -4.0ish UZR), with his bat, I would be very happy if I was a Boston Red Sox fan. All things considered, that’d be quite an upgrade. Obviously you’re replacing one hole with another, but the 2B options are much more palatable.

        If Pedroia is a complete trainwreck though, then you’re worse off than if you had given up a draft pick for Scutaro … and that’s saying something.

    • Evil Empire says:

      Never mind about finding out who got offered arb, I see the link TSJC posted.

    • I wonder if they’d flip Manny Delcarmen for Luis Castillo. That deal may be a win-win.

      Sox get a decent 2B without having to give up much; Mets get out from under Castillo’s contract so they can spend money elsewhere and get a decent bullpen arm.

      Meh, probably not enough for Castillo… whatevs.

      • Ah, nevermind.

        The Dodgers didn’t offer Hudson arb. Boston can now sign him, penalty free.

        Do that instead. Nevermind my rambling.

        • Evil Empire says:

          Shit. That was what I was concerned about. I cannot think of a better viable SS/2B combo for Boston in 2010 than Pedroia/O-Dog.

          Not that I’m trying that hard, but yeah.

          • Meh, O-Dog doesn’t scare me much.

            He’s decent, but he’s no Robbie Cano.

            • Rocky Road Redemption (formerly RAB poster) says:

              The fact is that moving Pedroia to short removes the advantage the Red Sox had at 2b, albeit a small one, to try and compete with the Yankees at SS. All moving Pedroia to SS would do is ensure that they don’t have a better player at either position, unless Jeter has a down year and Pedroia an up year.

              I don’t get it.

              • I get it.

                The point for the Sox is not to “have a better player than the Yankees at either 2B or SS or both”.

                It’s to have a good 1-9 lineup with good players at all 9 spots.

                They’re interested in building a quality team, not in having more All-Star starters than the Yankees.

                If Pedroia can play either 2B or SS, that gives them the flexibility to add either a 2B or an SS. There are good 2Bs on the market, There aren’t any good SSs on the market.

                Flexibility is good.

                • Rocky Road Redemption (formerly RAB poster) says:

                  The moral of the story: Advantage Yankees either way.

                • Yeah, I disagree.

                  If Pedroia can pull off a passable SS, a Sox team with a Pedroia-Hudson DP combo is better than one with a Lowrie-Pedroia combo.

                  (I’m not saying we need to run out and sign Lackey and Holliday to “answer” it, but it’s a better team nonetheless.)

                • Rocky Road Redemption (formerly RAB poster) says:

                  The Red Sox may become better, but what I’m saying is Jeter-Cano still beats what the Red Sox offer.

                • Evil Empire says:

                  “The Red Sox may become better.”

                  Well, that’s all that matters to the Red Sox. The evaluation stops there. Everything else is a fan-imagined narrative of pointlessness.

                  Jeter-Cano is the best offensive 2B/SS combination in the game though, and by a pretty wide margin (thanks to the precipitous decline of Jimmy Rollins)

                • Rocky Road Redemption (formerly RAB poster) says:

                  Pointless? Not really. I want my team to be better than the Red Sox.

                  Does it make sense to the Red Sox? Yes. Are the Yankees still better? Yes, and that’s important.

                • The problem with this convo, RRR, is that your original statement of:

                  The fact is that moving Pedroia to short removes the advantage the Red Sox had at 2b, albeit a small one, to try and compete with the Yankees at SS. All moving Pedroia to SS would do is ensure that they don’t have a better player at either position, unless Jeter has a down year and Pedroia an up year.

                  I don’t get it.

                  … seems to say that since moving Pedroia to short to facilitate a better upgrade of the Red Sox (with a better 2B than they could find at SS) would not make them better than the Yankees, they shouldn’t do it.

                  As in “I don’t get it”. As in “I don’t get why they’d do that, because it doesn’t make them better than the Yankees.”

                  The Sox don’t care if the Pedroia gambit makes them better than the Yankees. They’re just worried about being better than the 2009 Red Sox. Cano and Jeter does not enter into the discussion at all here.

                • Rocky Road Redemption (formerly RAB poster) says:

                  I see.

                  We’re still better.

                  /Stubborn ass’d

                • Evil Empire says:

                  You do have a point … we are still better. *On paper*, its hard to imagine the Red Sox coming up with a better opening day roster than the Yankees unless they splurge for Halladay … which I would openly welcome, for a variety of reasons.

                • Rocky Road Redemption (formerly RAB poster) says:

                  Even if the Sox splurge for Halladay, I’m not so sure they’re better. I would guess that would be the only big move they make, which would leave them with a rather old offense.Their pitching staff would be good, but Beckett is injury prone. So while they may have a better 1-2, we may have a better 3-4-5. And still a really good 1-2. And a better offense.

                  If the Sox get Halladay, everybody will overreact. Our team’s stillt the World Champions. We’re not that bad off, considering.

      • Evil Empire says:

        Y’know, I think that’s whacky enough to work. It might be Delcarmen + a C+ prospect or something but yeah, I think the framework makes sense.

        Still, if I was Boston, I don’t think I’d want more than 1 year commitment to a 2B just to make sure Pedroia isn’t a disaster that needs to be put back immediately.

    • Drew says:

      I don’t think he has the strongest arm. I approve this move.

    • Salty Buggah says:

      I’d like it. If he struggles there defensively again, he loses some value. It all depends on who they get for 2B though.

  5. pete says:

    I agree wholeheartedly, Mike. Market size is, I believe, defined quite a bit more by a team’s history of success than actual location. There are a bunch of HUGE cities with “small market” teams – Miami, Houston, Atlanta, Phoenix – all are around the same size as boston. New York and LA are bigger, but each of those towns have two teams. The draft system allows franchises to build themselves into success, and past success + good management and ownership = continued success.

    • JM says:

      7415 1/\/ “1337 5P34K”

    • Not only that, but market size is only a portion of it. Geography is the other.

      Boston may not be as big a market as, say, Detroit or St. Louis, but Boston is surrounded by a larger and more densely populated ring of suburbs. Midwestern cities are bigger, but are surrounded by nothingness. Massachussets is populated. Michigan is less so.

      Furthermore, smaller costal towns are, by and large, wealthier than larger midwestern towns. Boston’s media market generates more income than larger midwestern media markets, because they can charge higher prices since people make more money there.

      • Ivan says:

        Basics Economics 101.

      • JMK aka The Overshare says:

        Correct again, Tommie. Greater Boston is not he 16th smallest market in the US. It just isn’t. It’s the 10th.

        And their traditional fan reach is much farther than just that of Greater Boston. It’s the capital of the oldest, most established REGION in the country, New England. Greater Boston covers Boston, Nashua, Providence, Woester and the South Shore, but their reach also brings in Eastern CT, Vermont, New Hampshire, Maine and parts of Upstate NY (near Plattsburgh). As Tommie mentioned, they also have higher earning power in the region, so what Henry said is flat-out misleading. They have a monopoly in the region, one of the oldest teams in the most established part of the country, and a larger metro region than what was said.

        It’s just not a small market. It isn’t.

        • The top 30 Metropolitan Statistical Areas, according to the Congressional US Office of Management and Budget (sourced by Wiki, 2008 populations):

          1 New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-PA MSA 19,006,798
          2 Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana, CA MSA 12,872,808
          3 Chicago-Naperville-Joliet, IL-IN-WI MSA 9,569,624
          4 Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX MSA 6,300,006
          5 Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE-MD MSA 5,838,471
          6 Houston-Sugar Land-Baytown, TX MSA 5,728,143
          7 Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Pompano Beach, FL MSA 5,414,772
          8 Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta, GA MSA 5,376,285
          9 Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV MSA 5,358,130
          10 Boston-Cambridge-Quincy, MA-NH MSA 4,522,858
          11 Detroit-Warren-Livonia, MI MSA 4,425,110
          12 Phoenix-Mesa-Scottsdale, AZ MSA 4,281,899
          13 San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA MSA 4,274,531
          14 Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, CA MSA 4,115,871
          15 Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA MSA 3,344,813
          16 Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington, MN-WI MSA 3,229,878
          17 San Diego-Carlsbad-San Marcos, CA MSA 3,001,072
          18 St. Louis, MO-IL MSA 2,816,710 2,698,687
          19 Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater, FL MSA 2,733,761
          20 Baltimore-Towson, MD MSA 2,667,117 2,552,994
          21 Denver-Aurora, CO MSA 2,506,626
          22 Pittsburgh, PA MSA 2,351,192
          23 Portland-Vancouver-Beaverton, OR-WA MSA 2,207,462
          24 Cincinnati-Middletown, OH-KY-IN MSA 2,155,137
          25 Sacramento–Arden-Arcade–Roseville, CA MSA 2,109,832
          26 Cleveland-Elyria-Mentor, OH MSA 2,088,291
          27 Orlando-Kissimmee, FL MSA 2,054,574
          28 San Antonio, TX MSA 2,031,445
          29 Kansas City, MO-KS MSA 2,002,047
          30 Las Vegas-Paradise, NV MSA 1,865,746

        • toad says:

          Exactly. Just looking at Census stats is misleading. The Red Sox are New England’s team. Big market.

          Similarly, Atlanta is the South’s team. The size of the Atlanta MSA is interesting but doesn’t tell us what their market really is.

  6. JM says:

    The Red Sox do sure whine… a lot.

  7. pat says:

    Giving the Royals more money probably won’t stop them from wasting $48.35M on Jose Guillen, Kyle Farnsworth, and Willie Bloomquist. At some point the crutch of being a small market team has to be removed, and blame has to be shifted to management.

    THANK YOU. This should be the biggest argument against the small market whiners. If the Marlins can win a few rings by being shrewd judges of talent and making great trades then it is possible for any of these teams. Imagine the damage the Royals could do in the draft with the 5 million they spent on Kyle freaking Farnsworth. Even if they can’t resign the kids they can at least have a two or three year window where they’re under team control and producing at high level.IMO poor management is much more of a hindrance than a low payroll.

    • Januz says:

      The single most important thing in sports is the level of interest, not the size of the market. The classic example is Pittsburgh, where the Pirates are a “Small Market Team” in baseball. But of all American Based teams, the number ONE home attendance belongs to the Penguins (Obviously the Penguins are a “Bigger Market Team” than say the Islanders or Devils, who compete in the number one media market in America). Another example is Rutgers. They compete in the number one TV market in America, and never appeared in a MAJOR Bowl game (Even the likes of Washington State, Boise State or Wisconsin (Not exactly fun and sun party areas), have done that.
      What is interesting, is that in 2009, in all of the four major pro sports (As well as College Football and Basketball) the big boys all won: Steelers, Florida Gators, UNC Tar Heels, LA Lakers, Penguins, and of course, the Yankees. Everyone of those teams (Except the Penguins), generates tremendous amounts of passion (Good and bad). So everything is not simply “The Evil Empire” DEVOURING MLB and sports in general.
      I am sick of the “Small Market” and “Good Of The Game” arguments (Like Harold Reynolds used last night, complaining about the idea of the Yankees, Red Sox, or Dodgers getting Halliday). The real “good of the game” is the Yankees and Red Sox, and the interest they bring to baseball (And TV ratings bear this out).

  8. The Iron Horse says:

    World Series winners from 2000-2006: Yankees, D-Backs, Angels, Marlins, Red Sox, White Sox, Cardinals. I think I see 2 small-market teams in there. No repeats for 7 straight years.

    No other sport can say that. In the NFL it was the Patriots or Steelers. In the NBA it was the Lakers or the Spurs. Wah-wah-wah from those owners? Not so much.

    I’m surprised such uninformed people get to run things.

    • What Henry is saying isn’t “uninformed”.

      It’s just basic corporate propaganda. Nothing to be alarmed about.

    • The Artist says:

      While that is true, it’s also true that the same teams keep making the playoffs year after year, and they’re all high revenue teams. Yanks, Sox, Angels, Cards, Dodgers, etc. There are exceptions, like last years Rays and the 03 Marlins, but generally the rule still stands.

      We all know anything can happen in a short series, but having $$ to spend helps you get through the regular season and into the playoffs. It’s not honest of us not to admit that or try to change the subject.

  9. Salty Buggah says:

    I got 461 points out of 515 points in my Economics course. That’s a 89.5%, a B+, and my professor won’t fuckin round it up when a 463/515 gets me an A-. Why? Because she already has a curve…but that curve doesn’t fuckin affect me. It’s only people with low A’s, B”s, or C’s. She will automatically give them a normal A (DU treats regular A’s or B’s differently than A- or B- when calculating GPA).

    I once lost 2 points because I didn’t have my homework stapled, even though no one ever told us it had to be and it wasn’t in the syllabus/rules. I even fuckin paper-clipped it.

    I have gotten a 95 on every exam and a 95 on the final. So, I’m pretty much going to be penalized for a curve that doesn’t affect me and will get a B because of the lack of stapling on one assignment.


  10. I don’t see any nice wins for the Yankees yet from the arb decisions of other teams.

    All the Type A’s we should have been interested in (Soriano, Gonzalez, Valverde, Holliday) were offered arb. The Type A’s we shouldn’t have been interested in (Hudson, Polanco, Wolf, Gregg, Dotel, Hawkins) were the ones who weren’t offered arb.

    The only good thing for us: Scutaro was offered, which probably keeps him out of Boston (I doubt Theo gives up a pick for him when Hudson is free, and frankly, Scutaro is better than O-Dog).

  11. daneptizl says:

    Holliday AND Halladay… I need to taste Henry’s tears.

  12. This speech is boring the shit out of me. Tell me something I don’t know.

  13. JMK aka The Overshare says:

    The Knicks are beating the Suns? Am I drunk?

  14. Mike Pop says:

    I just missed out on free Nets tix by 6 seconds! Arg!!!!!

  15. T-Bird says:

    Just thinking out loud – I smell a beantown wharf rat – Would it be possible that Henry is expecting a huge jump in payroll due to some big name signings this winter? Also seems likely that he realizes the Yankees are doing a good job reduing payroll while staying VERY competitive. I wonder what “changes” he has in mind, and how they will continue to favor the Sawx and screw the Yanks?

    • The Artist says:

      No, I think he’s trying to set the terms of debate for the upcoming negotiations with the MLBPA after next season. Consider it the first salvo of that looming war. Clearly, he wants changes to the current labor agreement, ones that the Union may very well support. This is clearly directed at other owners, so this is an attempt to get them unified in advance on the Labor agreement.

  16. The Artist says:

    “Henry added, “While the Red Sox are in the 16th largest media market we’ve found a way to be very competitive even though we are funding other teams.”

    This is the most important thing Henry said. Baseball welfare isn’t the answer for small market clubs, growing their revenues is. If an owner thinks he cant expand his revenue base any further, he should look at some of the teams who have done just that, and how they did it.

    • The Artist says:

      One thing we have to acknowledge is that there are more ways to use revenue sharing money than signing big league free agents. Tampa and Florida have built perpetually productive farm systems through the draft, assuredly with some help of that revenue sharing money. In fact, you can argue this is exactly how the revenue sharing cash should be spent

      I thought this was the most important point that Mike made. When done right, revenue sharing can work. But the system we have now has a ceiling, but no floor.

      • Or, in lieu of the Mauer/Twins convo we were having earlier, I point you again to the story of the Detroit Tigers.

        Despite having a DECLINING market in terms of population, the Tigers moved from a 40-60M payroll, small-market also ran to a 100M+ payroll, big market big spender in the matter of a few years, by simply

        A) building a new state of the art ballpark that people want to go to and
        B) spending money to get a good team that people want to support.

        Now, they may have overextended themselves and gotten in a financial bind where they won’t be flexible or good for a year or two and may have to sell some pieces off, but they’re not going all the way back down to a 40M payroll ever again. They’ve established themselves. They spend money and continue to do so (i.e. bonus money for Porcello and the like).

        Also, the Mariners, the Rockies, etc.

        Lots of small market clubs have realized the simplest maxim in business: You have to spend money to make money.

        • “Or, in lieu of the Mauer/Twins convo we were having earlier, I point you again to the story of the Detroit Tigers… Lots of small market clubs have realized the simplest maxim in business: You have to spend money to make money.”

          This is the most important point, and it’s also very relevant when people talk about restraining the Yankees’ financial advantage. I wrote the stuff below elsewhere (in a comment in response to Joe Posnanski’s post about the Yankees’ financial advantage) but I think it’s relevant to this discussion… People need to understand that when they’re talking about restraining the Yankees they’re talking about restraining an organization because it has been too successful, not because it enjoys some innate advantage. Other clubs can do what the Yankees (and the Red Sox and other teams) have done, which is to build their brand and build their on-field, and financial, success. All these arguments for restraining the Yankees seem to be built on this premise that the Yankees enjoy some innate advantage that other clubs can’t compete with, but history shows this premise to be false. Restraining the Yankees wouldn’t be righting some natural wrong, it would be punishing one party for being too good at what it does.

          Here’s part of what I wrote:

          The Yankees do not spend, and have, the most money simply because they wear the pinstriped uniforms and play in the Bronx and call themselves the Yankees. When George Steinbrenner bought the team in 1973 he (and his fellow investors) paid $10 million for it. In 1998, with the Yankees in the middle of a successful run, the Yankees had the second highest payroll in the game. In 1990, the Yanks had the 4th highest payroll (and were within $1 million of the five teams right behind them), and I assume the Yanks have been near the top of the payroll standings since the 70s… But their payroll advantage, until the 2000s, was certainly not as significant as it is today.

          The point being… The Yankees do not have an advantage simply because they exist, but because they’ve BUILT that advantage over the last 15 years or so. There have been plenty of studies done (see: Horowitz – If You Play Well They Will Come—and Vice Versa: Bidirectional Causality in Major-League Baseball; and Noll: Attendance and Price Setting, among many others) to confirm for us something very intuitive and simple – if you build a winning team and provide a winning experience, fans will buy tickets to your games and watch your team on television and buy jerseys and hats and videos of your triumphs. Unfortunately for Yankees detractors, that rule holds true whether your team wears an interlocking NY on your hat or some other logo.

          Now, none of this is to say the Yankees didn’t have SOME sort of advantage from the start. They DO play in NYC, they do have a lot of history… But they also had those things before the 2000s (and other teams exist in NY that do not enjoy such a financial advantage, whether they exist in sports without salary caps, like the Mets, or even in the salary capped sports – just look at history before the institution of those caps), and their payroll advantage, if it existed, didn’t grow to outsized proportions until the 2000s. What happened? They invested shrewdly and pressed their advantages. They built a winning product and never looked back, building a television network and a (ridiculous) new stadium on the back of that winning product. And, in the end, they built themselves a very nice financial advantage.

          • JMK aka The Overshare says:

            All kinds of THIS.

          • Evil Empire says:

            Mondesi, I read that Posnanski article just the other day, and that is a really good reply to it. Props for cutting through the bullshit, accurately and succinctly stating why the Yankees’ payroll is what it is. I always knew argument you stated in the back of my head, but could never could put it quite so eloquently. Its really all common sense.

            Baseball is like life; its survival of the fittest. No one can begrudge the Yankees for spending the most or winning the most. Not to mention, they are a big part of subsidizing the rest of the league, which to me always seems like it should an automatic argument-ender.

            What have the Royals done for the Yankees lately? Y’know, besides lay down and take it on the field for the past decade.

            • Thanks… The thing is… I think people can still pine away for a cap or some other way to reign in the Yankees… I just think we have to be honest about what we’re talking about here. Comments like John Henry’s are built on a faulty premise – that the financial issues are totally dependent on market size (and, as TSJC noted, his numbers are fishy, to be kind). He, and other people, try to frame the argument that way because it serves their purposes – to punish one organization (the Yanks). But the Yankees don’t have their financial advantage because they just, like, do… They have their advantage because they built their advantage. I just wish we could cut through all the bullshit and have this conversation honestly, without the partisan bias built in.

              • Eh, I misspoke a bit there. Of course part of their advantage is their built-in, NY advantage. But that part of the advantage isn’t nearly as big as the detractors would have you believe, is the point.

              • Evil Empire says:

                Sure, people can bitch and moan for a cap, but I’d like to think any intelligent human being who can appreciate a job well done when he sees it would find no reason to further inhibit the Yankees. Any intelligent capitalist, at least.

                No one acknowledges how the Yankees generate so much money. They just take it as a given that they have it, and that’s all that matters.

                Its almost like the reverse of the Royals or Pirates, where the failures of the organization have been excused because they do not spend as much money on their product. The ineptitude of the organizations are covered by their financial restraints, which is a vicious circle.

  17. JMK aka The Overshare says:

    Amare is so overrated.

  18. Who else is excited for Scrubs?!

  19. Ivan says:

    I know the Suns play no defense but the Knicks are putting on an offensive clinic. By the way, did you see my dude Gallinari putting it work. Im kinda hyped lol.

  20. Yardisiak says:

    16th biggest market? The lowest I can find the Boston TV market ranked on any online source is 7th.

  21. Ivan says:


  22. zoudini says:

    Now that he didnt get arb, is Bedard a possibility? I mean best-case scenario he’s BattleCat redux for the next 10+ years right?

    • JMK aka The Overshare says:

      No, it ain’t happening.

      • zoudini says:

        which part? signing him? or best-case scenario? (good sir, at least gimme an explanation)

        • JMK aka The Overshare says:

          I don’t believe the Yankees will sign him. He’s expressed his distaste for larger markets and of the injury-concern FA’s, Harden and Sheets offer more.

          Absolute best-case scenario: Fringe #1, really good #2. He has the stuff, no question (or did). Most likely to happen? Injury-prone mid or back rotation starter. Wild prediction: he’ll be out of baseball in three years.

          Baltimore really fleeced the Mariners in that trade.

  23. Ivan says:

    YO Gallinari just the shit out of that Sun player.

    You see that Tommie lol.

  24. Salty Buggah says:

    OK, I made myself sound like a whiny bitch. I just got a reply to my email rant (though I tried not to make the tone of the email seem like I’m pissed) and my economics professor said that her calculations say that I got exactly a 90%. I guess she didn’t update the grades or something. So now, I don’t get just an A-, I get basically a full 100% because of her curve. Awesome!

  25. Ivan says:

    What a block by Gallinari. What a game from the Knicks.

  26. ultimate913 says:

    Darren Oliver anyone? Angels didn’t offer arb so no picks will be lost. Although he’ll command more than he is worth at age 39, after having a career year with a 2.71 ERA. What do you guys think? Signing him sounds perfect? or is signing him too risky for your liking? or are Marte and Coke enough lefties to have in the pen?

  27. So Mikey C. wasn’t offered arbitration. It makes even more sense to get him now. Do. It. Cash.

    • JMK aka The Overshare says:

      Who wins in a streetfight, Damon or Cameron?

    • Evil Empire says:

      I’m all for Cameron, but he was a Type B so it doesn’t really matter if he was offered arbitration on not, right? Its one less option for Cameron though, so that’s good.

      I think you can argue the Yankees are one of his likeliest destinations. The Yankees have the need, they proved they were interested in him last year, and he hasn’t given them a reason with his 2009 campaign to change their mind about how they evaluate him in the short-term.

      Buster Olney’s blog today was actually mainly about Mike Cameron and his desire to join a contender. The money quote straight from Cameron:

      “I feel like I can play [CF] with the best of them. At the same time, you have to understand if you want to be in the right spot, [moving to corner outfield] might be an option you want to take. … I’m just trying to get in the right spot to get in the playoffs.”

      So the dude seems to have the right attitude it would take for him to accept his role as a Yankee. I would peg him for 140 games in the regular season if we signed him, so he wouldn’t even take a significant hit in playing time. Honestly, if this seems like as good of a fit as it does to schmucks like me, I would have to think Cashmoney knows what the fuck is up too.

  28. Will says:

    Talk about bullshit. Henry’s heartfelt quotes about the how the Yankees are being cheated by revenue confiscation expose his true motives. He increasingly sees the Red Sox as more of a business and wants to be able to make more money off of them.

    Henry basically wants to have his cake (unshared revenue) and eat it too (have a structural excuse for not spending). In other words, Henry wants a system that basically favors large market teams that prioritize making money over winning ballgames. What he doesn’t address is what happens when the large market clubs stop spending above the luxury caps (like all but the Yankees have essentially done). Not only would the smaller markets lose the tax money, but they’d also be without the revenue sharing all while having to spend more because of the guaranteed percentage of revenue promised to the players. Of course, we shouldn’t be surprised by Henry’s thinly veiled hypocrisy because his team ranks relatively low in terms of payroll as a percentage of revenue.

    It’s amazing that Henry can continually get away with this nonsense without being called on it.

    As for the a salary cap, anyone who advocates it in baseball really needs to study how it is applied in the NFL first. Close scrutiny would reveal that there are so many loopholes in the salary cap and floor that it is really a sham.

  29. Esteban says:

    Did you guys say something? I’m too busy watching Angels strut down runways.

    • JMK aka The Overshare says:

      The internet exists (almost solely) for porn; why watch basic cable? They don’t even get naked!

      And holy lord do the Black Eyed Peas stink.

      • Esteban says:

        SO i guess you’re watching too then. A)It’s in HD B) I don’t know if watching porn in my living room with my parents around would really be acceptable.

        • JMK aka The Overshare says:

          I turned it on after reading your post. I saw a minute of Fergie (butterface) and turned it off. Terrible.

          Of course you’re not just going to fap in the living room. You obviously have a computer. Wait it out. They’re old. They’ll go to bed. THAT’S WHEN YOU STRIKE!!!

  30. ultimate913 says:

    “Marc Carig of the New Jersey Star-Ledger reports that if any free agents are curious about playing for the Yankees, Derek Jeter says they’re welcome to call and ask him any questions they might have. Jeter could save himself some time by simply mailing every prospective free agent a picture of his hand wearing five World Series rings.”

    LOL! My respect for Jeter just went +2.

    • Evil Empire says:

      Random note:

      RE: Revenue gained from Hideki Matsui

      This is something Buster Olney wrote in his blog today, as a follow up to his recent Matsui tweet:

      “Heard this: Yes, the Yankees have signs in their ballpark that were sold after Hideki Matsui joined the team, and yes, a lot of Yankees gear is sold internationally. But the amount of money that the team makes because of Matsui’s marketability has always been very overrated and will not be a factor as the Yankees discuss a possible return for the respected veteran. If Matsui departs and the Yomiuri Giants sign at Yankee Stadium is not renewed, well, the Yankees will just sell the space to another company; there is a line of companies prepared to fill the signage space. If Matsui departs and fewer tickets are used by fans from Japan, well, somebody else will acquire the tickets; the ballpark has been mostly sold out in Matsui’s time with the team. The Yankees hats and shirts that are sold overseas are popular sellers, but keep in mind that the team’s slice of those sales is 1/30th — per Major League Baseball’s licensing agreement. So when the Yankees negotiate the possible return of Matsui or Johnny Damon, or the possible signing of a veteran replacement, it will be about landing the right player at the right place.”

  31. Drew says:

    I didn’t realize how good of a year Lyon had. I think he’ll be looking for too much but I wouldn’t mind Cash taking a run at him.

  32. [...] to be similar to A.J. Burnett’s five year, $82.5M deal. It’s good to see the only the 16th largest market in the game able to go out an do something to improve their team. Posted on Monday, December 14th, 2009 at [...]

Leave a Reply

You may use <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong> in your comment.

If this is your first time commenting on River Ave. Blues, please review the RAB Commenter Guidelines. Login for commenting features. Register for RAB.