Pujols to the Angels

[Mr Baseball World]

Since the 1994 strike the New York Yankees have made the playoffs 16 out of 17 years and the one time they missed the playoffs they won 89 games.

[PotKettleBlack]

[quote:76081a481f="Mr. Baseball World"]Since the 1994 strike the New York Yankees have made the playoffs 16 out of 17 years and the one time they missed the playoffs they won 89 games.[/quote:76081a481f]

Conversely, Boston has been top five in spending for the past decade and has been out of the playoffs frequently. Part of that is the Yankees, but part of that is a Rays, who are both a small market team and run by very smart people. The A's also had a run built on top scouting, sharp deal making, and undervalued assets. And they were 40 feet of crap below the smallest market team. The success of the Twins since 2000 also suggests that money isn't everything, while the Mets and Cubs experiences over that same time frame suggest that money without brains is not as useful as brains without money. Best, obviously, is to have both, looking at Yankees, Boston (through 2008), Philly, Texas (recently), Anaheim under the previous GM, and so on.

[Valen]

All that really matters is having a reasonably equal shot at championship.
As Mcnole notes that is more equal in baseball than in the capped sports.

As to teams spending more having overall better win/loss records why shouldn't it be that way? If you put more effort in to winning should you not expect results. If I go down to the car dealship and plop down $20,000 and buy and you go down the the same dealership and put $90,000 on the counter you going to be happy if you are handed the keys to a car identical to mine? If they give you a cadillac should I have the right to go back and say no fair he got a cadillac and all you gave me was this escort. We should both get the same results no matter how much we spend here.

[Mr Baseball World]

Boston has made it 9 times in those 17 years.

[Mr Baseball World]

A reasonably equal shot at winning a championship????????? :lol:

[Valen]

Here is another way of looking at this. I spend about $25 a month on strat online. You spend $250. Should I reasonably expect to be allowed to play as many teams as you do? Or maybe look at it like this. If all I can afford is $20 should you also be limited to spending $20 on this site? Or even better I would love to be able to play twice as much. Perhaps If you spend more than $100 in a month you should have to give me a dollar for each extra dollar you spend. That way I can play more. :lol:

You know I just might be on to something here. We need to establish some luxury tax levels for Nev and those like him who spend a lot to pay for some of my teams. :lol:

[Mr Baseball World]

[quote:e20c7403d8="Valen"]Here is another way of looking at this. I spend about $25 a month on strat online. You spend $250. Should I reasonably expect to be allowed to play as many teams as you do? Or maybe look at it like this. If all I can afford is $20 should you also be limited to spending $20 on this site? Or even better I would love to be able to play twice as much. Perhaps If you spend more than $100 in a month you should have to give me a dollar for each extra dollar you spend. That way I can play more. :lol:

You know I just might be on to something here. We need to establish some luxury tax levels for Nev and those like him who spend a lot to pay for some of my teams. :lol:[/quote:e20c7403d8]

Not the same thing.

[Mr Baseball World]

To make it closer to baseball nev would get a 200 million dollar payroll and the right to outbid you on free agents and you would get 80 mill.

[Valen]

I would go for that nev gets 200 mil and I get 80 if I get exclusive rights to all cards until I have used them in at least 6 seasons. :lol: Plus I get to use those cards at 10% of their real value.

But if he uses one of those cards after that he has to let me name one additional card as mine and have the 6 years start over for that card. Plus once he uses a card once he has to use a card from the last 3 years of that player's career. In other words he has to sign whatever superstars he uses to 10 year contracts and then use those cards in their declining years much as yankees are having to do with Arod, Jeter, and Posada. He also has to pay 10-fold for all the cards he uses. So I get the first 6 years of Ruth at 1.3 mil while after he becomes available to Nev he has to pay 40 mil for Ruth. That is closer to the real baseball system.

Yanks did have a 200+ mil salary this year and last while Rangers operated closer to that 80 mil range. Which team was in the world series, team who spent the most or team that had the better run organization?

[chasenally]

I never intended to bust anyones balls with my post. I think Albert made the right move by going to the Angels. He won't be hammered by the press after every game he doesn't hit 5 HR's and get 10 RBI's. Anyone who follows sports know that if you play in New York you are graded after every game. He doesn't need that after the career he had. As one poster who lives in St. Louis and has watched him knows what the Cardinals know. He is done. I put that in my post. He can play out his carrer with the Angels and just go home and kiss the wife and take the kids to all the parks. I can't believe any sports star would put thier kids in public school as the security is not as good as a highly priced private school. You have to worry about your kid being harmed and taken for ransom as you have the money to pay out.
His run with the Cards is over and they got more from him then he did from them. They made him a fair offer knowing that someone else would make him a better offer and they can take that to the fan base and when his stats fall off they and the fan base can be thankful that the Angels are paying him in his decline. The Angels will sell more tickets and make up his salary. It is a win win win for all.
Again I am sorry if I offened anyone as THAT WAS NOT MY INTENT.