For anyone to imply that the Yankees are being cheap is absurd. The historical record simply doesn’t support that assertion. Plus, do such people realize the enormous expense of running a professional sports franchise in New York City? Take a good hard look at costs as well as revenues before making such a claim.
Hal is just cognizant that some fans are disappointed Â
outspent the Yankees by 46 million last year and have a ring to show for it.
Meanwhile, Yanks revenue has skyrocketed over the years but their payroll has flatlined.
outspent the Yankees by 46 million last year and have a ring to show for it.
Meanwhile, Yanks revenue has skyrocketed over the years but their payroll has flatlined.
Over the last fifteen years, as the RS have won 4 WS and the Yanks have gone to one, Yanks have consistently spent more.
Yanks' payroll was down last year but they will spend a lot more this year. Chunks to Gardner and Sabathia and LeMahieu instead of targeting a position player improvement.
Sox won the WS last year because they signed JD Martinez instead of going for 211-strikeout Stanton.
Some valid points made by Hal Steinbrenner....debt service costs, stadium costs, scouting, etc. all need to be considered when discussing player costs vs. revenues. It boils down to spending wisely. The old adage "working smarter, not harder" also applies to spending .....it's not how much you spend as much as it is on how you spend. I applaud sports organizations which spend wisely, getting the most value vs. getting the most publicity from splashy free agent signings. The Yankees, in particular, always rank among the top payroll teams in MLB and criticizing them for being "cheap" is patently absurd. I, for one, loved seeing the Yankees giving their farm system a chance to grow prospects, trading for young talent, bringing significant positional talent to the MLB field and seeing the strategy bear fruit. It's fun watching the young players hustle and perform vs. seeing geriatric players past their prime but still owed substantial money on long term deals.
You gotta love sportswriters and some fans, who seemingly love to "stir the pot" ---first by beating the drums to sign the biggest FA's to long term mega deals, then criticize the organization when the player fails to meet expectations or passes their peak in terms of performance, hound the team and the player until the player is gone, then start beating the drums for additional signings. It must be tough to meet deadlines for stories.
I've always viewed FA signings as a way to supplement the team vs. building a core. Teams most times use FA to cover an inability to grow young talent. A well run team grows it own, pays their own players and adds a piece or two to put them over the top, when needed.
shooting back that he wasn't cheap really wasn't the thing that got Yankee fans attention. What got their attention was Hal responding to the question posed to Boone where he was asked if the roster was set. Boone said yes. Hal said, not necessarily.
So Yankee fans imagination will tell them they are waiting to swoop in on Harper or Machado (which has been rumored now for a while that both might take a shorter term deal and the Yankees will discuss that). Of course, that could mean they are going to sign Adam Warren or a starter who is sitting around and not getting any bites (a Gio type).
outspent the Yankees by 46 million last year and have a ring to show for it.
Meanwhile, Yanks revenue has skyrocketed over the years but their payroll has flatlined.
The Yanks outspent EVERY team and incurred more than $300M in luxury tax payments- and only have a ring from 2009 to show for it. Spending does not guarantee success.
Another very important factor that gets overlooked is that when George was doing a lot of big spending, the Yanks were playing in a stadium that was "paid for." There were not mortgages or interest to be paid on it.
That isn't the case anymore. A $1B Stadium has some rather extreme interest payments, I am sure- in addition to the normal mortgage.
In short, don't make assumptions based on limited information- you'll be wrong every time.
They've spent 100 million dollars on an average age FA of 34 for guys that are old, hurt, or relievers. The tax is re-set. Re-set to sign guys in their prime like Harper and/or Machado. Not the Rockies infield from 5 years ago.
shooting back that he wasn't cheap really wasn't the thing that got Yankee fans attention. What got their attention was Hal responding to the question posed to Boone where he was asked if the roster was set. Boone said yes. Hal said, not necessarily.
So Yankee fans imagination will tell them they are waiting to swoop in on Harper or Machado (which has been rumored now for a while that both might take a shorter term deal and the Yankees will discuss that). Of course, that could mean they are going to sign Adam Warren or a starter who is sitting around and not getting any bites (a Gio type).
The funny part about that is Hal regularly uses that line about always reviewing what is brought to him.
In this case, since Machado and Harper are still sitting out there, people just assume that is what he is talking about. I think Cashman keeps in touch with their agents, but unless he gets a steal, I doubt he takes anything to Hal.
Maybe if the rumor earlier this week that Machado wants a 1-year deal is true, maybe Cashman runs that up to ownership- but it would have to be a discount.
They didn’t make a play for either Harper or Machado after it was expected all year that they’d land one of them.
"Some fans" is the operative phrase here. When one considers:
(a) Needs;
(b) Current Payroll;
(c) Paying future contracts for Judge, Sevy, et.al.
It is not really surprising at all that the Yanks did not lay out big money for Machado/Harper.
Also, this is not the George Steinbrenner Yankees. There's a concerted effort to build the team from within and to avoid having a completely open wallet.
Why would you assume a long term deal for Judge four years from now would be better than a long term for Harper now, for instance? Judge will be 31 then.
They've spent 100 million dollars on an average age FA of 34 for guys that are old, hurt, or relievers. The tax is re-set. Re-set to sign guys in their prime like Harper and/or Machado. Not the Rockies infield from 5 years ago.
This is not even remotely true. You are just trolling now.
The oldest player they signed was CC- and that was just bringing back a #5 SP at a discount. He only gets $8- after getting $10M+ last year.
Gardner is likely to be the starting LF until Frazier can take it from him (or the Yanks need the DH spot for someone and move Stanton to LF). He gets $7.5M- down from over $11M last year.
They will pay Tulo $550,000 this season.
They will pay DJ $24M over 2 years. That's $12M this season.
Happ is a quality SP who a number of teams pursued. He gets $17M this year.
They will pay Ottavino $9M this year- for a guy who was dominant- pitching in Colorado, where few are successful as pitchers.
Britton gets $13M and gives them a powerful bullpen. If Chapman's knee doesn't hold up, they have a legit closer option.
That $67M.
Don't make up garbage to try and support fake news. If you don't have facts, don't make up things.
Why would you assume a long term deal for Judge four years from now would be better than a long term for Harper now, for instance? Judge will be 31 then.
And will be four years into his big money deal as opposed to 31 year old Judge who will just be starting his. So who is the better investment?
You just answered your own question.
Judge.
Judge will be cheaper and so long as he stays healthy, is likely to produce numbers equal to Harper. Remember that Harper has trouble staying healthy- so there is a good argument that Judge will likely outperform him.
Further, when Judge is 31, the Yanks aren't likely to give him a huge mega-deal. He might get 3-4 years.
Thus, if you apply salary and production over the next 8 years, Judge will win in a landslide. Judge is going to get less than $1M this year, he MIGHT get $10M if everything breaks right in arbitration in 2020.
Over that same period, Harper wants $30M annually (don't know if he gets it at this point, but he CERTAINLY will NOT get paid $11M over the next 2 years.
Wait, what does Judge's current status have to do with anything? Â
the analytics say that spending the money to sign either Harper or Machado at the prices they are going for is not going to return enough in wins to make the investment worth it. Why? I don't know, I don't have that analysis, but I'm pretty sure Hal does.
Of course it's simpler to assume that Hal is just being cheap.
As far as spending money I think Cash and Hal have made prudent decisions with what they've spent. I never liked Machado because of his attitude (deliberately stepping on an opposing player, spitting in the face of another, saying he's not that kind of player when he's called out for lack of hustle). I would like Harper in the OF but you have to move Stanton to make it work.
Cash has added a couple of right handed bats with power the opposite way. Fits the short porch in NY and makes sense against our main competitor Boston who has a handful of left handed pitching. Smart cheap moves.
True, they had the highest payroll ...but how much was paid to Hanley Ramirez and Pablo Sandoval? Position players like Betts, Benintendi, Bogearts, Bradley are just now reaching their "big payday" time. The Sox are now in the position where they really can't afford to pay their closer (Kimbrell) what he's asking for because it's "pay up" time for them with regard to the young guys.
Machado on a long term deal. But if he does ultimately sign for 3 years or less and especially if it is a 1 year deal I do think that would mean the Yankees are being too cheap.
Harper is a little more complicated because there isn't really a great spot for him but I think that is a little true for him as well.
This may be moot as it seem like Machado might prefer something like 7/175 to 2/60 but I guess we will see!
If I was going to make one more move ( this is fantasy) to succeed this season I would try to trade for a SP. ( so if adding Harper or Machado allows that domino second move Im ok with it).
But if that isn't going to work, id badly weaken the Sox in an important series or the playoffs and add to what interchangeable chips I could trade mid season.
ID add Kimbrel. Do they need him? Not at all. Does he really weaken the Sox in a close series? Absolutely. Does he allow a mid season trade of valuable closer like arm to a National League team? Absolutely.
Should we fake try to sign him a la what they did to us with Bernie? Absolutely.
Again, not necessary at all. The only reason not to do it is that the Sox and Yankees could add millions to each others payroll playing that game in rounds of retaliation. Half season of using all the bullpen arms to help the starters and ease the long season on the bullpen keepers? Smart.
A half season of some good bullpen pitcher is much less than a multi year of Harper or Machado.
Again, its usually not a god idea to make your life or team complicated. But as complications go, it is an idea with some tempting elements
never work out in the latter stages of the deals. Players know it, teams know it. Star players want to be paid in their waning years as much or more as in their primes, and teams are finally choosing not to go that route.
If the players were willing to bet on themselves and get to FA again after 6 or so years, they'd be willing to sign for less years. But they're not. So why should a team take the risk when the player won't?
If a team was willing to give out a 10 year contract to either Machado or Harper they'd have signed already. No one has as yet been willing to offer such a deal. The agents are waiting for a team to get desperate, but I'm not sure any team will.
Would I love Machado and/or Harper on the Yanks? Of course. Do I think that Hal is cheap? No. Do I think that a 10 year contract at huge numbers for either of them is wise? No. Do I think that the Yanks would be on in them if they came down in years? Likely, because then they might be able to trade,for a #1 starter with our "surplus".
RE: Greg, we've all seen how very long term contracts virtually Â
never work out in the latter stages of the deals. Players know it, teams know it. Star players want to be paid in their waning years as much or more as in their primes, and teams are finally choosing not to go that route.
If the players were willing to bet on themselves and get to FA again after 6 or so years, they'd be willing to sign for less years. But they're not. So why should a team take the risk when the player won't?
If a team was willing to give out a 10 year contract to either Machado or Harper they'd have signed already. No one has as yet been willing to offer such a deal. The agents are waiting for a team to get desperate, but I'm not sure any team will.
Would I love Machado and/or Harper on the Yanks? Of course. Do I think that Hal is cheap? No. Do I think that a 10 year contract at huge numbers for either of them is wise? No. Do I think that the Yanks would be on in them if they came down in years? Likely, because then they might be able to trade,for a #1 starter with our "surplus".
outspent the Yankees by 46 million last year and have a ring to show for it.
Meanwhile, Yanks revenue has skyrocketed over the years but their payroll has flatlined.
We have had a better team under our new cost control strategy than we have in years just spending wildly. Not sure what your point is.
RE: Wait, what does Judge's current status have to do with anything? Â
The point being discussed is the oft-cited "Oh, they can't spend money now because they have to sign their own players in the future".
I think you are applying that to everything which isn’t fair. Yankees definitely would rather pay their own but that doesn’t mean they will. The bigger point being discussed is the long term deals Harper and Machado want.
The 10 year deals are going the way of dinosaurs at the dollars they Â
are asking. Ridiculous team risk . Only if the yearly cost is reasonable would it be feasible. If elite FA's like Harper or Manny were to ask for 15 or 18 million per year they would get 10 or more years.
I can only imagine the cost of doing Yankee business has skyrocketed. Insurance cost, stadium maintenance, travel expenses, food costs etc.
Let’s see what Machado and Harper actually sign for, then we will know Â
if Stanton is really such a steal. I don’t mind the Yanks being fiscally responsible, but they should have planned better. There was no need to take on that contract when we already had a glut of OF’s and other needs to look after. Many said they could still sign Machado or Harper even after obtaining Stanton, well, apparently the Yanks don’t share that sentiment. Many here said we don’t have to worry about Judge until 2021, well, apparently the Yanks are.
Hicks, Judge, and....what? Gardner is pretty much on his last legs, Ellsbury is useless, Frazier is unproven and coming off a season ruined by concussions.
RE: Glut of outfielders? What glut of outfielders? Â
Hicks, Judge, and....what? Gardner is pretty much on his last legs, Ellsbury is useless, Frazier is unproven and coming off a season ruined by concussions.
You just listed 5 OF, then deny that at glut exists. Ok then...
I also see you conveniently left Stanton off the list- while he is usually a DH, he does play to the OF too- and may end up there if a batter with a less than stellar glove needs a new position.
It is amusing to see the lengths some will try and argue in attempts to prove a point that doesn't exist.
He's questioning the decision to trade for Stanton because, in his telling, the Yankees had a glut of outfielders. So why would I include Stanton on that list?
I listed five names. One of them is fucking trash and should never suit up again. One of them turns 36 this season, had a pretty weak season last year, and might be basically finished. One of them only played in a handful of games last season and is completely unproven at the MLB level. Now, given those facts, you're telling me that, if they hadn't traded for Stanton, the Yankees would have a glut of outfielders?
I don't think Stanton or the number of outfielders is the issue Â
Nor is the average salary. It's the years. It's the fact that Harper wants a ten year deal for well north of $300M. They took on ten years of Stanton's deal, but only after Miami agreed to share some of that cost, so it will come to significantly less than $300M over the ten years when all is said and done...and Stanton was coming off an MVP season in which he hit 59 HRs.
p.s.--I still think the Yankees will come away with Harper. And not because they swooped in at the last minute, but because this has been the plan for awhile now.
I don't think money is scaring the Yankees as it relates to Â
Harper and Machado. I think Hal (and Cash) are pondering the lost of draft picks and Int'l money should they sign either one.
How good are the odds of getting a player via the draft or international FA as good as either Harper or Machado? Come on now.
It’s obvious Cash likes the team as is and doesn’t feel the need to add either guy. Time will tell if he’s right.
It's true that Harper/Manny are likely better than any future player, but Hal may think the Yankees can win with what they currently have. Draft picks and Int'l money give the Yankees players that will be ready five years from now when current players may no longer be productive. It's a certainly a consideration.
Hal saying: "We've spent a lot of money and addressed our priorities, but if the baseball operations people come to me with something I'll look at it"
is in the vein of Mara's saying last year:
"We have to get better around Eli but of course I'll discuss that with whomever the new GM is that I pick."
Shouldn't be too hard to figure out.
And Hal's right that he's not cheap. Cashman does get to spend more money than just about any other GM.
Meanwhile, Yanks revenue has skyrocketed over the years but their payroll has flatlined.
Meanwhile, Yanks revenue has skyrocketed over the years but their payroll has flatlined.
Over the last fifteen years, as the RS have won 4 WS and the Yanks have gone to one, Yanks have consistently spent more.
Yanks' payroll was down last year but they will spend a lot more this year. Chunks to Gardner and Sabathia and LeMahieu instead of targeting a position player improvement.
Sox won the WS last year because they signed JD Martinez instead of going for 211-strikeout Stanton.
You gotta love sportswriters and some fans, who seemingly love to "stir the pot" ---first by beating the drums to sign the biggest FA's to long term mega deals, then criticize the organization when the player fails to meet expectations or passes their peak in terms of performance, hound the team and the player until the player is gone, then start beating the drums for additional signings. It must be tough to meet deadlines for stories.
I've always viewed FA signings as a way to supplement the team vs. building a core. Teams most times use FA to cover an inability to grow young talent. A well run team grows it own, pays their own players and adds a piece or two to put them over the top, when needed.
So Yankee fans imagination will tell them they are waiting to swoop in on Harper or Machado (which has been rumored now for a while that both might take a shorter term deal and the Yankees will discuss that). Of course, that could mean they are going to sign Adam Warren or a starter who is sitting around and not getting any bites (a Gio type).
Isn't that precisely the situation they're in now? Another piece to put them over the top?
They signed Stanton last year and have been very willing to hand out contracts.
It really boils down to a lot of fans wanting Harper and Machado and instead of shaking fists at clouds, they chalk it up to Hal being a miser.
Meanwhile, Yanks revenue has skyrocketed over the years but their payroll has flatlined.
The Yanks outspent EVERY team and incurred more than $300M in luxury tax payments- and only have a ring from 2009 to show for it. Spending does not guarantee success.
Another very important factor that gets overlooked is that when George was doing a lot of big spending, the Yanks were playing in a stadium that was "paid for." There were not mortgages or interest to be paid on it.
That isn't the case anymore. A $1B Stadium has some rather extreme interest payments, I am sure- in addition to the normal mortgage.
In short, don't make assumptions based on limited information- you'll be wrong every time.
It wasn't until the spending coincided with leaning on baseball people that the winning happened.
Perhaps Hal means what he says?
So Yankee fans imagination will tell them they are waiting to swoop in on Harper or Machado (which has been rumored now for a while that both might take a shorter term deal and the Yankees will discuss that). Of course, that could mean they are going to sign Adam Warren or a starter who is sitting around and not getting any bites (a Gio type).
The funny part about that is Hal regularly uses that line about always reviewing what is brought to him.
In this case, since Machado and Harper are still sitting out there, people just assume that is what he is talking about. I think Cashman keeps in touch with their agents, but unless he gets a steal, I doubt he takes anything to Hal.
Maybe if the rumor earlier this week that Machado wants a 1-year deal is true, maybe Cashman runs that up to ownership- but it would have to be a discount.
"Some fans" is the operative phrase here. When one considers:
(a) Needs;
(b) Current Payroll;
(c) Paying future contracts for Judge, Sevy, et.al.
It is not really surprising at all that the Yanks did not lay out big money for Machado/Harper.
Also, this is not the George Steinbrenner Yankees. There's a concerted effort to build the team from within and to avoid having a completely open wallet.
This is not even remotely true. You are just trolling now.
The oldest player they signed was CC- and that was just bringing back a #5 SP at a discount. He only gets $8- after getting $10M+ last year.
Gardner is likely to be the starting LF until Frazier can take it from him (or the Yanks need the DH spot for someone and move Stanton to LF). He gets $7.5M- down from over $11M last year.
They will pay Tulo $550,000 this season.
They will pay DJ $24M over 2 years. That's $12M this season.
Happ is a quality SP who a number of teams pursued. He gets $17M this year.
They will pay Ottavino $9M this year- for a guy who was dominant- pitching in Colorado, where few are successful as pitchers.
Britton gets $13M and gives them a powerful bullpen. If Chapman's knee doesn't hold up, they have a legit closer option.
That $67M.
Don't make up garbage to try and support fake news. If you don't have facts, don't make up things.
Harper will be 30 in 4 years. Your point is?
And will be four years into his big money deal as opposed to 31 year old Judge who will just be starting his. So who is the better investment?
Quote:
Harper will be 30 in 4 years. Your point is?
And will be four years into his big money deal as opposed to 31 year old Judge who will just be starting his. So who is the better investment?
How the hell would anyone know this now? Shouldn’t we probably wait 4 years and then see whether or not the Yankees hand Judge a 10 year contract?
Of course not! It’s much funner to just bitch and bitch and bitch for the next decade, like some of you do about EVERYTHING.
Quote:
Harper will be 30 in 4 years. Your point is?
And will be four years into his big money deal as opposed to 31 year old Judge who will just be starting his. So who is the better investment?
You just answered your own question.
Judge.
Judge will be cheaper and so long as he stays healthy, is likely to produce numbers equal to Harper. Remember that Harper has trouble staying healthy- so there is a good argument that Judge will likely outperform him.
Further, when Judge is 31, the Yanks aren't likely to give him a huge mega-deal. He might get 3-4 years.
Thus, if you apply salary and production over the next 8 years, Judge will win in a landslide. Judge is going to get less than $1M this year, he MIGHT get $10M if everything breaks right in arbitration in 2020.
Over that same period, Harper wants $30M annually (don't know if he gets it at this point, but he CERTAINLY will NOT get paid $11M over the next 2 years.
Of course it's simpler to assume that Hal is just being cheap.
Cash has added a couple of right handed bats with power the opposite way. Fits the short porch in NY and makes sense against our main competitor Boston who has a handful of left handed pitching. Smart cheap moves.
Harper is a little more complicated because there isn't really a great spot for him but I think that is a little true for him as well.
This may be moot as it seem like Machado might prefer something like 7/175 to 2/60 but I guess we will see!
But if that isn't going to work, id badly weaken the Sox in an important series or the playoffs and add to what interchangeable chips I could trade mid season.
ID add Kimbrel. Do they need him? Not at all. Does he really weaken the Sox in a close series? Absolutely. Does he allow a mid season trade of valuable closer like arm to a National League team? Absolutely.
Should we fake try to sign him a la what they did to us with Bernie? Absolutely.
Again, not necessary at all. The only reason not to do it is that the Sox and Yankees could add millions to each others payroll playing that game in rounds of retaliation. Half season of using all the bullpen arms to help the starters and ease the long season on the bullpen keepers? Smart.
A half season of some good bullpen pitcher is much less than a multi year of Harper or Machado.
Again, its usually not a god idea to make your life or team complicated. But as complications go, it is an idea with some tempting elements
Weakening them makes that much more possible
If the players were willing to bet on themselves and get to FA again after 6 or so years, they'd be willing to sign for less years. But they're not. So why should a team take the risk when the player won't?
If a team was willing to give out a 10 year contract to either Machado or Harper they'd have signed already. No one has as yet been willing to offer such a deal. The agents are waiting for a team to get desperate, but I'm not sure any team will.
Would I love Machado and/or Harper on the Yanks? Of course. Do I think that Hal is cheap? No. Do I think that a 10 year contract at huge numbers for either of them is wise? No. Do I think that the Yanks would be on in them if they came down in years? Likely, because then they might be able to trade,for a #1 starter with our "surplus".
If the players were willing to bet on themselves and get to FA again after 6 or so years, they'd be willing to sign for less years. But they're not. So why should a team take the risk when the player won't?
If a team was willing to give out a 10 year contract to either Machado or Harper they'd have signed already. No one has as yet been willing to offer such a deal. The agents are waiting for a team to get desperate, but I'm not sure any team will.
Would I love Machado and/or Harper on the Yanks? Of course. Do I think that Hal is cheap? No. Do I think that a 10 year contract at huge numbers for either of them is wise? No. Do I think that the Yanks would be on in them if they came down in years? Likely, because then they might be able to trade,for a #1 starter with our "surplus".
Solid points, yat - I agree.
Meanwhile, Yanks revenue has skyrocketed over the years but their payroll has flatlined.
We have had a better team under our new cost control strategy than we have in years just spending wildly. Not sure what your point is.
I think you are applying that to everything which isn’t fair. Yankees definitely would rather pay their own but that doesn’t mean they will. The bigger point being discussed is the long term deals Harper and Machado want.
I can only imagine the cost of doing Yankee business has skyrocketed. Insurance cost, stadium maintenance, travel expenses, food costs etc.
You just listed 5 OF, then deny that at glut exists. Ok then...
I also see you conveniently left Stanton off the list- while he is usually a DH, he does play to the OF too- and may end up there if a batter with a less than stellar glove needs a new position.
It is amusing to see the lengths some will try and argue in attempts to prove a point that doesn't exist.
Weakening them makes that much more possible
I think the Phillies will take care of the Kimbrel issue for everyone.
I listed five names. One of them is fucking trash and should never suit up again. One of them turns 36 this season, had a pretty weak season last year, and might be basically finished. One of them only played in a handful of games last season and is completely unproven at the MLB level. Now, given those facts, you're telling me that, if they hadn't traded for Stanton, the Yankees would have a glut of outfielders?
p.s.--I still think the Yankees will come away with Harper. And not because they swooped in at the last minute, but because this has been the plan for awhile now.
How good are the odds of getting a player via the draft or international FA as good as either Harper or Machado? Come on now.
It’s obvious Cash likes the team as is and doesn’t feel the need to add either guy. Time will tell if he’s right.
Quote:
Harper and Machado. I think Hal (and Cash) are pondering the lost of draft picks and Int'l money should they sign either one.
How good are the odds of getting a player via the draft or international FA as good as either Harper or Machado? Come on now.
It’s obvious Cash likes the team as is and doesn’t feel the need to add either guy. Time will tell if he’s right.
It's true that Harper/Manny are likely better than any future player, but Hal may think the Yankees can win with what they currently have. Draft picks and Int'l money give the Yankees players that will be ready five years from now when current players may no longer be productive. It's a certainly a consideration.