Yankees open season with lowest payroll since 2007


Via Bob Nightengale, the Yankees will open the season with a $197.9M payroll, their lowest since 2007. That’s still the highest in MLB, obviously. The Padres are dead last at $53.9M. I believe that is the 25-man Opening Day roster payroll, not the full 40-man roster payroll with benefits that will get counted towards the luxury tax.

Update: Just for the sake of completeness, that number is the 25-man Opening Day roster plus players on the big league DL.

Categories : Asides


  1. Plank says:

    grumble grumble…

  2. 28 this year says:

    They better charge me less for a ticket.

    /that guy’d

    • Typical MIT Nerd says:

      Why is this a sarcastic remark? I have a ticket plan and they’re not exactly hurting for cash. If the Angels can get $3 Billion, what are the Yankee rights worth?

      • jjyank says:

        Because ticket prices and the team’s value have nothing to do with each other? Its about supply and demand, not what the team could possible sell for.

      • Justin Maxwell's Silver Hammer (formerly Rainbow Connection) says:

        He just reads other people typing that here and wants to be just as snarky.

  3. Plank says:


    Interesting article on Hal Steinbrenner.

    • Havok9120 says:

      That was a fantastic read. Thanks a ton for the link.

      • Plank says:

        His attitude in that article reinforces my suspicion that he is gearing up to sell the team in the not too distant future.

        • Havok9120 says:

          It does the opposite for me. I may be naive for believing him when he says “I enjoy it now,” but I really think he does. Its almost certainly the biggest, most complicated thing he’ll ever have a chance to operate. The challenge will be fun (or it would be for most people of that personality type), at least for another decade or so. It depends how much he enjoys the complexities of it as opposed to the money-making side.

          • RetroRob says:

            While it wouldn’t shock me if the Steinbrenner’s sold the team at some point, I wouldn’t expect to see it happen so soon after the passing of their father. All indications are that he wanted the Yankees to be part of the Steinbrenners for generations to come, so to sell the team would mean they would collectively have to ignore his wishes at the end. Yes, I can see it happening, but I don’t think it’s likely right now, and if I had to place a bet, I’d say 25 years hence, there’s a better chance that the Steinbrenners will still own the Yankees than not.

            I used to believe that Hal either wasn’t enough of a baseball fan to want to run the Yankees, or perhaps wanted to make his own mark elsewhere and not live under the shadow of his father. Purely a guess, of course. Yet what a man wants, or for that fact doesn’t want, in his 20s can change quite a bit in his 40s, 50s and beyond.

            The Yankees are a lot more than the baseball team that GMS acquired in 1973. They are now the engine that fuels YES Enterprises, an organization that is much broader than the baseball team. It’s an expanding global brand and an expanding media empire. It’s kind of interesting. CBS acquired the Yankees back in 1960s as a cog in that massive media empire run by Bill Paley. The marriage didn’t work. Yet here we are nearly 40 years later watching a media empire spring out of that very same baseball team. The world is different. Three networks don’t control the content. Viewership is fractured, making brand and content king. The Yankees own both the brand and the content that can fill up hours upon hours of TV time, and also radio time. Rumor has it the Yankees are now looking to buy their own radio station.

            So my point here is that while the Yankees baseball team still drive YES Global Enterprises, there is a lot more business for someone like Hal to run and build. He doesn’t have to be bored. He can now run a now run a media business.

            As I noted when Billy Epler was named Assitant GM, I thought it was interesting for what meant about the future of Brian Cashman. It seemed then, and now, like succession planning. Cashman, like Hal Steinbrenner, are men only in their 40s. There is a lot of road ahead to do interesting things. It seems to me that Cashman is as close to being a Steinbrenner without being one. They seem to have great trust in him. I can see him eventually taking over all operations running the NY Yankees, while Hal focuses more on the media side. Cash still answers to Hal and the Steinbrenners, but he takes over greater control running the baseball teams full operations, while Hal focuses on what he finds much more interesting.

            This is, of course, all just a guess, but I no longer think Hal’s goal is to sell the Yankees.

            • Guest says:

              + 1 Gazillion…

              Not sure I agree with every prognostication here, but this a really awesome, insightful comment.

              • Robinson Tilapia says:

                At some point, the Yankees will be owned by someone not in the Steinbrenner family. Will it happen in the near future? I don’t think so. Everything comes to an end, though, and I can picture this happening WELL within our lifetime. How likely really is it that, say, Hal’s kids will own the team one day?

    • Needed Pitching says:

      I refuse to visit any of those hotels unless Prince Fielder is signed to be front desk clerk.

      • Plank says:

        I’ve been on a hunger strike for months waiting for the Yankees to sign a real DH. The Yankees appeased me by signing king of the hunger strikes – Gandhi.

  4. Kvothe says:

    If George Steinbrenner knew that the Yankees were only outspending the lowest spending team in baseball by only about 400%, he’d be rolling in his grave. We should be outspending them 8 to 1.

    Hal and Cash are RUINING this franchise.

    • Carl says:

      Newsflash: This ain’t George’s Yankees anymore, kid. The days of big free agent spendings are over and not coming back. Move on.

      • Havok9120 says:

        Someone’s sarcasm detector is broken here. It could be mine, but I’m pretty sure it isn’t.

      • CJ says:

        The old time days of 2009?

        • Plank says:

          You said that jokingly, but there is actually some merit to that. That was 3 years ago. 2010 had no big signings, 2011 had Soriano as the only big signing, and this offseason had no big signings (except restructuring Sabathia).

          The two biggest FA signings of the past 3 years have been Soriano and Kuroda, unless I’m missing someone obvious. The organizational shift has already happened.

          3 years is a long time not to make a big signing.

          • Needed Pitching says:

            Jeter, Mo??

            Or are you only referring to external signings?

            I think the big difference since 2009 is they didn’t have big salary coming off the payroll to enable replacement with other big salaries, and they are choosing to keep payroll relatively level. They were able to go big in 2009 because they had Giambi, Moose, Abreau, etc contract expiring.

            • Plank says:

              They lost the Posada contract this offseason without redistributing that payroll. Arb raises largely made that money go away, but still…

              I didn’t include Mo or Jeter since their resignings did nothing to change the payroll landscape of the team. They replaced themselves essentially.

              They will do the same with Mo as with Posada, I think. His money coming off the books won’t be reallocated and the team will be worse for it.

          • Havok9120 says:

            I think his point might more have been that it was done under Hal’s watch. Which is valid, though I agree with your viewpoint more.

            I do think its a question of talent and need more than purely budgetary concerns (or at least it will be after 2015). We’re set, and generally have been. We had holes in the staff last season, but no one worth the money they wanted to fill them. This year, there was someone (Kuroda) and we went and got him. The Yanks (like most of us here) never liked Jackson/Wilson and apparently and didn’t think too highly of Darvish (I don’t blame them). As for the other FA’s….we didn’t really have room for any of them. We’ve got a DH of the future (ARod), and signing Fielder/Pujols and sticking them at DH and then 3B in a few years doesn’t make a ton of sense.

            Like I said, I DO think something of a shift has happened. I just think its less of one than you do and that, if ANY shift has happened, we won’t know until the Yankees have true need of a big time FA (like we did Sabathia, Teix, or A.J.) and we completely pass on them.

          • “The two biggest FA signings of the past 3 years…”

            They tried pretty hard to get Cliff Lee to sign, he just decided to go elsewhere. They didn’t sign him, but it wasn’t because they were outbid.

            Take Soriano off your list and replace him with Cliff Lee. All of a sudden you don’t really see as much of an “organizational shift.”

            I do think there’s probably something to trying to get the payroll down for 2014, I just think your argument/evidence is a little weak and incomplete.

            • Plank says:

              The Yankees offered less money than the Phillies. I can’t figure out how it’s constantly repeated that the Yankees offered more.

              The contracts were similar, but the Phillies offered more money guaranteed according to the leaked Yankees bid.

              • Needed Pitching says:

                iirc, Yankees offered 6 yrs guaranteed, Phillies only 5. Phillies had higher AAV, but Yankees offered higher total guaranteed dollars.

              • Whatever, I’m not going to bother looking this stuff up nor am I motivated to argue it.

                Call the bids even, for all I care. The point is, to look at last offseason and say that Soriano being the biggest signing is good evidence that the Yanks had some sort of organizational shift away from signing free agents is wrong. They tried to sign the biggest fish out there last offseason, they just didn’t get him. There’s probably been a shift, but that bit of evidence isn’t the strongest argument to back up that opinion.

              • Mike Axisa says:

                Yanks offered 6/138 plus a $16M player option. Phils got him for 5/120 plus a vesting option. Yanks offered more total money but a lower AAV.

              • Havok9120 says:

                More money, more years (year, IIRC), less AAV. We whiffed, but Lee made it pretty clear afterwards that it wasn’t because our offer was lacking.

              • Plank says:

                Ok, my bad. The contracts were similar.

                Considering the generous option for the last year of Lee’s Phillies deal and the relative tax rates of NY and PA, I would still think the Phillies offer is more lucrative for Lee, at least I would have taken the Phillies offer over the Yankees offer.

                Your point about the Yankees willingness to spend last offseason is valid. Still, they went after a player and didn’t get him since they didn’t offer enough.

                It seems like the Yankees aren’t willing to admit the price of talent has gone up. Except for middle relievers.

                • Needed Pitching says:

                  “Still, they went after a player and didn’t get him since they didn’t offer enough.”

                  Not sure this is true. Seems Lee wanted to go to Phillies. Maybe if the Yankees made a ridiculously over market offer he might have been swayed, but it’s probably not wise for the Yankees to do that.

                  • Plank says:

                    Assuming every FA is motivated by money, every signing is over market, or to look at it another way, every other offer is below market.

                    Either way, the Phillies offered the more appealing option financially. They were similar, but a guaranteed 5/132.5 or 6/147.5 depending on if the option is picked up or not is better than the Yankees offer of around 6/140 in a higher tax state.

              • RetroRob says:

                I think, although I wouldn’t bet my life on it, but it’s the other way around. The Yankees offered more guaranteed money in the contract over a longer period of time, while the Phillies offered a higher AAV.

                Yet the Yankees were never given a chance to counter the offer. They were called by Lee’s agent to say that he had accepted another offer. In other words, Lee wanted to go to the Phillies, he had the offers of the Yankees and Rangers, and then structured a deal that was to his liking. Less guaranteed money (less years), but higher AAV. I’m pretty sure the Yankees would have worked to match it but they were not given the opportunity.

                That’s my memory, which of course can be faulty!

                • Plank says:

                  Yeah, my memory was faulty. The Yankees offered more guaranteed dollars and lower AAV, but there is no simple way to say one contract is better than the other.

                  I wouldn’t want to assume how the negotiations went. For all we know, Lee’s people said they want to do a single bid from each interested team and they would choose the best one – no second chances. Who knows? No one who has spoken publicly.

          • Mike Axisa says:

            They offered Lee more money than anyone else, it’s not like they didn’t try. Who did they pass on that was a realistic fit during those three years (ie not Pujols, Fielder, Reyes)? Darvish and Wilson? That’s pretty much it.

            • Plank says:

              Carlos Pena seemed like an obvious fit this offseason, but the Yankees didn’t want to spend the extra 7 million it would have cost to sign him.

              • Needed Pitching says:

                Not sure Pena would have signed with NY for that. Coming to NY he would have been a platoon DH. In TB he is a full time 1B. I’m not sure he would have taken the same pay for a reduced role, especially on just a one year deal.

                I agree he seemed like an obvious fit though.

                • Plank says:

                  True, he may not have wanted the reduced role, but I bet he would do it for an extra million dollars.

                  The point I was making was that they didn’t even make a play for him for financial reasons.

              • Havok9120 says:

                I really don’t think he would have taken the role we were asking of him over a starting 1B job though, do you? I mean, maybe if he just wanted to play for the Yankees and (arguably) have a better shot at a ring, but still…

      • Justin Maxwell's Silver Hammer (formerly Rainbow Connection) says:

        Stay off the internet, please.

  5. Carl says:

    Mike was way off with his estimates, (220M Opening day payroll). I got some heat for stating it was going to come under last year’s 205 Million. I can see next year coming in at 190-195M.

    • Needed Pitching says:

      I think the 220M was in reference to luxury tax payroll, not actual payroll. As of now, it appears their luxury tax payroll for 2012 will end up 215M+, depending on earned bonuses (and potential future trades)

      • Carl says:

        Did you not see the OPENING DAY PAYROLL?? Mike also stated 225-230+ for Luxury tax purposes. Also Mike is way off with adding in benefits and the 40. Just look at last year, what they opened with and what they paid tax on. So in short, you thought WRONG. I also predicted they would pay around the same tax this coming year as they did last year (Just for the record).

        • Needed Pitching says:

          I don’t recall the article you are referring to, so I’m not going to argue the details (I’m guessing it may have been pre-AJ trade though). My point is opening day actual payroll and luxury tax payroll don’t necessarily coincide. Based on last year, it seems adding 40-man roster players and benefit costs added about 15-16M to their luxury tax payroll.

          • Carl says:

            LOL. Incentives?? Nope, nobody had incentives on their contract……..Dude really?? And you were the first to comment back then during Mike’s initial writeup and once again now. Off the top of my head Freddy had recieved 2.5 Million in incentives, but keep fishing….DOH

            • Needed Pitching says:

              wtf are you talking about? I factored in incentives and bonuses earned last year. Using the luxury tax numbers (not actual pay, but what the player counts for in luxury tax calculations, based on the CBA in effect last year) last year’s payroll for the 25-Man roster and 60-day DL players , INCLUDING BONUSES, and including Brackman(since he is gone now and made an unusually high amount for a 40-man minor leaguer) came to about 196M. That includes everything used in luxury tax calculations except benefits and the remainder of the 40-man roster. Their final luxury tax payroll was reported as 212.7M. That leaves 16M+ for benefits and 40-man roster players.

              • Carl says:

                Real slow now, OK. Opening day payroll last year was 205M, without the 40, Benefits and Incentives. It finished at 212.7 after INCENTIVES were EARNED. Martin also hit some of his incentives with Freddy.

                Now if this year’s opening day payroll is 197+, and they have less contracts on their book this year that payout incentives, could one come to the conclusion that this year Tax bill will come in lower (Barring additional moves). FYI, Incetives don’t count until they’re earned, meaning they’re calculated end of year.

                • Needed Pitching says:

                  Reallly slow now.

                  Opening day payroll uses actual pay. Luxury tax payroll uses AAV and other conditions set forth in the CBA. THEY ARE NOT THE SAME NUMBERS. Last year’s LUXURY TAX NUMBERS, as I said, came to about 196M including all bonuses that were earned and everything except benefits and 40-man roster players. That means benefits and 40-man roster players added 16M+ to their final luxury tax payroll.

                  I’ll make it easy for you. 212.7M – 196M = 16.7M

                  Opening day payroll has no bearing on any of this because opening day payroll is based on actual pay + prorated signing bonuses. This is not the same number as a player’s luxury tax number, which is based on AAV + earned bonuses + other stipulations set forth in the CBA.

                  In short, opening day payroll and luxury tax payroll use completely different calculations.

                  • Needed Pitching says:

                    And fwiw, the luxury tax numbers for this years opening day roster and players currently on the DL comes already to about 199.5M without including any bonuses, benefits, Pettitte, or 40-man roster minor leaguers. So the final luxury tax number this year will be over 215M with no bonuses. And there are very big bonuses available this year. ARod gets 6M if he hits 31 HR. Garcia, Jones, and Ibanez can combine for about 6M in bonuses (though most of it is unlikely to be earned)

                  • Carl says:

                    Dude, why are you turning this into something it’s not??? MIKE WROTE A WRITE-UP AND IN IT HE STATED A 220M OPENING DAY PAYROLL(Only 5 Million is saved this year from AJ). AFTER he announced the real numbers, I commited.

                    Do you even have a clue?? Some players recieved paychecks YEAR ROUND (Most 6 months), which then need to be minus’d off the opening day payroll numbers since they’ve recieved some of their pay already. Opening day payroll is from opening day-to end of season.

                    In SHORT, I NEVER said they were the same. Since it seems you have a comprehension problem, here is my initial post.

                    Mike was way off with his estimates, (220M Opening day payroll). I got some heat for stating it was going to come under last year’s 205 Million. I can see next year coming in at 190-195M. NOTE the OPENING DAY PAYROLL in ( )

                    TYY to understand this, MIKE did list an opening day payroll in his writeup which is what my comment is based off. STOP trying to turn it into something that benefits your (LACK of) argument.

                    Thorazine might help you???

                    • Needed Pitching says:

                      Again, for the learning impaired, Mike clearly stated he was using luxury tax figures (AAV) in the computation of that opening day payroll. Also, when a payer is paid in the season has no bearing on either payroll.
                      You are saying Mike is way off in his opening day payroll computed using luxury tax numbers because it is different than an opening day figure computed using an entirely different methodology. You are comparing apples to oranges. The numbers Axisa was using in the article (luxury tax numbers) have nothing to do with the numbers used to compute the 197.9 M opening day payroll mentioned in the article.

                      I don’t understand why you can’t seem to grasp this very simple concept.

                  • Carl says:

                    Mcfly, You found some writeup that suits your needs, but I don’t see my comments on the bottom, so nice try, but no cigar.

                    Then you tried bringing AAV into, no cigar

                    Maybe this surprises you but RAB is wrong about most predictions they make.

                    OPENING DAY PAYROLL IS OPENING DAY PAYROLL, no-matter how you want to dress it.


                    • Needed Pitching says:

                      it’s calculated 2 different ways. I you can’t understand that you would get 2 different results using 2 different methodologies, I can’t help you.
                      Mike’s estimate was a bit high. I’ve acknowledged that. It was also computed using AAV instead of salary + prorated bonus. If you calculate the opening day payroll using AAV, you would get very close to the 207.5 for the opening day roster that Mike estimated here:

                      If you compare apples to apples, Mike’s numbers are close. If you compare apples to oranges, of course you are going to get very different results.

                • Carl says:

                  My Bad, I shouldn’t of use Mcfly’s year end number of 212.7. It was 216M. http://sports.espn.go.com/espn.....id=7381589

          • Carl says:

            “so I’m not going to argue the details.” Would that be a first?? Do you always feel the need to comment on everybodies posts?? Seems Ted has gotten a life, I suggest you follow.

            • Needed Pitching says:

              Dude, your coming back weeks after the article to gloat (despite not understanding the numbers used in the article, and showing a general ignorance of how luxury tax payrolls are different than opening day payrolls)

              If anybody needs to get a life, it’s you. If you can’t stand somebody replying to your post, don’t post. The reply button is there for a reason.

              • Carl says:

                Dude, (bet you didn’t know this Mr. Brainy) MO also has some money in this year’s contract DEFFERED until 2013. I think it’s 3 M off the top of my head. So you’re numbers are Garbage.

                You really like calling people out don’t you?? I didn’t write much my first comment so umm, it seems you took offensive, but whatever dude. It’s like arguing with Beavis and Butthead. LMFAO

                • Needed Pitching says:

                  Mo does have money deffered. The deferred money is included in the luxury tax calculation at its present value since the money is deferred without interest. 1.5M is deferred each year. Accounting for the deferred payments, the present value comes to about 14.93M instead of 15M. I already accounted for that. I also accounted for the deferred pay in Jeter’s contract as well.

                  And I don’t get off on calling people out. If you look at my first reply, I simply pointed out that Mike was using luxury tax numbers, which are different than the numbers used in opening day payroll calculations. Your ridiculous response to my making a simple observation is what escalated this.

                  • Carl says:

                    And I stated from the GET that it was off of Mike’s opening day numbers. Why is that hard for you to comprehend?? But you had to blow it up!! And BLOW, you did. I have seen you do with with a number of posters in the past, so it’s nothing new.

                    AGAIN my comment was.

                    Mike was way off with his estimates, (220M Opening day payroll). I got some heat for stating it was going to come under last year’s 205 Million. I can see next year coming in at 190-195M.


                    • Needed Pitching says:

                      Again, your comparing opening day numbers calculated with 2 different methodologies. It’s not a valid comparison. Mike computed his opening day numbers using AAV, the calculation’s for the 197.9 in this article uses salary + prorated signing bonuses. You are comparing 2 completely different sets of numbers.

                      And the only one blowing up is you. I’m rationally arguing a point. And you are irrationally not getting it.

                • Dude says:

                  Stop calling me and using my name, especially when you don’t know what you’re talking about.

        • Havok9120 says:

          Um. So basically you’re not only tooting your own horn but doing so rudely and for no other reason than to proclaim your brilliance to teh interwebz?

          Right then. You should open your own Yanks blog, and probably ask for your money back from RAB. Nice talking to you.

          • Robinson Tilapia says:

            So much dick-waving here that I began to wonder when the blog turned into a porn channel overnight.

    • Havok9120 says:

      He was generally referring to luxury tax + 40 man roster + 60 day DL payroll. His still may be a mite high unless our benefits are higher than expected.

      • Carl says:

        Benefits and the 40 come in UNDER 10 Million. Mike was way off predicting that as well (13-15M). It doesn’t take much to play with numbers that just occured last year, from opening, to final tax bill. DOH

        • Needed Pitching says:

          It doesn’t take much if you are using the correct numbers to start with. It seems you are not. Total for benefits plus 40-man roster minor leaguers came to about 15-16M last year.

        • Havok9120 says:

          I even admitted that he was probably high (by ~5 by using your numbers; by about 2% using NP’s- either way, its not by much), and you still saw the need to be rude. Yikes.

          • Carl says:

            Rude?? Seems some have a bad habit on jumping on others. And dam right, I hit it on the nose, my opening day number and barring any additional moves, the year end number. Let’s take another Blogs article, change a few words add a personal opinion and throw it up on RAB?? Mcfly, I didn’t ask you to comment on my post, did I??. LMFAO

            • Needed Pitching says:

              Except you are comparing apples to oranges. The numbers Mike was using were the numbers used for luxury tax purposes, which are not the same as the numbers used in the opening day payroll calculation. Mike was a bit high in his projections, but you are wrong in your comparison as well.

              • Carl says:

                Mcfly, beccause Mike likes to OVER-ANALYZE everything, he did have an opening day payroll figuare in his write-up. You’re just fishing and coming up with SQUAT. I never said they were the same numbers. WOW, somebody needs to put their helmet on before running into walls????

                • Needed Pitching says:

                  If you are referring to this article http://riveraveblues.com/2012/.....our-64412/
                  all of the numbers Mike was using were luxury tax numbers. The opening day figure he was talking about was the luxury tax figure for the opening day roster. He clearly states the numbers he was using “The money listed is in terms of average annual value, which is what is used to calculate the luxury tax.”
                  Calculating the opening day payroll using luxury tax numbers is not the same as the 197.9M referred to in this article. Ther are different calculations entirely. Mike was a bit high on his estimates, but it has nothing to do with the 197.9 reported today.

                  • Carl says:

                    MIKE also posted 4 parts to the 2014 budget and countless other writeups which he tends to go over board on. Then we got some more writeups from the rest of the crew as well.

                    WOW, to spend 1 hour+ to find that write-up, a litte desperate??

                    Maybe NEEDS-HELMET is a better handle??

                    • Needed Pitching says:

                      You were the one referring to Mike’s numbers. In fairness to you, I wanted to know what you were referring to. And it took 2 seconds to find. And it indicates everything I’ve said. You are comparing numbers arrived at using 2 different methodologies. Which was my original point. Which you keep arguing despite all evidence showing that 2 different methodologies were being used and you are comparing apples to oranges.

                      Yes. Opening day payrolls computed using 2 completely different methodologies that have nothing to do with each other turn out to be different.
                      Go figure.

                    • Carl says:

                      Now do us all a favor and save this thread. We will revisit this when the Yankees receive their luxury tax bill for 2012.

                      I’d BET that is comes in right around last year’s number, NOT WHAT MIKE CALCULATED.

                      GOODNIGHT MCFLY

                    • Needed Pitching says:

                      So I’m on the record, as of right now, they would be about 216M for total luxury tax payroll, without any bonuses. If Alex hits at least 31 HR, it will be over 222M. Adding Andy, other bonuses, and potential acquisitions, it will go even higher.
                      My guess, without a major $ acquisition, is the final luxury tax payroll will be 217-221M if ARod doesn’t hit 31 HR’s, and 223-227M if he does get a HR bonus this year.

                      What number are you on record for??

                  • Carl says:

                    THAT”S NOT THE WRITE-UP MCFLY. Do you see my comments below it???

                • Biff Tannen says:

                  Biff: That’s about as funny as a screen door on a battleship.

                  McFly: It’s a “screen door on a submarine,” you idiot.

            • Havok9120 says:

              You posted on a public forum using numbers that were incorrect for the comparison you were making. If that isn’t begging someone to comment, I don’t know what is.

              Numbers that are luxury tax adjusted are not equal to numbers that are not luxury tax adjusted. I’ve seen your brilliance and am converted. I’ll be ignoring this thread now. Its about time for bed anyway.

              ‘Night, night.

    • Bunt Gardner says:

      Is this Sheldon Cooper?

  6. lance bass says:

    OH YEAH!

  7. Yeah, that number is BS.

  8. Chris says:

    Not bad only 11 mill off of the magic number and its 2 years away. Looks like they will be in great shape and won’t have to make any shocking no signings (ie Cano).

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.