I'm conflicted
brianj
I love the Yankees.
brianj
powrwrap
> I hate the Yankees.
>
> I love the Yankees.
I'm not conflicted.
I don't like the Yankees.
I don't hate the Phillies.
I don't hate the Yankees.
I don't like the Phillies.
GO PHILLIES!
Scott Smith
wrote:
I don't really care one way or the other about the Phillies.
.
.
- Scott Smith: scott...@iphouse.com
MySpace: http://www.myspace.com/choppersmith
AnnE
> On Mon, 2 Nov 2009 08:25:18 -0800 (PST), powrwrap <powrw...@aol.com>
> wrote:
>
> >On Nov 2, 8:26 am, brianj <firstp...@turtlecreek.net> wrote:
> >> I hate the Yankees.
>
> >> I love the Yankees.
>
> >I'm not conflicted.
>
> > I don't like the Yankees.
> > I don't hate the Phillies.
> > I don't hate the Yankees.
> > I don't like the Phillies.
>
> >GO PHILLIES!
>
> I'm not conflicted. I don't like the Yankees.
>
> I don't really care one way or the other about the Phillies.
>
> .
> .
>
> MySpace: http://www.myspace.com/choppersmith
Gosh, you guys make me laff. I've been saying the same thing for
days.
Are we just sore that the TWINS are not playing instead of the Yanks?
But I'm not sure I could handle them being there at this time of year
between the Gophers, Vikings, Wild, and Timberwolves. Sheesh. It's
about time there is a separation between the sports.
AnnE
Jack Johnson
wouldn't have to worry about it right now. (lol).
Go Phillies.......but, let's face it. Even if the Phils win tonight,
they're not gonna sweep the Yankees back home in New York. They're
not playing well enough. There's always next year.
AnnE
The more games they play, the more $$$$s are made!
We'll see.
AnnE NY in 7 bah
brianj
If I had thought about it longer, I would have written:
I hate the Yankees.
I love some of the Yankees.
I just can't bring myself to hate guys like Jeter and Pettite.
brianj
brianj
Upon further reflection, let me say:
I don't always hate the Yankees, though I sometimes do.
I can't help but respect some of the Yankees sometimes, for the way
they play the game.
There. I feel better about it now.
brianj
atjar
Hate is a strong word that loses its impact if overused.
You really are jealous of the Yankees success because they beat the
Twins in the playoffs constantly, but with real commitment from
management, the Twins could be a real World Series contender. Yet that
won't happen. That's why Torii Hunter and Johan Santana went bye bye,
and Mauer will be next.
I respect Morneau and Mauer and Gardenhire and I will see them at
Hammond Stadium in Fort Myers in March.
AJ
powrwrap
>
> You really are jealous of the Yankees success because they beat the
> Twins in the playoffs constantly,
Please show where anyone in this group said they were jealous of the
Yankees success.
> but with real commitment from
> management, the Twins could be a real World Series contender.
What, like building a new ballpark? Like locking up an MVP first
baseman for seven years at $14M a year? Like signing a 16 year old SS
to the second highest signing bonus in MLB history?
The Yankees were able to buy another championship (Sabathia, Teixiera,
Burnett) because they have the revenues. Like just about every MLB
team the Yankees spend about 55% of their revenues on salary. They
happen to have the most revenues. Just because somebody may have
personal wealth it does not mean they are going to throw it away on
high-priced free agents.
> Yet that
> won't happen. That's why Torii Hunter and Johan Santana went bye bye,
> and Mauer will be next.
Mauer will be signed this off season to a contract extension. Hunter
and Santana left because other teams WITH HIGHER REVENUES offered them
ridiculous amounts of money.
brianj
>
> - Show quoted text -
I know that what you are saying is conventional wisdom, but the truth
is that the Twins offered Hunter and Santana a lot of money. A lot.
The organization was not trying to get by on the cheap in either
case. You can fault the Twins' front office for many things, but
failing to offer these guys really nice contracts is not one of them.
You also make it sound like a vice that the organization doesn't have
a higher payroll. But the truth is, they just don't have anywhere
near the kind of money available for player salaries that the Yankees
do. So they have to create winning teams using a completly different
model. To an outsider, this model looks like a failure when the Twins
lose somebody like Hunter or Santana, but it is just part of the way
the system works (though I will amit it hurts when it happens).
Sometimes the stars move on, and you have to have thought of that
ahead of time, and developed players who can (arguably) take their
places.
My sometimes negative feelings about the Yankees are really more about
how the team is brought together, because I am a fan of a team that
doesn't have the option of going out and signing, for example, CC
Sabathia at whatever price he demands. I am not jealous of the
Yankees' success. I am just a little miffed that they have an
advantage over the Twins that will last forever--an advantage the
Twins have to try to overcome every year (Lately, that has not been
working out so well.). I don't have anything against the players. As
I have said, any baseball fan who doesn't respect and even admire guys
like Pettite and Jeter and Texiera should pay closer attention, in my
opinion.
brianj
atjar
If I remember correctly, Hunter, the face of the Twins organization
all those years, and for that, the Twins were offering him a 3-year
contract. You can argue money; Angels offered not only more money, but
what Hunter wanted, more years. And that's as I said again, to the
face of your franchise, who I remember watching in A ball when Fort
Myers was the Twins farm team, all he deserved was a three-year
contracr.
Santana, same thing in some ways. Was told Twins don't offer 5 or 6-
year contracts for pitchers; they don't, it's not what they do.
Well, they should have since the Mets offered 6 years. Santana is one
of those once in a generation kind of pitchers where you throw such
arbitrary "we don't offer those kind of long term contracts"
philosophies out the window.
Again, the Twins stuck to their guns and like Hunter, Santana walked
as well.
AJ
brianj
Still, it has to do with what resources are available. If the Yankees
agree to pay CC millions of dollars for many years, and he fails to
produce, they lick their wounds and try again with somebody else. If
the Twins sign Santana for 6 years and his arm falls off after two,
they are in deep. And there will be no money to pay anyone to replace
him, because he will be sitting on his couch collecting the Twins'
money. Because of their limited resources, the Twins are just not in
a position to enter into the kind of contracts the Yankees can sign.
Will Joe Mauer be the exception? Maybe. I believe the Twins have to
sign him. He knows that, and every Twins fan knows that. That should
put him in the driver's seat at negotiation time. But he also wants
to win, and that means that the Twins have to be able to afford to
build a team around him (and Morneau). If everybody does the right
thing, it can happen, and everybody makes money, and the Twins get a
good team.
There's no magic to this formula. It's just a lot more complicated
trying to build a winning team when you have less money.
brianj
powrwrap
> If I remember correctly, Hunter, the face of the Twins organization
> all those years, and for that, the Twins were offering him a 3-year
> contract.
Three years at $15M a year.
> You can argue money; Angels offered not only more money, but
> what Hunter wanted, more years.
Yeah, five years at $18M a year. He's not worth it.
> And that's as I said again, to the face of your franchise,
<psst...."Joe Mauer">
> who I remember watching in A ball when Fort
> Myers was the Twins farm team, all he deserved was a three-year
> contracr.
He was 32 years old at the time. How many outfielders remain
productive past age 35?
> Santana, same thing in some ways. Was told Twins don't offer 5 or 6-
> year contracts for pitchers; they don't, it's not what they do.
That's right. Because it's stupid. See Mike Hampton, Kevin Brown,
Dontrelle Willis, Barry Zito, Chan Ho Park, Carl Pavano, even Carlos
Silva.
atjar
Mauer is the face of the franchise now, especially with Hunter gone.
Torii was until the day he left.
Productive past 35? Here's one: Ichiro; he's 36.
Not stupid. Here's one: Josh Beckett.
AJ
brianj
>
> - Show quoted text -
It's not stupid because it fails every time. It is stupid because it
fails too often. It is especially stupid for a team on a smaller
budget than the Yankees. I think your examples are evidence against
your position. Sure sometimes a team signs a huge long-term contract
and everything works out great. But it would be more like an
exception than a rule. It was pointed out that not many outfielders
are really productive past age 35, and in argument you named one--and
he is 36. I am sure there are others past 35 who are hanging in
there, but surely you get the point.
brianj
powrwrap
What about Josh Beckett's THREE year contract? For $28M?
I thought the subject matter was long term big buck contracts to
starting pitchers. Sorry, this doesn't qualify. Also, he was 27 years
old when he got it. How big of a risk is a three year contract to a 27
year old?
He does have a club option for $12M that the Red Sox will surely pick
up.
atjar
You made my point. I believe Santana was about 28 when the Mets
offered him the six-year contract. How big is a risk for a 28-year-old
of his skills to have him locked up pitching to 34?
And look, if the Twins are organizationally against a long-term
contract like this for even someone like Santana, offer him less
years but for alot more money per year. But the Twins don't want to do
that; they want to pay a yearly salary that would be comparable to a
long-term contract, but only extend it for 3 years at most.
Aj
powrwrap
>
> You made my point. I believe Santana was about 28 when the Mets
> offered him the six-year contract. How big is a risk for a 28-year-old
> of his skills to have him locked up pitching to 34?
It's a huge risk. Huge. Oh look, he got injured this year and is
having surgery. See what I mean?
> And look, if the Twins are organizationally against a long-term
> contract like this for even someone like Santana, offer him less
> years but for alot more money per year.
The Twins offered 4 years at $20M a year. At the time, had Santana
signed that deal, he would have been the 2nd highest paid player in
baseball (tied with Manny and Jeter, with A-Rod being #1 highest
paid.) Is there something wrong with an offer that would make a person
the 2nd highest paid player in the game?
I predict the Mauer contract will be at least a five year deal for at
least $100M. Will that satisfy your spending/longevity requirements?
atjar
> > On Nov 6, 10:24 pm, atjar <a_jar...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > You made my point. I believe Santana was about 28 when the Mets
> > offered him the six-year contract. How big is a risk for a 28-year-old
> > of his skills to have him locked up pitching to 34?
>
> It's a huge risk. Huge. Oh look, he got injured this year and is
> having surgery. See what I mean?
>
> > And look, if the Twins are organizationally against a long-term
> > contract like this for even someone like Santana, offer him less
> > years but for alot more money per year.
>
> The Twins offered 4 years at $20M a year. At the time, had Santana
> signed that deal, he would have been the 2nd highest paid player in
> baseball (tied with Manny and Jeter, with A-Rod being #1 highest
> paid.) Is there something wrong with an offer that would make a person
> the 2nd highest paid player in the game?
>
if you are referring to the $20 million, you mean he's be the 2nd
highest for one year at $20 million. There are a good number of
contracts - again, it's the length - that are better than $100
million.
> I predict the Mauer contract will be at least a five year deal for at
> least $100M. Will that satisfy your spending/longevity requirements?
It won't for Mauer because he and his agent and the going rate for a
CATCHER of his quality, at his age, is easily 6-7 years at $22-$24
million. You'll see. And then like with Santana, when the Twins are
turned down because you tried to lowball him (hell, if you were
offering $100 million what's another $37?) you'll wind up signing
someone like you did when the Twins then inked Livan Hernandez for
what was it, $7 million a year, only to release him in mid-season. You
don't want to pay top dollar for a marquee player than spend a good
chunk of money on junk because you needed a starter, as you will need
for a catcher. That's where the problem with baseball, and teams who
complain about salaries, lie. It's not with the Santana contract
offers, its the fact that the Livan hernandez's of this world get
offered $7 million and Gil Meche $55 million for five years by teams
who think they're spending wisely by buying second-rate talent.
AJ
powrwrap
> > On Nov 7, 4:19 pm, powrwrap <powrw...@aol.com> wrote:
> > I predict the Mauer contract will be at least a five year deal for at
> > least $100M. Will that satisfy your spending/longevity requirements?
> It won't for Mauer because he and his agent and the going rate for a
> CATCHER of his quality, at his age, is easily 6-7 years at $22-$24
> million. You'll see.
That would be the 2nd highest contract in baseball history, behind A-
Rod.
> And then like with Santana, when the Twins are
> turned down because you tried to lowball him (hell, if you were
> offering $100 million what's another $37?)
Umm...37 percent higher?
> you'll wind up signing
> someone like you did when the Twins then inked Livan Hernandez for
> what was it, $7 million a year, only to release him in mid-season. You
> don't want to pay top dollar for a marquee player than spend a good
> chunk of money on junk because you needed a starter, as you will need
> for a catcher. That's where the problem with baseball, and teams who
> complain about salaries, lie. It's not with the Santana contract
> offers, its the fact that the Livan hernandez's of this world get
> offered $7 million and Gil Meche $55 million for five years by teams
> who think they're spending wisely by buying second-rate talent.
Blah, blah, blah. Non sequitur. You really do enjoy moving the
goalposts and changing your argument, virtually on a post-by-post
basis.