Light the Hot Stove fires

[cranberry]

These are businessmen. Some of them simply won't pour more money into a business than they could ever get out of it.

Baseball owners tend to make most of their money, historically, on the sale of the club because of the crazy rate of increase on franchise values. The only intelligent business strategy is to invest in your baseball operations, including players, to ensure optimum value increase. People pay way too much attention to annual operating revenues in these discussions.

I never said they were making intelligent baseball decisions. Being successful in other areas doesn't mean you will run your franchise well.

I see cran's point, but it still makes a difference if the money is coming from team revenue rather than the owner's pocket. And even when it comes time to sell, none of these franchises will ever have the value of the Yankees.

Of course it makes a difference, which is why it will always be better to be the owner of the Yankees and the Royals and why a franchise in a big market will always be more valuable than one in a smaller market. You get what you pay for.

But a lot of club investment is done with borrowed money because money is relatively cheap with today's interest rates. I wouldn't be surprised if the Yankees carried one of the higher debts in baseball. Doesn't mean they're about to go broke, though, because their growth (franchise value) is far outpacing their debt.

 

[Oz]

Joe Posnanski likes the Meche signing. The optimist in me believes the optimist in him ...

http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/sports/16190469.htm

And Meche is young, too — he just turned 28. Here, for fun, are the pitching stats for three pitchers at that age.

Line No. 1: 55 wins, 44 losses, 4.65 ERA, 815 innings, 810 hits, 575 strikeouts, 363 walks.

Line No. 2: 49-50, 4.83 ERA, 870 IP, 870 H, 612 K, 331 W.

Line No. 3: 43-47, 4.58 ERA, 799 IP, 846 H, 586 K, 344 W.

OK, so all three lines are pretty similar. What's the point? Well, the first line belongs to Gil Meche. The second is Chris Carpenter, who became the best pitcher in the National League. The third is Jason Schmidt, who went 78-37 for San Francisco since 2001 and just signed a contract for almost $16 million per year.

Of course, we could easily find comparable pitchers who flopped, but the point is that Dayton Moore and his Royals decision makers looked hard at Meche and decided this was a young man who could emerge. He was the one young pitcher in the group who had a chance to become an ace.

 

[Sea Bass]

Lefty closers are very iffy

No more iffy than righties.

Yes they are, with lineups stacked with righties.

Billy Wagner was able to get by, when he would hit 100 and throw strikes.

B.J. Ryan has seemed to do OK as did Randy Myers and Norm Charlton. John Franco - who never could hit 100 - had a nice career.

All I'm saying is your statement is way too stereotypical. On the flip side, then righty hitters should be iffy (especially in the late innings) since the majority of pitchers are righties.

Why are middle-inning left-handers one-batter pitchers?

Because the odds are that the righties will hammer him.

Are there no right-handed one-batter pitchers?

Not unless he is facing a righty bracketed by two left-handed hitters.

Percentages.

Exactly. So why don't they leave the rightie in? Because, to use your words, odds are the lefty would hammer him.

So I'm just not sure how this means lefty closers are any more iffy than righties.

 

[Evil Bastard (aka Chris_L)]

Separated at Birth?

<img src="http://espn.starwave.com/media/mlb/2004/1227/photo/a_drew_frt.jpg" />

<img src="http://www.dacre.org/stills/webm/Mcl3759.jpg" />

New Red Sox outfielder JD Drew and Victor McLaglen (well known actor for such films as The Quiet Man and Gunga Din among others)

 

[lantaur]

The Orioles are giving Jay Payton a two-year deal. The fun continues in Balmer. Sigh.

http://www.baltimoresun.com/sports/baseball/bal-os1208,0,5860222.story?coll=bal-sports-baseball

 

[casty33]

Jason Marquis to the Cubs -- a three-year contract worth either $20M or $26M, depending on which paper you read. I don't know if I should applaud the Cubs for taking a chance or call them crazy. Marquis wasn't even good enough to make Cards' postseason roster, yet he did win 13 games for them two years ago. I'll let others who saw more of him last season than I did rate this one.

 

[leo1]

These are businessmen. Some of them simply won't pour more money into a business than they could ever get out of it.

Baseball owners tend to make most of their money, historically, on the sale of the club because of the crazy rate of increase on franchise values. The only intelligent business strategy is to invest in your baseball operations, including players, to ensure optimum value increase. People pay way too much attention to annual operating revenues in these discussions.

the twins are exhibit a of this. the marlins, if they can sustain their success in 2007, might be exhibit b. i have no idea how much the twins pay their scouts or pour into their baseball development, but whatever they're doing, it works. i've been beating this drum for years. nothing is to stop the yankees from skipping one $20 million player in a given offseason and devote that entire amount to beefing up the farm system, from facilities to nutrition to quality scouts to actual instructors who know how to teach instead of ex-player hangers ons owed a favor by someone.

 

[outofplace]

Jason Marquis to the Cubs -- a three-year contract worth either $20M or $26M, depending on which paper you read. I don't know if I should applaud the Cubs for taking a chance or call them crazy. Marquis wasn't even good enough to make Cards' postseason roster, yet he did win 13 games for them two years ago. I'll let others who saw more of him last season than I did rate this one.

Wow, that's awful. He was brutal this year.

 

[Columbo]

And the fact the Royals have suddenly found $62 million to spend on two injury-prone pitchers proves, once and for all, that all this bullshirt about teams being unable to afford to compete is just that: Bullshirt. They've all got the money. Some just need three 100-loss seasons in a span of four years to be inspired to spend it.

Except there's little room for error if they miss. Chances are they won't land a Bobby Abreu or someone like that at the trade deadline should things go wrong.

What I'm hoping is that what's happening now is akin to what the Tigers did years ago when they landed Pudge among others and everyone thought they just wasted money. Like I said in October, the Tigers definitely gave Royals fans hope.

And the ability to give away their mistakes hasn't helped the Yankees at all this decade.

1 WS win
3 AL pennants
7 postseason berths

Nothing.

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.

You have some vested connection with baseball management.

There is no reasonable explanation for your bizarre take on this when you are so on point with so much else.

 

[Columbo]

These are businessmen. Some of them simply won't pour more money into a business than they could ever get out of it.

Baseball owners tend to make most of their money, historically, on the sale of the club because of the crazy rate of increase on franchise values. The only intelligent business strategy is to invest in your baseball operations, including players, to ensure optimum value increase. People pay way too much attention to annual operating revenues in these discussions.

You lose money every year until you sell=Bad business.

 

[Columbo]

And even when it comes time to sell, none of these franchises will ever have the value of the Yankees.

Just like a two-bedroom condo in Minneapolis will never have the value of a two-bedroom condo in Manhattan.

Exactly.

No baseball team should have an advantage to win purely based on where it's located.

 

[Columbo]

These are businessmen. Some of them simply won't pour more money into a business than they could ever get out of it.

Baseball owners tend to make most of their money, historically, on the sale of the club because of the crazy rate of increase on franchise values. The only intelligent business strategy is to invest in your baseball operations, including players, to ensure optimum value increase. People pay way too much attention to annual operating revenues in these discussions.

I never said they were making intelligent baseball decisions. Being successful in other areas doesn't mean you will run your franchise well.

I see cran's point, but it still makes a difference if the money is coming from team revenue rather than the owner's pocket. And even when it comes time to sell, none of these franchises will ever have the value of the Yankees.

Of course it makes a difference, which is why it will always be better to be the owner of the Yankees and the Royals and why a franchise in a big market will always be more valuable than one in a smaller market.

Not in the NFL.

In a sports setting, where - dunno if you've heard of it - a level playing field is pretty important, baseball is a joke.

Why not let the Yankees have a fourth outfielder, too. A rover, while every other team just has three.

It's exactly the same concept. But I bet your ass you would object to THAT.