Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Now with the siigning of Carl Crawford, even thou a 7 year contract at 20 mil seems outrageous, I think the Red Sox's will be where they were in 2004....World Series Champions
Ummm, WS champions? It's too early to make serious predictions now, with a winter of dealing still ahead, but at this moment the Sox remind me more of there arch rivals in the middle of the decade. Remember all the pre-season talk along the lines of "Can ANYONE possibly beat the Yankees?" prior to the '03, '04, '05, '06 . . . seasons? Instead, the Yankees were the team the Braves had been a few years earlier, the team that almost always won their division but then exited the playoffs early. Why? I'd say it was lack of pitching depth.
People get awed by teams with frighteningly good lineups, but seem to have less appreciation for the importance of pitching. I'm talking here about really deep pitching, not just an ace or two at the front of the rotation and a star closer. The Yankees for most of this decade that's winding down now had the scary lineup, and had the couple of aces at the front of the rotation, and of course had the great closer. What they also had when it came to pitching was a long, rocky road between the couple of big guns at the front of the rotation and Rivera. That's why they failed to go all the way during those mid-decade years despite the lineup that had people either drooling or quaking, depending on their sentiments.
The Red Sox are similar at this moment. As long as everyone stays healthy, and no one suddenly goes dramatically downhill, they've got a deeper rotation than the mid-decade Yankees had. Where they are still weak, though, at least by the standards of a would-be champion, is in bullpen depth. Lineup or no lineup, they need to use the rest of the off-season to seriously shore up the pen, or they're likely to go into the season giving a lot of people inflated expectations, only to disappoint in the end.
I guess this makes Larry Lucchino's calling the Yankees "the evil empire" pure hypocrisy. I think at this point they should share the evil empire title.
Umm, share the Evil Empire title? Not really. Take a closer look at the Red Sox. They've thrown money around, but they've done so in a judicious way. A lot of their acquistions under the current administration have involved building serious depth with players who are very good, but are not huge stars. Think Mueller, Millar, Foulke, Arroyo, Embree, Crisp, Okajima, Bay, and so on. Remember too that one of their key stars of recent years, a moderately good hitter by the name of Ortiz, blossomed into a big-name player AFTER the Sox acquired him. Maybe they got lucky, or maybe they've got some people who are really good at spotting talent, but there's at least one major star who's been a key figure in their two recent titles who was picked up at a bargain.
Next there's the impressive collection of talent they've brought up through their own system. Papelbon, Ellsbury, Youkilis, Lester, Pedroia, Buckholz, not to mention some of the prospects they've used as trade bait, like Justin Masterson and Hanley Ramirez.
Then what they do is shell out the big bucks here and there to shore up a weak spot. Perhaps the most obvious example is Schilling, but Schilling is an example of another interesting point. The history of this current Red Sox front office has been to shell out really big bucks on deals that involved some risk. Keep in mind how old Schilling was when the Sox traded for him. Another big-money move was the signing of Dice K, which was also risky because you never know for sure how a player from the Japanese leauges will do in the majors until he's there.
Where the Sox spend money is in keeping the players they have, and in the occasional big contract to pick up a star in the later years of his career, like Schilling. That can't even remotely compare to the way that year in and year out the Yankees hand out HUGE money for one star after another who's right in his prime.
Go Phillies, I might note that the Phillies have become a big-money team the last few years themselves, doing it pretty much the same way the Sox have done, by spending money to keep their players, and offering the big contract to an occasional major star--Halladay is the prime example--to give them the final boost toward serious contention. They join not only the Red Sox but the Angels and Mets as teams in the second tier of big spending (though of course the Mets have not gotten the results from their large payroll that the other three have).
None of these teams, though, compares to the Yankees in tossing around the mean green. In passing out the dollars two years ago on their way to buying their '09 title, the Yankees acquired as many, or more, stars in their primes than probably what the Sox, Phils, Angels, and Mets combined have picked up in the past seven or eight years. In recent years what you typically see is that whichever of the teams in the second tier for payroll happens to lead that bunch in a given season, in other words the club with the second highest payroll in the majors, will be closer in total payroll to the club with something like the 20th hgihest payroll than they are to the Yankees.
Trying to mention any of these clubs--yes, including the Red Sox--in the same breath as the Yankees when it comes to spending is like looking at a field with an elephant at one end and a bunch of dogs at the other end, then trying to say that the Mastiff, the Newfoundland, and the St. Bernard, being the biggest of the dogs, should be viewed as being in the same size category as the elephant. There's just no comparison. It gets old to see people constantly trying to put the Red Sox (and occasionally some of the other clubs with similar payrolls) into the same category as the Yankees when it comes to spending. If you really look at the facts this idea just plain does not wash.
You might notice the last two names have something in common – they were both acquired by the Boston Red Sox this week. That’s right, over the last five years, Adrian Gonzalez and Carl Crawford have been virtually identical in value.
Now with the siigning of Carl Crawford, even thou a 7 year contract at 20 mil seems outrageous, I think the Red Sox's will be where they were in 2004....World Series Champions
Umm, share the Evil Empire title? Not really. Take a closer look at the Red Sox. They've thrown money around, but they've done so in a judicious way. A lot of their acquistions under the current administration have involved building serious depth with players who are very good, but are not huge stars. Think Mueller, Millar, Foulke, Arroyo, Embree, Crisp, Okajima, Bay, and so on. Remember too that one of their key stars of recent years, a moderately good hitter by the name of Ortiz, blossomed into a big-name player AFTER the Sox acquired him. Maybe they got lucky, or maybe they've got some people who are really good at spotting talent, but there's at least one major star who's been a key figure in their two recent titles who was picked up at a bargain.
Next there's the impressive collection of talent they've brought up through their own system. Papelbon, Ellsbury, Youkilis, Lester, Pedroia, Buckholz, not to mention some of the prospects they've used as trade bait, like Justin Masterson and Hanley Ramirez.
Then what they do is shell out the big bucks here and there to shore up a weak spot. Perhaps the most obvious example is Schilling, but Schilling is an example of another interesting point. The history of this current Red Sox front office has been to shell out really big bucks on deals that involved some risk. Keep in mind how old Schilling was when the Sox traded for him. Another big-money move was the signing of Dice K, which was also risky because you never know for sure how a player from the Japanese leauges will do in the majors until he's there.
Where the Sox spend money is in keeping the players they have, and in the occasional big contract to pick up a star in the later years of his career, like Schilling. That can't even remotely compare to the way that year in and year out the Yankees hand out HUGE money for one star after another who's right in his prime.
Go Phillies, I might note that the Phillies have become a big-money team the last few years themselves, doing it pretty much the same way the Sox have done, by spending money to keep their players, and offering the big contract to an occasional major star--Halladay is the prime example--to give them the final boost toward serious contention. They join not only the Red Sox but the Angels and Mets as teams in the second tier of big spending (though of course the Mets have not gotten the results from their large payroll that the other three have).
None of these teams, though, compares to the Yankees in tossing around the mean green. In passing out the dollars two years ago on their way to buying their '09 title, the Yankees acquired as many, or more, stars in their primes than probably what the Sox, Phils, Angels, and Mets combined have picked up in the past seven or eight years. In recent years what you typically see is that whichever of the teams in the second tier for payroll happens to lead that bunch in a given season, in other words the club with the second highest payroll in the majors, will be closer in total payroll to the club with something like the 20th hgihest payroll than they are to the Yankees.
Trying to mention any of these clubs--yes, including the Red Sox--in the same breath as the Yankees when it comes to spending is like looking at a field with an elephant at one end and a bunch of dogs at the other end, then trying to say that the Mastiff, the Newfoundland, and the St. Bernard, being the biggest of the dogs, should be viewed as being in the same size category as the elephant. There's just no comparison. It gets old to see people constantly trying to put the Red Sox (and occasionally some of the other clubs with similar payrolls) into the same category as the Yankees when it comes to spending. If you really look at the facts this idea just plain does not wash.
You can point fingers at the Yankees but the sox did EXACTLY the same thing. They have homegrown talent, picked up a few role players and went after star free agents. Don't try to make it sound like the Sox have been so innocent or different than how you claim the Yankees are.
Also if you remember, Ortiz was a good hitter with the Twins and then when he joined the sox, him and Manny formed a nice tandem. Strange coincidence though----they both got busted for PED's. I guess maybe they waited till they came to the Sox and then they started hitting the ROIDS !!!!
You can point fingers at the Yankees but the sox did EXACTLY the same thing. They have homegrown talent, picked up a few role players and went after star free agents. Don't try to make it sound like the Sox have been so innocent or different than how you claim the Yankees are.
Also if you remember, Ortiz was a good hitter with the Twins and then when he joined the sox, him and Manny formed a nice tandem. Strange coincidence though----they both got busted for PED's. I guess maybe they waited till they came to the Sox and then they started hitting the ROIDS !!!!
it's true, my Sox are becoming the Yankees
in 2005 the Yanks spent just over 200 Million (85 Mil more than the Sox), in 2010 that gap was down to 40 mil as the Sox spent over 160 mil, and it would appear at least that the 2011 Sox payroll will go up again.
I guess I'm happy about it, it's a good feeling to know that if you need a player your team has the means to get one.
But I would still love to see 30 teams all spending around 100 million and the best team wins. It shouldn't be about who has the deepest pockets
You can point fingers at the Yankees but the sox did EXACTLY the same thing. They have homegrown talent, picked up a few role players and went after star free agents. Don't try to make it sound like the Sox have been so innocent or different than how you claim the Yankees are.
Also if you remember, Ortiz was a good hitter with the Twins and then when he joined the sox, him and Manny formed a nice tandem. Strange coincidence though----they both got busted for PED's. I guess maybe they waited till they came to the Sox and then they started hitting the ROIDS !!!!
Looking at the comparison you're trying to make here, in a sense every team is the same. Every team has homegrown talent, trades for role players, and signs free agents. The difference lies in how heavily each club relies on each of these sources of players in comparison to their reliance on each of the other means of signing players, and how much money they spend doing it. No one else compares to the Yankees in shelling out the huge bucks time and again for the biggest stars right in their primes. No one else relies as heavily as the Yankees on this means for putting together a contender, as compared with the other methods of acquiring talent. It's not even close.
in 2005 the Yanks spent just over 200 Million (85 Mil more than the Sox), in 2010 that gap was down to 40 mil as the Sox spent over 160 mil, and it would appear at least that the 2011 Sox payroll will go up again.
I guess I'm happy about it, it's a good feeling to know that if you need a player your team has the means to get one.
But I would still love to see 30 teams all spending around 100 million and the best team wins. It shouldn't be about who has the deepest pockets
I definitely agree that it's a problem when the same few clubs are the top contenders every year. I don't know what to do about it, though. The simple answer would seem to be a salary cap, but that seems unlikely to happen in baseball in the foreseeable future. Lest we forget, it was the owners' attempt to push for a cap that was at the center of the dispute that led to the big strike in '94. We don't want to see that again.
Fortunately, it's still possible for clubs outside that fat-cat top tier to put something good together on occasion. This past season was a good example. I found it refreshing to see some new faces going deep into the postseason, and I'm sure I'm not alone in that sentiment.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.