Levine on adding payroll at the trade deadline: “We’re the Yankees”


Via Andy McCullough: Team president Randy Levine indicated ownership is willing to add payroll if necessary to complete a move at the trade deadline. “We’re the Yankees. We’re always active. We’re always trying to get better,” he said. “We’ll leave that to [Brian Cashman]. We’ll see where the team is, what’s the best move, what do we really need, what players are coming back, when are they coming back … We’re going to do everything we can to try and win.”

The Yankees opened the season with an all-time high $230.4M payroll, but a huge chunk is eaten up by injured players. The team has recouped a bunch of Mark Teixeira‘s salary from the World Baseball Classic and insurance, and some of that money was already spent on Vernon Wells. New York has a laundry list of needs and, frankly, if they were unable to add payroll at the deadline, their hands would be tied and they wouldn’t be able to do anything other than trade Phil Hughes to clear up about $2.5-3M. Adding payroll is pretty much a must at this point if they want to improve the team.

Categories : Asides, Trade Deadline


  1. Hey Levine, How about you shut the fuck up.

  2. Eddard says:

    If he’s saying they’re the Yankees why was an austerity budget put in for next season? George never would have allowed that. $189 million is a very respectable payroll and a realistic goal if they hadn’t already made so many big dollar commitments. Once you get rid of the albatross contracts then it makes sense to get under $189m if that’s the goal. To remain competitive and get under $189m isn’t realistic with the albatross contracts.

    • MannyGeee says:

      You actually make sense. I actually agree with you.

      Excuse me while a pour myself an Ajax/Clorox martini and take a nap…

      • jsbrendog says:

        george would never have allowed that is where he lost me. i stopped reading.

        • Cool Lester Smooth says:

          But he’s actually right.

          • jsbrendog says:


          • trr says:

            That may be, but George, love him or hate him, is years removed from running the team. We can only live in the present and plan for tomorrow

            • jjyank says:

              I wish more people thought like that. I am so, so tired of people saying “Well The Boss would never have done this or that!”

              • Preston says:

                Let’s face it, the Boss would be in prison for hireing a hit man to murder A-Rod and the team would have used the savings on Josh Hamilton…

            • LK says:

              Also, George had his flaws. The late-90s teams were really built while he was on suspension. The ’09 team was built when he was basically senile. We know that he was still meddling in the team in the 2000s to its detriment (like insisting on Sheffield over Vlad).

              I get why people liked George, because his main problem was he wanted to win too much, and Hal’s problem *might* (we don’t know this yet) be that he doesn’t want to win enough. But even if that’s true, it’s not clear which flaw will actually produce more winning in the long run. I get as frustrated with the upcoming budget as anyone, but the Hal vs. George debate has a long way to go before it’s settled.

          • trr says:

            That may be, but George (love him or hate him) is years removed from running the team. We can only deal with the now while planning for the future.

          • Fin says:

            He may be right but it doesn’t mean the Yankees would be in better shape. IF George were still alive and making decisions its almost certain he would have signed Hamilton and how would that be looking for the Yankees?

            • jjyank says:

              Besides the fact that acquiring over the hill veterns was kind of his thing. Sooooo…Wells and Ichiro would probably still be on the team too.

        • King George says:

          Except for the fact that he’s right? Check the snideness at the door. Civility please.

        • MannyGeee says:

          I actually missed the ‘King George woulda…” bullshit. I disagree with that, but overall I actually am agreeing with the sentiment. Work towards getting to $189M after you pay off your shitty debt albatross contracts. I can sign up for that.

    • I'mVernonI'mVernon4U says:

      Agreed, Eddard. Teams can win under 189, we saw that last year and other years previously. But definitely not with essentially 2 albatross contracts.

    • OhioYanks says:

      A plan was set in motion to see if they could get under $189 million. They never said that it was definitely going to happen. They said it was a goal and would happen if they were still a contender. If they had committed long-term money beyond this season, they would have little choice. They tried to do their best to keep their options open. There have been some hitches, but it’s gone pretty well overall (2.5 out almost half way through the season).

      They still might be able to do it, but between injuries to like 50% of the roster, CC’s bad season, the money they sunk on Ichiro, several of their cost controlled guys underperforming (notably Nova, Adams, Romine, Nunez… though Phelps, Warren, Claiborne, Kelley, Gardner, and Robertson are doing well), and none of the top prospects really knocking down the door (maybe JR Murphy)… it looks less likely that it did a year ago or whatever. Then there are also the sagging ratings.

      A few things could still happen this season to put them in a position to get under $189 million: Pineda comes in hot, A-Rod and Jeter look good, Cervelli is at least respectable, at least one OF prospect is looking like a 2014 starter (Zoilo, Austin, Flores…), and certainly if Adams, Romine, and/or Nova manage to turn it around.

  3. Robinson Tilapia says:

    $230 million payroll? I thought Hal was pocketing the money and going to bottomless titty bars with the money.

    I’d like for Randy to still say they’re TEH YANKEES in the off-season.

    • LK says:

      “I’d like for Randy to still say they’re TEH YANKEES in the off-season.”

      This is really all that needs to be said in response to this news.

  4. lol says:

    Levine on adding payroll at the trade deadline: “We’re the Yankees”

    Really ………so you do nothing in the off season to improve. You let some really good international players walk and now at the trade deadline you wanna add players? So what players are you going to get for cash now? So your going to make a trade :example: for Stanton and you are just going to give the other team cash? I mean I don’t understand this logic? Who are you going to add at the deadline just more trash or players teams have givin up on? Do the Yankees really need 10 more replacement players? How about you make some real signing oops to late for that and work on getting some every day players on this roster.

    • Nathan says:


    • FIPster Doofus says:

      Amen, pal.

    • OhioYanks says:

      I don’t understand your logic. They spent a lot this off-season. It hasn’t all worked out, but they spent a lot to keep their Ps and then on Youk, Ichiro, and to a lesser extent Hafner. In-season trades are always options. And yeah, sometimes that only means taking on the remainder of someone’s salary and giving up a middling prospect. Sometimes it means giving up serious prospects and also taking on some salary. Guys traded at the deadline aren’t just guys other teams gave up on. There are also just teams that aren’t contending and prefer to get some financial relief and/or young talent for their veterans.

  5. Jim Is Bored says:

    I should have known where this thread was doing. O:S to all and to all a good night.

  6. Travis L. says:

    I have a sucky trade proposal!!!! Well, its a trade question/idea, anyway. Is there anyone that Arizona would take that could net us Chris Owings? With Gregorius in the SS position, would they part with Owings?

  7. trr says:

    Actions talk louder than words.
    Speaking of talking, in the past Levine has shown the ability to talk out of both sides of his mouth, and his ass, at the same time

  8. David Ortiz Dealr says:

    I agree with all the why now comments. If theres budgetary room now, where was it in Dec-Feb. At this point its going to be overpaying in $$ or prospects, if not both, for a rental.

    For the first time since 1993, I dont feel like a starter, bull-pen arm and a bat or 2 will be enough. I just dont think 3 players fix this.

    In theory, Jeter, ARod and Pineda are all coming back… so theres your 3 guys. Granderson, and maybe Tex too.

    I’d rather the money be given to Cano and have him locked up.

    • OhioYanks says:

      There was a ton of budgetary room and a ton of spending for 2013. They didn’t commit beyond 2013 to preserve their options. You can agree or disagree, but it’s not very difficult to understand.

      You don’t think that 3 players could fix a team that is only 2.5 games out? I’m not looking at a SP or RP particularly, but 3 bats would be 33% of their line-up. Combine that with some injured guys returning (Granderson and Cervelli are coming back as well as the guys you mentioned), and I don’t see how that doesn’t “fix” this team. Not to say it guarantees anything, but if 3 contributing bats replace 3 dead bats (even if it’s just guys in the line-up bouncing back and picking it up) how is the team not going to be competing?

  9. FEED.ME.MORE! says:

    $300 million dollar payroll or Hal doesn’t give a shit?


    The idea is not to spend MORE it’s to spend wiser.

    Even with the CC-ARod-Tiex-Jeter money, and the arb guys like Gardner and Robertson we still have $80-90 million to spend in the offseason.

    How you spend that money is the issue, but you won’t have to get a #1-2 starter, a still good 1B, a CF and a closer/set-up man.

    I’m really for the $189 plan, BECAUSE I’m tired of patching holes with Vernon Wells and Ichiro. I want the team to almost be forced to make player development a priority.

    Might 2014 be a bad year? Sure. But I started my Yankee fandom when they stunk, so the possibility of it happening has always been there. I’d rather them struggle and develop players than spend money just because and still struggle. Look at the free agents out there this offseason. Who are you going to spend the money on who will stem the tide? Ellsbury? Corey Hart? Gimme a break.

    All of you crying that they don’t spend money will bitch and moan in December about WHO they spend the money on. You can’t just throw money at the problem.

  10. FEED.ME.MORE! says:

    Why do people get so up in arms over GM or Ownership speak?

    It’s as if you prefer them to say:

    “We suck, and our being 2.5 games out a first guarantees we’ll never win a fucking thing! I hate the team and want you all to know it! Yeah we have the highest payroll in sports, but that’s because we want to lose! What type of shithead shows up to watch a perennial playoff team vie for the playoffs.”

    It’s as if you’ve never been a boss or manager or owner of anything in your lives.

  11. ThatstheMelkyMesaWaysa says:

    I really wonder what The Boss would do with this team. I’m betting McCutch, Trout, Harper, Puig, and Cespedes would be on it though.

    • OhioYanks says:

      I’m betting Albert Pujols, Josh Hamilton, CJ Wilson, Zack Greinke… maybe a few of the high ticket IFA types like you mentioned. Not to say that’s entirely a good or bad thing.

      Not sure if you were being sarcastic, but if not what exactly are the Yankees going to trade to the Pirates, Angels, and Nats to get their super-cheap, young studs?

  12. Fin says:

    LMAO…None of those guys would be involved with the Yankees barring Don Corlenoe and a horse head in the other owners beds.

  13. Jonah Falcon says:

    Way to add payroll! What an amazing trading deadline!

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.