RANT: It's not even November Yet and...

[TiredofLosing20]

Oakland knew they could not compete so they dumped payroll,

And this statement basically proves my point and is exactly what is wrong with the current system. Oakland knew they could not compete. Isn't that the whole point. Name me one NFL team that says they can not compete simply because of their market. My guess is you can't which may be why the NFL is much more popular.

I am not arguing that small market teams can not find ways to compete I am arguing that they shouldn't have to. Oakland or KC or fill in the blank should simply be afforded the same resources as any of the other team and not be penalized solely due to geography and market. Since you are such an advocate for good management you would think you would love a salary cap. Success in the NFL is based solely on your ability to manage your team as teams are not given any inherent advantages via a salary cap. Again, is the goal fair competition and putting together a better product or something else?

What my "simple" statistics clearly show is that buying wins is a pretty successful strategy and not one that is available to all teams. "Simply" put, the statistics are pretty clear that if you are able to pay you have a far better chance of winning than if you are not. While that is fine and dandy in the real world, when dealing with sports entertainment it just doesnt make any sense.

[TiredofLosing20]

An outstanding post. These sort of researched views are a big part of what makes the Hangout so impressive. You have a researched viewpoint and then deliver the resulting reasoning in an easy to understand format.

Whether or not you agree with this post is a sidebar... well done TiredofLosing20.

Thank you.

[geschinger]

No one's saying that teams without big payrolls can't make the playoffs, but rather that it is an inherent advantage to have more payroll available. The disparity is a real issue. My whole point is quite simple... I'm advocating a more level playing field. I have trouble comprehending why that makes no sense to some.

Let me just ask... are there any posters here who feel that the chasm-like financial disparity that exist in MLB is okay, and that a plan to incorporate a more fair and level playing field in not needed? Is it wrong to expect that my team has the same basic chances to be successful as the other teams in my league?

I think most would agree that it is a problem. My reading of the thread isn't that people don't think it's a problem but rather that it's no excuse for not being competetive.

I don't think there is any reason why we couldn't compete for the long term w/o a $100m+ payroll. But at the same time I do think that the disparity is a problem and would like to see real revenue sharing.

[TiredofLosing20]

However, Billy Beane and most of us here are astute enough to take that analysis for what it's worth and not as a pillar from which to reach a caveman-like conclusion that larger markets have higher payrolls which result in more playoff appearances. In two years, smaller market teams in Oakland, Tampa, Florida and Minnesota will be legit contenders for their respective divisions.

Um, the statistics show that they do. No one is saying that there are any absolutes but to deny that there is a significant correlation between payroll level and winning is ludicrous.

If that turns out to be true than kudos to them for overcoming their disadvantage, but in four years when all of their good players are playing for Boston, NY, LA and CHI and they find themselves back in rebuilding modes while the top payroll teams continue to make the playoffs now, then, and later, the trends I have pointed out will have continued to prove out.

[Enjoy Terror]

No offense but did you even understand my point?

BTW, my point was what you just posted.

No, I didn't. I must've missed it. It wasn't worded well, if you were trying to agree with me.

[Sports Guy]

No, I didn't. I must've missed it. It wasn't worded well, if you were trying to agree with me.

I wasn't even addressing you.

My point was obvious..make smart decisions and you can compete.

[Greg Pappas]

I think most would agree that it is a problem. My reading of the thread isn't that people don't think it's a problem but rather that it's no excuse for not being competetive.

I don't think there is any reason why we couldn't compete for the long term w/o a $100m+ payroll. But at the same time I do think that the disparity is a problem and would like to see real revenue sharing.

Good post. We see this the same. I agree that we have no excuse... poor decisions and mismanagememt are at the heart of our failures. Hopefully the reverse is now true.

[LookinUp]

I wasn't even addressing you.

My point was obvious..make smart decisions and you can compete.

Don't over simplify this SG. Because some teams are at a disadvantage, being smart isn't enough. They need to be smartER than the other teams who all have highly paid people scouting, drafting, signing international talent and in player development.

The point of this thread is that the degree to how much smarter the have nots must be is pretty darn severe. The numbers tell the story, so the problem needs to be addressed.

[LookinUp]

BUMP!!!

Even if the Yankees/Sox don't end up with Teixeira, I think this thread is the right place for many of the frustrations people are seeing in this year's market. CC, Burnett and maybe Lowe, all to the Yankees. Just wow.

[WallyBunker]

The NYY going on a massive shopping spree is my preferred choice of action. Their overspending on under-productive players is our best ticket to compete.

Besides, the annual whining here when the NYY spend their $ is annoying. None of Mussina, Pavano, Giambi, ARod, Matsui have helped them to a major championship and all were part of a team that missed the playoffs this year.

Although you are right about the aforementioned additions not helping the Yanks make the playoffs last year, it still doesn't change the fact that they are playing under a different set of rules than most other teams. Can you imagine if the play on the field matched the play off the field. The Yanks would be given 12 outs an inning. Wouldn't people in general be whinning about a lack of fairness? This is similar, just not as drastic. They have more money to spend. Money buys great players. Great players win games. etc. etc.