Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
MLB 2009 Season
- Thread starter zioxide
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
yeah right. K-Rod left, Fuentes stepped in, had almost 50 saves. K-Rod who?
The Angels (and Mike Scioscia) won't just watch and do nothing. They have a strong farm system, and, granted Vlad is no young chap anymore, but I think they will do fine. Vlad was out on the DL several times this year, and they still won 97 games. Sure, they don't have 600 million to throw at players, but that doesn't always get good results.
Oh, I HATE the Yankees. I don't think of any of the world series and ALCS title runs they have had in the last 15 years, has been with a team with a payroll of less than 300 million... Seriously..I understand EVERYTEAM, in essence "buys" a championship to some point, but the Yankees have been the highest, or in the top 2, every year, for as long as i can remember.
I like Derek Jeter, C.C., Damon is ok, but I despise A-Fraud. He WILL have an astericks next to his stats when it is all said and done. If not, why not Bonds? I think A-Fraud didn't cheat in Seattle (well, who knows, anything he says is a lie), but after that...
/end rant
Fuentes is no K-Rod and it shows in the post season.yeah right. K-Rod left, Fuentes stepped in, had almost 50 saves. K-Rod who?
The Angels (and Mike Scioscia) won't just watch and do nothing. They have a strong farm system, and, granted Vlad is no young chap anymore, but I think they will do fine. Vlad was out on the DL several times this year, and they still won 97 games. Sure, they don't have 600 million to throw at players, but that doesn't always get good results.
Oh, I HATE the Yankees. I don't think of any of the world series and ALCS title runs they have had in the last 15 years, has been with a team with a payroll of less than 300 million... Seriously..I understand EVERYTEAM, in essence "buys" a championship to some point, but the Yankees have been the highest, or in the top 2, every year, for as long as i can remember.
I like Derek Jeter, C.C., Damon is ok, but I despise A-Fraud. He WILL have an astericks next to his stats when it is all said and done. If not, why not Bonds? I think A-Fraud didn't cheat in Seattle (well, who knows, anything he says is a lie), but after that...
/end rant
You most have forgotten the 90's team that barely had any stars on it at all.
You want to say A-Rod is a cheat fine, but name me any other players that we know are 100% clean? Can't do it can you.
yeah right. K-Rod left, Fuentes stepped in, had almost 50 saves. K-Rod who?
The Angels (and Mike Scioscia) won't just watch and do nothing. They have a strong farm system, and, granted Vlad is no young chap anymore, but I think they will do fine. Vlad was out on the DL several times this year, and they still won 97 games. Sure, they don't have 600 million to throw at players, but that doesn't always get good results.
Oh, I HATE the Yankees. I don't think of any of the world series and ALCS title runs they have had in the last 15 years, has been with a team with a payroll of less than 300 million... Seriously..I understand EVERYTEAM, in essence "buys" a championship to some point, but the Yankees have been the highest, or in the top 2, every year, for as long as i can remember.
I like Derek Jeter, C.C., Damon is ok, but I despise A-Fraud. He WILL have an astericks next to his stats when it is all said and done. If not, why not Bonds? I think A-Fraud didn't cheat in Seattle (well, who knows, anything he says is a lie), but after that...
/end rant
You don't want to believe it? Fine. This is a team with one strong pitcher in Lackey and rumor has it he wants to go home to Texas. Fuentes is overrated and got lucky in the last game againt a guy who has 1 or two hits in the playoffs. Vlad's problems will never go away and he is not the same player. Once you have knee problems, you'll always have them. You have no idea how good any players that come up in the farm system will be.
I'm not saying they won't make the playoffs next year but this is the last year where they the PITA to the Yankees and Red Sox. Well at least for a couple of years anyway.
As for A-Rod I was never his biggest fan so you're not hurting my feelings but he is as twice as good as any player you have on your team with or without 'roids.
Most teams have not been to a WS or championship series this decade. Many teams either have no WS games in recent history, win or lose, or the last one they had was 20, 30 or more years ago. The Yankees had 4 wins out of 5 tries culminating in their last in 2000. So no, I don't think the Yankees need another one nor do I think it's been a long time for them.
I don't get anybody here seeing why NY needs another ring. For the players on their team that don't have a ring, some of them are shoe ins for the hall of fame or the biggest paychecks for years to come. Somehow, I don't really feel for them.
Sure the Phillies won last year, but they were around since the early days of baseball over 100 years ago and they only have two rings, 28 years apart, so I am going to go with the Phillies (or Angels) even though I think New York could be all over them unless the Phillies come up with some amazing pitching. If, and that's a big if, the Angels make it, they will have to really step up. The Phillies can rest for a few days and savor their NLCS championship, but their glee will be short lived when they face the Yankees. Going against this Yankees lineup, I wouldn't feel safe unless I beat them in the World Series. Even if I were up 3-0 on them, odds say if anyone can come from behind, it's them.
Unless you are really young, you have to remember Jeter and company with a fistful of rings. Both the Angels and the Phillies have some hard won battles in the future to get to 4 or 5 rings themselves, if they ever get to that point in our lifetimes. It could be 100 years before the Angels or Phillies win their next world series, but the Yankees are almost guaranteed to get to at least two or three WS a decade.
Most teams have not been to a WS or championship series this decade. Many teams either have no WS games in recent history, win or lose, or the last one they had was 20, 30 or more years ago. The Yankees had 4 wins out of 5 tries culminating in their last in 2000. So no, I don't think the Yankees need another one nor do I think it's been a long time for them.
I don't get anybody here seeing why NY needs another ring. For the players on their team that don't have a ring, some of them are shoe ins for the hall of fame or the biggest paychecks for years to come. Somehow, I don't really feel for them.
Sure the Phillies won last year, but they were around since the early days of baseball over 100 years ago and they only have two rings, 28 years apart, so I am going to go with the Phillies (or Angels) even though I think New York could be all over them unless the Phillies come up with some amazing pitching. If, and that's a big if, the Angels make it, they will have to really step up. The Phillies can rest for a few days and savor their NLCS championship, but their glee will be short lived when they face the Yankees. Going against this Yankees lineup, I wouldn't feel safe unless I beat them in the World Series. Even if I were up 3-0 on them, odds say if anyone can come from behind, it's them.
Unless you are really young, you have to remember Jeter and company with a fistful of rings. Both the Angels and the Phillies have some hard won battles in the future to get to 4 or 5 rings themselves, if they ever get to that point in our lifetimes. It could be 100 years before the Angels or Phillies win their next world series, but the Yankees are almost guaranteed to get to at least two or three WS a decade.
I don't get this philosophy that is shared by you and others on this board. It's not a question of need, but wanting another championship. Do you really care who wins the W.S. other than your team and maybe the team you hate? I couldn't care less if the Cubs never won a W.S. ever again.
I'd seriously doubt that you'd have to wait a long time to for the Phillies or Angels to win. They don't have small payrolls. Yes, the Yankees will always have an advantage in payroll as will a few other teams. If you look at the Mets or the 2008 Yankees, that doesn't mean you win. It still comes down to talent, hunger, and chemistry.
Most of the Yankees wins in the late 90's were because they were the best team. It wasn't because they spent a lot of money. In reality they stopped winning after they started over spending. So you can't really say that once the payroll went over 200 million that they starting winning all these championships.
Those all matter, but after payroll. Sad, but true. Look at all the talent the Yankees have bought over the decades.
All the passion in the world won't help you win a WS. Let me understand this, of the millions of baseball players in this world, the best few hundred are in the majors, right?
..so I would figure they all have passion and drive to win. Look at how hard they worked to get into the majors as individuals. And then there is a team which can cherry pick the best players among major league players and get them to work as a unit. This is what makes the Yankees a perennial threat in baseball.
The odds are always in the majority for the Yankees to win the ALCS and if in the World Series, that, too.
Not that I know of. It kind of stinks when a team starts doing really well with a player, or two teams, or even three in a season and then they end up in NY pinstripes. I am just glad NY didn't buy Bonds during his productive years in San Francisco. It was always a fear in the back of my mind. The Yankees did take the Bay Area's Jason Giambi and for a long time on sports radio, I didn't hear the end of that.
This jealously of NY's payroll goes all the way back to when they got Reggie Jackson. I really think he had one or two championships with Oakland left in him. But his talent got utilized with the Yankees.
The Yankees are a big market team and make a ton of money. They can afford the big players. There are no rules saying the Yankees can't do it. Some teams make a profit but pocket the money. The Yankees take the money they make and put it back into the team. I think if more owners did that we would have a more competitive balance. If a city can't afford to support a team they have no business having one. Small market teams get money from baseball to keep players but a lot of them chose not too.
Don't blame Reggie on the Yankees blame free agency.
Don't blame Reggie on the Yankees blame free agency.
I agree that the Yankees put it back into their team. No professional sports team does it better than the Yankees. It just gets old having seen them win so many ALCS and WS championships. I was glad the year Boston beat the odds and won it all in 2004. I really don't see that as a new era where Boston will dominate New York or anything, just an anomaly.
The best I can hope for is another anomaly, like the Angels taking the ALCS but they will have to do something in the second half of this game which they are losing. The Yankees are the last team anybody wants to be trailing in a game. If the Yankees get it, then I will root for another anomaly, which would be the Phillies beating the Yankees. Many where I am didn't think the Phillies were up to the Dodgers.
At the end of the day, if it's the Phillies, it's still their decent lineup (if they are all playing their best) against New York's superstar lineup. With New York's roster, they can literally have half their players suck in a game and still beat any team in baseball.
Sure, there are those who want to see the Phillies sweep the Yankees if those two meet, but if the Phillies win the WS, it will be six or seven games and none of them will be blowouts in favor of the Phillies. The best most teams can hope for is to beat the Yankees by a point late in the game. The Yankees, OTOH, have made it a tradition to blowout teams left and right. It's enough to have people hate the Yankees more than any other team in baseball. Invariably, people always see that the Yankees usually do well in part with players they got who were stars on the teams they used to be on before they went to the Yankees.
That's simply not true. The Marlins have won 2 WS (1 against the Yanks) since since they've been around which is as much or more than every team in baseball with the exception of the Yankees. since at least 1990. The Mets have continually have the second or third highest payroll in baseball for awhile and have nothing to show for it. The same goes for the Dodgers who haven't been to the WS in twenty years. Look at the teams that have been in the WS. You will be surprised to know that there were a lot of teams with small market payrolls.
Sidenote: Tge ball 4 to A-Rod was a strike. That's a superstar bases on balls.
Nope...but it would be interesting to see how competitive the Yankees would be if a salary cap was introduced...
The Yankees spent over $50M more on their roster ($201M) than the next closest team (NY Mets - $149M).
I think a cap at $90M would make the MLB a heck of a lot more interesting...(12 teams are above this as of opening day 2009)
Hickman
The other side is how much do the Yankees give back in luxury taxes to the league.
I am not talking about one example here or there, but in the long term.
Yes, there are teams with small budgets who have good, even great seasons. The Yankees are going for their 27th ring and it looks like they are not far from that. What other sport can you think of where a team dominates through several generations?
The Yankees, to me, seem to have an overall team legacy which would be the equivalent of the combination (in football terms) of the 1950s Browns, 60s GB, 70s Steelers, and 80s 49ers.
Or maybe the 60s Raiders, the 70s and 90s Cowboys, and the Tom Brady era Patriots combined.
Or in basketball terms, the Yankees are like the 80s and more recent Lakers combined with the Celtics of the 80s, and 90s Chicago Bulls franchises.
The Yankees professional sports franchise is just so deep and wide that it's mind blowing. They are not just another sports dynasty, but the dynasty to define all dynasties in sports in general. Why not a cap like Brian Hickman, above, suggests?
Yikes, the Yankees are two runs ahead in the 6th inning. This does not look good for the Angels. This far in the game and the Angels have just one point? This sucks.
Taxes schmaxes....the Yankees have a bottomless pit of money...the taxes are not a deterrent at all to them..
In fact, it just adds to the Yankees ability to buy a more powerful team, since some of the smaller market teams would not be able to afford taxes if they attempted to buy a better roster...
The luxury taxes may have been a good idea, but it was not implemented properly...the Yankees wipe their collective asses with $27M a year...
The only way to really level the playing field is to introduce a salary cap...IMHO....
Hickman
That's fine if you want that but I think that the salary cap is horrible. The NBA version can send a team into oblivion for years because the long term contracts kill their ability to sign free agents. The NFL version creates so much parity that there really are no great teams anymore. A successful team like the Patriots are not nearly as great as the teams that existed pre-cap and rhose in the early days of the cap.
It's funny you mention the Mets too. How is their payroll working out for them. Why is the salary cap always brought up when the Yankees are successful? Why is it not bought up with the Red Sox who I think are third. This is just Yankee bias. Like I said, look at the teams that have been to the World Series in the past 15 years. You will find many small market teams. The Marlins have won 2 W.S. And I believe the Twins won two. For all their high payrolls through the 80s, the Yankees weren't in the WS.
Agreed. Also many other teams are paying this tariff as well.
I dont even call the NBA's a Cap its the most Confusing thing close to it and i think you need to be a accountant or a Team Gm to figure out what the heck it exactly means
No, look at the teams who have gone since the inception of the World Series. This paints a clear picture. Even in the last 15, it hasn't been bad for NY with four or five rings. Any way you see it, whether its the post season or regular season, or regular and post seasons combined, there's a good argument to be made for a salary cap.