Otter Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 Henry believes cap would garner support Comment Email Print Share Associated Press FORT MYERS, Fla. -- Boston Red Sox owner John Henry is renewing his call for a baseball salary cap. Henry said Wednesday he thinks all owners would support an "enlightened" salary cap to improve competitive balance and that players might agree. He did not give details. Henry's call came Wednesday at spring training after the New York Yankees signed three free agents for a total of $423.5 million during the offseason. The Red Sox gave out much shorter and cheaper deals. Exactly five years earlier, Henry called for a salary cap when the Yankees obtained Alex Rodriguez in a trade with Texas after the Red Sox failed to complete a trade for him. At that time, he advocated a cap to deal with a team that he said has far more resources than any other team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECURB Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 Oh boohoo... you cant have it both ways... Its not like the Yanks win every single year... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morrissey Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 Cry me a river. This is the same guy who paid $51.1 million bucks, just to talk to Daisuke Matsuzaka. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thai Jet Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 Oh boohoo... you cant have it both ways... Its not like the Yanks win every single year... Or even make the playoffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neckdemon Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 baseball does need a hard cap though....he is right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morrissey Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 MLB has as much parity as the NFL does, it doesn't need a cap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
war ensemble Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 Why would players agree to this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neckdemon Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 MLB has as much parity as the NFL does, it doesn't need a cap. no it doesn't. there's not really a level playing field. just cause the yankees have spent 200 million the last 5 years and haven't won doesn't make it parity...it just means the yankees did alot of choking. only fans that i know of who don't think there shoudl be a cap are yankees fans......and it's pretty obvious why. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECURB Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 no it doesn't. there's not really a level playing field. just cause the yankees have spent 200 million the last 5 years and haven't won doesn't make it parity...it just means the yankees did alot of choking. only fans that i know of who don't think there shoudl be a cap are yankees fans......and it's pretty obvious why. They are forced to give money to the other teams... there are rules in place to make it work... I think it is pretty level... if it wasnt why the heck arent the big teams winning it ever single year? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morrissey Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 no it doesn't. there's not really a level playing field. just cause the yankees have spent 200 million the last 5 years and haven't won doesn't make it parity...it just means the yankees did alot of choking. only fans that i know of who don't think there shoudl be a cap are yankees fans......and it's pretty obvious why. 20 different teams have made the post season the last 4 seasons. Facts are facts. Yankees Rays Red Sox White Sox Indians Twins Tigers Angels Athletics Braves Mets Phillis Cubs Brewers Cardinals Astros Diamondbacks Dodgers Padres Rockies Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bugg Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 No way the PA goes along unless there'a high floor(which poor sister teams won't do) and revenue-sharing ends(ditto). Can't have it both ways. Rightnow, the poor teams aren't obliged to spend much more than bottom dollar and they get Yankee revenue sharing cash to cover it. WHy would the PA or the Yankees go along with a salary cap and revenue sharing? Mr. Henry-crazy idea-get yourself some land in Boston and build a real stadium. It's not that hard to do. NYC is doing it twice, and you guys have all sophisiticated MIT and Harvard book-learned guys to work it out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Otter Posted February 18, 2009 Author Share Posted February 18, 2009 The Yankees generate a tremendous amount of money each season. As a fan I am happy that they reinvest that money into the team, instead of other franchise owners that simply pocket the profits and the Yankee luxury tax money. Since 2000, 8 teams have won the World Series. The Yankees, D-Backs, Angels, Marlins, Red Sox (2), White Sox, Cardinals, and Phillies. Baseball has plenty of parity. By the way, since 2000, the 6 teams have won the Super Bowl. The Ravens, Patriots (3), Tampa Bay, Steelers (2), Colts, and Giants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECURB Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 20 different teams have made the post season the last 4 seasons. Facts are facts. Yankees Rays Red Sox White Sox Indians Twins Tigers Angels Athletics Braves Mets Phillis Cubs Brewers Cardinals Astros Diamondbacks Dodgers Padres Rockies The Yankees generate a tremendous amount of money each season. As a fan I am happy that they reinvest that money into the team, instead of other franchise owners that simply pocket the profits and the Yankee luxury tax money. Since 2000, 8 teams have won the World Series. The Yankees, D-Backs, Angels, Marlins, Red Sox (2), White Sox, Cardinals, and Phillies. Baseball has plenty of parity. By the way, since 2000, the 6 teams have won the Super Bowl. The Ravens, Patriots (3), Tampa Bay, Steelers (2), Colts, and Giants. Great posts guys... that about sums it up... game over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Otter Posted February 19, 2009 Author Share Posted February 19, 2009 No way the PA goes along unless there'a high floor(which poor sister teams won't do) and revenue-sharing ends(ditto). Can't have it both ways. Rightnow, the poor teams aren't obliged to spend much more than bottom dollar and they get Yankee revenue sharing cash to cover it. WHy would the PA or the Yankees go along with a salary cap and revenue sharing? Mr. Henry-crazy idea-get yourself some land in Boston and build a real stadium. It's not that hard to do. NYC is doing it twice, and you guys have all sophisiticated MIT and Harvard book-learned guys to work it out. I don't think the Sox want to build a new ballpark. They like having a small ballpark with high ticket demand, so that they can charge crazy ticket prices. However, I wouldn't be surprised if they decided to put seats up and down the Pesky Pole and charge $250 a pop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morrissey Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 Since 2000, 8 teams have won the World Series. The Yankees, D-Backs, Angels, Marlins, Red Sox (2), White Sox, Cardinals, and Phillies. Baseball has plenty of parity. By the way, since 2000, the 6 teams have won the Super Bowl. The Ravens, Patriots (3), Tampa Bay, Steelers (2), Colts, and Giants. Good stuff Otter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morrissey Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 I don't think the Sox want to build a new ballpark. They like having a small ballpark with high ticket demand, so that they can charge crazy ticket prices. However, I wouldn't be surprised if they decided to put seats up and down the Pesky Pole and charge $250 a pop. I think after Fenway Parks 100 year anniversary (2012) they will begin discussing a new ballpark. Until then they will continue renovating bits and part of the stadium, and try and cram in as many people as they can. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lil Bit Special Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 I don't think the Sox want to build a new ballpark. They like having a small ballpark with high ticket demand, so that they can charge crazy ticket prices. However, I wouldn't be surprised if they decided to put seats up and down the Pesky Pole and charge $250 a pop. Fenway isnt going anywhere anytime soon... http://bostonist.com/2009/02/18/sox_brass_fenway_for_50.php Can you imagine the Red Sox gearing up for the 2059 baseball season at Fenway Park? The Red Sox ownership can. Larry Lucchino spoke to WEEI today and mentioned that the now-annual off-season renovation process at Fenway is in the "ninth inning" phase, and that the work being done while Boston waits for spring has helped transform a park that faced the possibility of demolition less than a decade ago into one that "will be stable and solid and, with normal maintenance, will be around for another 50 years." So gear up, fans. House of Blues patrons, you're still going to be fighting wicked crowds on show-game nights. What are your thoughts? Do you think it's so good, so good, so good or have you been praying for a new ballpark down by the water? Bostonist's take: we are thrilled at the idea of hearing "Dirty Water" coming through the ballpark's sound system for years to come. http://fullcount.weei.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/021809_larrylucchino_fenwayanother50years.mp3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bugg Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 I think after Fenway Parks 100 year anniversary (2012) they will begin discussing a new ballpark. Until then they will continue renovating bits and part of the stadium, and try and cram in as many people as they can.It's an antiquated fire trap. I'd bet if it didn't have the cache it has it could not pass a legit fire inspection. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neckdemon Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 The Yankees generate a tremendous amount of money each season. As a fan I am happy that they reinvest that money into the team, instead of other franchise owners that simply pocket the profits and the Yankee luxury tax money. Since 2000, 8 teams have won the World Series. The Yankees, D-Backs, Angels, Marlins, Red Sox (2), White Sox, Cardinals, and Phillies. Baseball has plenty of parity. By the way, since 2000, the 6 teams have won the Super Bowl. The Ravens, Patriots (3), Tampa Bay, Steelers (2), Colts, and Giants. well i also think that teams should be forced to spend a minimum amount of money on payroll also. either way what i think or what you think doesn't really matter anyway. you can say whatever you want about the number of teams who have won the world series or made the play-offs. in football, usually the best team wins a given game. in baseball that's not so much the case. that said, there still isn't a level playing field, and i don't care what you say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bugg Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 well i also think that teams should be forced to spend a minimum amount of money on payroll also. either way what i think or what you think doesn't really matter anyway. you can say whatever you want about the number of teams who have won the world series or made the play-offs. in football, usually the best team wins a given game. in baseball that's not so much the case. that said, there still isn't a level playing field, and i don't care what you say.Andf in MLB, there have has been one. Henry is pissed his cheif competition is about to open a new revenue stream he cannot hope to match. He ought to at least be honest about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aten Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 Here's a better idea: get out of currency, you ****ing baby. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piney Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 That is funny, that is like having a room of fat people and the second fattest man in the room looks around at everyone else in the room and tells them "We should all go on a diet." Meanwhile he is shoveling food in his mouth hand over fist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdropOFvenom Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 20 different teams have made the post season the last 4 seasons. Facts are facts. Yankees - 3 Rays - 1 Red Sox - 3 White Sox - 2 Indians - 1 Twins - 1 Tigers - 1 Angels - 3 Athletics - 1 Braves - 1 Mets - 1 Phillis - 2 Cubs - 2 Brewers- 1 Cardinals - 2 Astros - 1 Diamondbacks - 1 Dodgers - 2 Padres - 2 Rockies - 1 The facts suggest that the big market teams are much more likely to make the postseason then the small market teams are. Of the teams that have made the playoffs multiple times over the last 4 years, the only "Small Market" team that qualifies is the San Diego Padres, and as much of that has to do with the NL West as anything else. The rest of them (NYY, Boston, CWS, LAA, Philadelphia, CHC, St Louis, LAD) are all in the Top Half of the league in salary, if not the Top 5 (Going by 2008 Salary numbers). Of the Top 10 teams in Salary in the league, only Seattle has not made the Postseason in the last 4 years. Of the Bottom 10 teams in Salary in the league, 6 of them (Florida, Pittsburgh, Washington, Kansas City, Texas, and Baltimore) have not made the postseason in the last 4 years. You can choose to cherry-pick stats that fit your argument, but the playing field is not level. That's just the reality of the matter and you are in straight denial if you try and claim otherwise. You know I'm a Mets fan, and that my team has a considerable advantage because of the way the rules are in place now, and yet I'd still support a salary cap (As long as it comes with a salary floor) because it's what's right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdropOFvenom Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 Since 2000, 8 teams have won the World Series. The Yankees, D-Backs, Angels, Marlins, Red Sox (2), White Sox, Cardinals, and Phillies. Baseball has plenty of parity.Yankees - 1st in Salary Red Sox (2) - 4th in Salary White Sox - 5th in Salary Angels - 6th in Salary Cardinals - 11th in Salary Phillies - 13th in Salary ---- Diamondbacks - 23rd in Salary Marlins - 30th in Salary Notice the disparity now? 7 of the Last 9 World Champions ranked 13th or better in Salary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piney Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 Yankees - 1st in Salary Red Sox (2) - 4th in Salary White Sox - 5th in Salary Angels - 6th in Salary Cardinals - 11th in Salary Phillies - 13th in Salary ---- Diamondbacks - 23rd in Salary Marlins - 30th in Salary Notice the disparity now? 7 of the Last 9 World Champions ranked 13th or better in Salary. I would agree if the Cardinals or the Phillies payroll was somewhat unreasonable as compared to most other teams. I would like to see the difference between 13th in salary and say 20th in salary... that would tell a better story Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jbro22 Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 MLB needs a Salary floor, not a cap. Too many owners pocketing money instead of putting it into there team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdropOFvenom Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 I would agree if the Cardinals or the Phillies payroll was somewhat unreasonable as compared to most other teams. I would like to see the difference between 13th in salary and say 20th in salary... that would tell a better story by 2008 Payrolls 13. Philadelphia[url=http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/teams/salaries?team=phi] 95,479,880 20. Colorado 68,655,500 It's a pretty large gap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jbro22 Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 Oh and its a good thing the players union will NEVER agree to this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piney Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 by 2008 Payrolls 13. Philadelphia 95,479,880 20. Colorado 68,655,500 It's a pretty large gap. I don't know if I agree with that....you are talking an average drop of 3,832,054 per slot... 4 million a team for teams who spend over 50 mil on payroll isn't that great a difference. And that is the difference between to team who won the World Series, not the lowest payroll of the other playoff teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Otter Posted February 19, 2009 Author Share Posted February 19, 2009 I got all of this information from http://content.usatoday.com/sports/baseball/salaries/default.aspx Here is list of all of the World Series matchups since 2000 and where each team ranked in payroll that season. 2000 Yankees (1) Mets (6) 2001 Yankees (1) D-Backs (8) 2002 Angels (15) Giants (10) 2003 Yankees (1) Marlins (25) 2004 Red Sox (2) Cardinals (9) 2005 White Sox (13) Astros (12) 2006 Tigers (14) Cardinals (11) 2007 Red Sox (2) Rockies (25) 2008 Rays (29) Phillies (13) If you average up the salary rank of teams that have made the World Series it is a tad under 11 (10.9). The average rank of Series winners is exactly 10. So although these averages are in the top half of MLB they are much closer to the league average than the league high (10 and 11 being closer to 15 than 1). Since 2004, only one team in the top ten in payroll has even made the World Series, the 2007 Red Sox, while 2 in the bottom 5 of payroll have. Looking at these numbers, I really don't see the argument for a salary cap. Baseball does have it fair share of parity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdropOFvenom Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 I got all of this information from http://content.usatoday.com/sports/baseball/salaries/default.aspx Here is list of all of the World Series matchups since 2000 and where each team ranked in payroll that season. 2000 Yankees (1) Mets (6) 2001 Yankees (1) D-Backs (8) 2002 Angels (15) Giants (10) 2003 Yankees (1) Marlins (25) 2004 Red Sox (2) Cardinals (9) 2005 White Sox (13) Astros (12) 2006 Tigers (14) Cardinals (11) 2007 Red Sox (2) Rockies (25) 2008 Rays (29) Phillies (13) If you average up the salary rank of teams that have made the World Series it is a tad under 11 (10.9). The average rank of Series winners is exactly 10. So although these averages are in the top half of MLB they are much closer to the league average than the league high (10 and 11 being closer to 15 than 1). Since 2004, only one team in the top ten in payroll has even made the World Series, the 2007 Red Sox, while 2 in the bottom 5 of payroll have. Looking at these numbers, I really don't see the argument for a salary cap. Baseball does have it fair share of parity. No offense, but you just proved the opposite, IMO 15/18 teams (83%) that Made the World Series that you listed had a Payroll in the Top Half of the league. You just proved that those that have money have a significantly greater chance of team success then those that do not have money. While there is the occasional outlier (Such as last years Rays), the trend there is clear. Those that have money Win more games, Make the playoffs more often, Make it to the World Series more often, and Win the World Series more often, then those that do not have money. I'm not sure why that is a shocking concept to anybody, and it illustrates the need for a Salary Cap (And Floor). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uart Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 What a communist.... Salary caps don't do anything for the fans. They hurt the players. The only ones who benefit are owners. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdropOFvenom Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 What a communist.... Salary caps don't do anything for the fans. They hurt the players. The only ones who benefit are owners. Easy to say a Salary Cap doesn't do anything for the fans when you're a Yankee fan. Not quite as easy to say when you're a Padres fan and your team is forced to look into trading the face of their franchise because they "Cannot afford" him anymore (Which we all know is bull****), while letting your legendary closer walk over a couple million dollars. The players wouldn't lose any money in a properly managed system, sure, the Yankees would spend less, but teams like the Marlins would be forced to spend more, the cap numbers would adjust as the economy adjusts to changing times. In the end, it evens out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morrissey Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 Easy to say a Salary Cap doesn't do anything for the fans when you're a Yankee fan. Not quite as easy to say when you're a Padres fan and your team is forced to look into trading the face of their franchise because they "Cannot afford" him anymore (Which we all know is bull****), while letting your legendary closer walk over a couple million dollars. The players wouldn't lose any money in a properly managed system, sure, the Yankees would spend less, but teams like the Marlins would be forced to spend more, the cap numbers would adjust as the economy adjusts to changing times. In the end, it evens out. Bad example, they where looking to trade there franchise player because there owner was going through a messy divorce, but I'm pretty sure someone bought the team from him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdropOFvenom Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 Bad example, they where looking to trade there franchise player because there owner was going through a messy divorce, but I'm pretty sure someone bought the team from him. Point remains the same, small market teams across the league eventually have their great players priced out from them. It's why CC Sabathia is a Yankee, it's why Johan Santana is a Met, ect. I'm not saying that there still wouldn't be some cases where players are priced off of their current teams, but they would be in a much better position to keep them if the playing field was leveled out some. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.