OT: Yankees win
November 5th, 2009 at 12:37 AM ^
Disclaimer: I'm a 100 percent tigers fan.
I think the Yankees winning is a good thing for baseball. I think the Yankees winning in the first year of their new stadium is also a good thing for baseball. Every good story needs a villain and every good upset needs a huge favorite. This is the Yankees through and through. Yes, it's fun for 99 percent of baseball to watch the Yankees lose, but if they never won and became meaningless within the sport, you no longer get to cheer for the giant slayers, the underdogs, the scrappy teams that stared down the Yankees and beat them on their own field. Every hero needs an anti-hero, and could there ever be a better fit for that role than the Yankees?
But, their celebration at the end of the game was maybe the most sterile celebration I've ever seen. It looked like the end of a company golf outing. Where was the cream-pie-in-the-face and coolers filled with champagne?
November 5th, 2009 at 12:55 AM ^
there will be chmpagne in the clubhouse, dont worry
November 5th, 2009 at 1:06 AM ^
I couldn't agree more about the celebration. There didn't seem to be any appreciation of the magnitude of what they did. Just another World Series for them. That's just something I hate to see. A team not appreciating something of that magnitude. I don't know, maybe they do, but it didn't come off that way, and it's sad.
2010 starts anew in less than 5 months.
November 5th, 2009 at 9:14 AM ^
I don't agree with that all. There was a ton of appreciation for what they did. If you watched any of the post game interviews it was obvious. If you would have seen A-Rod's reaction after the final out it was obvious. They didn't pile on top of each other on the mound, but that's not to say they weren't excited about it.
November 5th, 2009 at 9:32 AM ^
I guess my standard is watching Todd Jones ball his eyes out moments after the Mag's walk off homerun to make it to the world series. I'm not even sure the ball landed in the stands before he was sobbing in joy.
November 5th, 2009 at 2:32 PM ^
it looked like 50 guys were told to clump together and jump around, but not too high. Remember, no pileup; someone could get hurt.
November 5th, 2009 at 12:46 AM ^
Yes they did kind of buy it. But it only worked for them twice this decade. And if you're going to incriminate NY spending, the exact argument can be made about BOS. Money doesn't guarantee anything, execution does.
This year's Yankees were extremely clutch, something that can't be said about any of the other teams out there.
November 5th, 2009 at 2:16 AM ^
Or do they just have the best team in baseball?
They didn't win because they were more "clutch" than other teams, they won because they have a lineup/bullpen that includes A-Rod, Tex, Jeter, Cano, CC, Burnett, Pettitte, etc...
that and NOT having Brad Lidge helps.
November 5th, 2009 at 2:43 AM ^
What you say is true, but they had the best team in baseball the last 9 years yet only won this year. Remember the disastrous performance in the 2004 ALCS.
November 5th, 2009 at 3:49 AM ^
I would argue Boston probably had the best teams the last several years, but the point's taken that at some point (probably several points) between 2001 and now the Yanks had the best team.
But that's why baseball is so hard to have a rooting interest in (and in part why I simultaneously love and hate it)...the best team, moreso than in any other sport, often does not win a best of 7 or best of 5 series. the margin between good and bad teams is much smaller
I agree with your point about money not guaranteeing anything (see the Mets or the Cubs), but i would chalk up teams like 06 Cards more to luck than any kind of "clutchness."
November 5th, 2009 at 4:05 AM ^
Agree with you there, luck and fickle momentum play a large role in baseball playoffs. What comes to mind especially is the 2002 World Series (Giants blowing game 6) and 2003 NLCS (scapegoat fan).
November 5th, 2009 at 7:25 AM ^
The amount of variability in one game of baseball (or even a short series) is why I really, really dislike the Wild Card round of the playoffs. The teams that are best during the regular season should win the playoffs most of the time. Instead, over the past few years, Wild Card and weak teams like the '06 Cardinals* teams have won.
*The Tigers aren't my baseball team, so this isn't just sour grapes.
November 5th, 2009 at 2:18 AM ^
Well I'm not the biggest fan of Boston either, and you do bring up a good point about Boston being up there in spending, but the Yankees are known for constantly spending outlandish sums, moreso than any other team. I mean tying up $400-some million dollars into 3 players can say that.
November 5th, 2009 at 4:48 AM ^
When you get immediate returns.
November 5th, 2009 at 9:15 AM ^
What else would you suggest that they do with the money that they make?
November 5th, 2009 at 12:54 AM ^
Did the Yankees buy the core of their team from 1995 to today? Derek Jeter? Mariano Rivera? Andy Pettitte? Jorge Posada? They have spent money on players, but so does every other team. there were plenty of teams willing to shell out the same kind of money for Teixeira and CC as the Yankees did. The point is they wanted to come to NY to play and win a World Series and they did.
November 5th, 2009 at 1:18 AM ^
Dude, really? The 'core' of a team is not four players. If you want to make the argument that the Yankees don't have purchased team, you point out how many players have been brought up through their farm system.
Yes, every team spends money on players. You kinda have to do that in sports; pay your players. But the Yankees outspend every team, year in and year out. Texeira, CC, and Burnett are the perfect example of purchased players.
November 5th, 2009 at 7:27 AM ^
The core of a team is four players. The Yankees developed a strong cohort of really young players and also spent a shitload of money. They got into trouble when they didn't make smart decisions (they signed Wright and Pavano a few years ago instead of Beltran; not so bright).
November 5th, 2009 at 10:27 AM ^
yes, these 4 players are essentially the core of the team.. theyve all been around for over a decade and theyve all been through playoff baseball before. they are all all-stars or have been all stars, and jeter and mariano will go down as two of the best ever to play the game. You dont think that the other guys on the team model themselves after these guys who are such leaders both on and off the field? Mark Teixeira even pointed these guys out when he said that it was an honor to win a championship with these guys who seem to do it best. Let the Yankees enjoy their championship and stop arguing that they only won because of the players they bought, because if you look at the stats, the home grown yankees have been the most important players on the team.
November 5th, 2009 at 2:35 PM ^
as a guy telling the NY media what they want to hear.
November 5th, 2009 at 8:35 AM ^
But how many of those teams could have shelled out the money for A-Rod AND Teixeira AND Sabathia AND Burnett AND Matsui AND Damon AND been able to hang on to Rivera AND Jeter AND Swisher AND Posada AND Pettitte (who actually counts as a free agent)?
New York won the Series because they have the best team in baseball, but they have the best team in baseball because they're the only ones who can afford it.
November 5th, 2009 at 9:41 AM ^
Of course the Yankees bought players - I'm not denying that at all. During their late 1990s run of dominance, though, it was players they developed* who formed part of their core. Because of how free agency works, players are often in their late 20s/30s when they hit the market. A long term contract will usually include a period of decline.
* They didn't draft all of them - I mean players they acquired who became much better once they joined the Yankees (e.g. Paul O'Neill)
The Yankees have a massive financial advantage, but they've also made bad choices this decade, which is why, for a team so willing to spend, there was a gap between Titles.
I say this as a Mets fan who hates the Yankees more than almost everyone else. The Mets have spent a ton of money as well and have nothing to show for it.
November 5th, 2009 at 11:39 AM ^
As a Yankees fan, you're right on the money with this one, especially regarding the bad decisions. I'm pretty confident, however, that those days are predominantly in the past. I think we'll have a better idea on that in the coming weeks when they have to make decisions on Damon and Matsui.
November 5th, 2009 at 1:02 AM ^
Tigers 2010! Rick Porcello - MVP! Who's with me.
November 5th, 2009 at 2:15 AM ^
WOOOO
November 5th, 2009 at 8:37 AM ^
Co-AL Cy Youngs and MVPs- Justin Verlander and Rick Porcello!
November 5th, 2009 at 8:11 AM ^
Having grown up in New England and being a true Red Sox fan as far back as I can remember, I will never derive cheer from anything the Yankees do, except when they lose.
There are certain laws of nature that cannot be violated.
November 5th, 2009 at 8:23 AM ^
Actually this is the first time I've ever taken even a small modicum of pleasure from a Yankees win in the Series. Only a tiny bit mind you, but you see I live in Red Sox country, and I hate that team just as much as I hate the Yankees, and it's fun watching the locals squirm.
November 5th, 2009 at 9:22 AM ^
Today feels good.
November 5th, 2009 at 11:01 AM ^
i don't understand why people blame the yankees for spending the money, even with their salary, they are still making a net profit year after year, and unlike other owners, they would rather spend their money to bring back a world championship for their fans, rather than pocketing it...
george steinbrenner isn't even the richest baseball owner:
#1 Carl Pohlad $3.1 Billion - Twins
#2 John Malone $2.2 Billion - Braves
#3 Mike Ilitch $1.6 Billion - TIGERS
#3 Tom Hicks $1.6 Billion - Rangers
#5 The Boss $1.3 Billion - Yankees
dont hate the yankees for spending their money willingly, hate MLB for not having a salary cap
November 5th, 2009 at 11:39 AM ^
I don't really mind owners spending their own money either, but as a Braves fan I just have to point out that John Malone is simply the CEO of Liberty Media; Liberty Media (the company) actually owns the braves, which is a different set up than any of those other ones.
November 5th, 2009 at 11:06 AM ^
Nobody in Michigan seemed to mind when the Red Wings were the Yankees of hockey, spending the most and winning (Hasek, Hull, Hatcher, Shannahan, Robitaille, Chelios). From 1999-2004 (Pre-salary cap) the Red Wings had the highest payroll 4 times and 2nd highest the other 2 times, winning their division every year and a cup in 2002 (when they had the highest payroll) of those years. In that period, they spend an average of 61% more that the NHL average team payroll.
Not to mention the Tigers having the 3rd highest payroll in the American League. If the Tigers had an average payroll wouldn't people be upset that Ilitch wasn't trying to win and was cheap?
People are only offended when their team isn't the one winning. 99% of fans wish their owners cared about winning so much.
November 5th, 2009 at 2:40 PM ^
As a wings fan I always HATED the wings of the 90's being compared to the Yankees. Yes the wings spent a lot of money on those teams and it was always one of the highest payroll teams.
But, the wings have arguably the best scouts, and have been the most adept at drafting significant talent in late rounds.
First off, Hasek, Shannahan, and Chelios were aquired via trades.
Second, Federov, Fetisov, Larianov, Lindstrom, Kozlov, Dallas Drake, Yzerman, Konstantinov, all DRAFTED.
The wings did it the right way, through the draft. The used their money to retain their top guys and bring in a high priced free agent here and there.
I think it's further evidence that even after the salary cap and the retirement of the greatest captain in the history of the NHL, the wings have still been one of, it not the premier team in the NHL. And they continue to do it with shrewd drafts, and a good free agent pick up here and there.
November 5th, 2009 at 5:32 PM ^
As far as bringing up talent through the organization or through trades, the Yankees have done a lot of that as well:
Current roster includes the following players brought up through the organization Jeter, Posada, Petitte, Rivera, Cano, Chamberlain, Hughes, Cabrera, Gardner. A-Rod and Swisher were acquired via trade (since we aren't counting those either).
I still don't see the Red Wings are that different because whether you bring them through the organization or acquire them by trade/free agency, they paid top dollar to keep them in town, using their money to their advantage.
I still see a lot of parallels between the two teams, but that doesn't mean I think they are not a great organization. The Wings are a great organization, but the Yankees develop a significant amount of their talent as well.