O/T A-Rod $350M Contract...R U Kidding Me?

[Archive]

Posted By: Peter_Spaeth

Let's legislate salary caps, or better yet turn over all private enterprise (including Barry's auction house ) to the government.

[Archive]

Posted By: David Atkatz

"Barry--no he doesn't--"

No?

Then prove me wrong.
Provide a strong argument to the contrary.
In fact, provide any argument.

[Archive]

Posted By: JimCrandell

Relax buddy--start a sportscard thread.

Not a politics boards--Barry and I are just kidding around.

[Archive]

Posted By: John Kalafarski

Is A-Rod the best player in the game? I can think of three players on the Red Sox alone who I'd rather have: Ortiz (who took a reasonable contract), Beckett (who took a reasonable contract), and Papelbon (who's playing for the MLB minimum). Red Sox Nation doesn't want A-Rod; he's the Yankee's burden. He's greedy and his salary demands are excessive. I hate to break it to some of you people, greed is bad. I hope his contract is picked up by nobody and he retires to sit and gloat over his bank accounts.

[Archive]

Posted By: arodrules

Kenny said..... "Arodrules is an idiot"

"Arod is an EMPLOYEE. He is not a CEO. He is not the manager. He is not a team player"


Well if i am in IDIOT(pretty personal there guy, and you don't even know me,LOL), i gotta say ......
You did not do a SMART job with that argument.Let me enlighten you Kenny....

A CEO is AN EMPLOYEE, a manager is AN EMPLOYEE.Arod is a TEAM PLAYER.He gets paid to perform GOOD NUMBERS, which he does.No 1 player can carry a team.Everyone knows this.He does put the numbers up which is what he gets paid to do.

As far as 350 million being excessive pay, i also agree.My point is that if corporate masters of the universe can make the money so can Arod, or any other athlete,entertainer,etc.Kenny you need to work on making better arguments, especially if you are going to get so personal.

[Archive]

Posted By: RAND

arodrules, you are allowed to voice your opinion, but on this board you should put your real name and email in your post and not hide behind "arodrules". I started this thread, and my disgust comes from his unprofessionalism to "opt out" during the World Series, not giving the Yankees the opportunity for a face to face meeting (even if he already made up his mind), and his agent blasting out there a 350M contract or dont bother to call. It just rubs me the wrong way. I hope nobody jumps in with an offer and he sweats and eventually has to take 10M less a year.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jason

First of all........1 player CANNOT carry a team. 2 players CANNOT even carry a team. If you had any part of just a little bit of playing experience you would know that. If I were Steinbrenner, I would be very happy. I would save alot of money by dumping dead weight. While AROD does perform very well, he tends to choke in the clutch. I would much rather have a player like Varitek or Pappelbon for alot less $$$ than Arod, and I am not even a Red Sox fan. He is just concerned for himself. I cannot say I would blame him if I were in his shoes and I am not. I would imagine most people would go with the most $$$. However, I think he will have a hard time finding a place to pay him that much $$. If they do, then they certainly have more $$$ than brains. He lacks class and integrity due to the fact he would announce this garbage during the last WS game. It is clear he is NOT a team player. He cannot impact a team to win so he is DEAD weight.I wish him well. I really think he deserves what he gets. Know the game before you make stupid statements. By the way.....anyone with an email address that idiotic is not a rational person anyways. Learn some baseball then come back and maybe I will read some more of your garbage.


Jason

[Archive]

Posted By: Peter_Spaeth

Cmon give the guy credit for having a sense of humor!!

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

A little bickering amongst board members is expected. A little bit of politics in an off topic thread isn't the end of the world but we would prefer not to see too much of it, if any. We even put "bickering" in the rules so it's allowed. What we have almost 0 tolerance for is arguing and staying anonymous....So whoever "arodrules" is, is going to have to make himself/herself known or not participate anymore in this thread.....Nothing personal...regards

[Archive]

Posted By: davidcycle

Here's an example why many many fans don't like ARod. He took the largest ever contract to play for Texas. Taking that amount was no crime, but he claimed he went to Texas because it was his number one choice for a team, which no one believed. His contract took up so much of the Rangers budget that it prevented the team from signing the needed other players needed to field a winning team-- meaning ARod's salary demands came at the expense of the team. Before long ARod complained that the Rangers were losing, when it was his very contract that prevented the team from being competitive.

This also illustrates why maximizing your salary is not always a good thing, as it can come at the expense of other desirables. While it is granted he other avenues of income, Michael Jordan chose a major pay cut so his team, the Chicago Bulls, could sign other players. Considering his concern was winning and his team went on to win numerous championships, I'm sure Jordan has never regretted having accepted a lower than market value salary.

The comparison between the two players should speak for itself.

[Archive]

Posted By: Marc S.

Is it A-Rod for taking up too much of the Rangers' budget, or was it the Rangers' management, for offering A-Rod so much, knowing that they would have to spread the remaining money over a very thinly-qualified field? In 2001, the Rangers spent $7.5MM on Kenny Rogers, who was 5-7, with a 6++ ERA for the Rangers. But people look at the Rangers at the beginning of this decade, and point the finger of blame at A-Rod? I just don't believe it. You can't fault A-Rod that the Rangers offered him so much money. And you can't look at A-Rod and claim that he "stole" the Rangers budget.

The Rangers upper management made some strategic mistakes in building their team in 2001 and 2002. Quite frankly, the Rangers had the best offense in the American League at the time, led not only by A-Rod, but by I-Rod, Ruben Sierra, Rafael Palmeiro, Andres Galarrage and some other key players. Their offense was phenomenal (3rd in runs, 2nd in hits, 1st in homers, 3rd in batting average, 1st in slugging, and had an OPS+ of 110). The Rangers spent $88MM in salary that year -- yes 25% was to A-Rod, but the Rangers bet on offense, and the few marginal investments they made in pitching were abysmal failures. Last in the league in ERA, last in hits allowed, last in runs allowed, last in home runs allowed, and last in walks given up. Not for a lack of trying. Two of their five highest paid players were Rogers and Darren Oliver. But it did not work. I can't fault A-Rod for the Rangers' management's poor decisions.

[Archive]

Posted By: davidcycle

A contract is an agreement between two parties. Responsibility and blame is given to both parties of a bum contract, in particular considering that neither side was required to sign it. If giving $250 million cripples the team, accepting the $250 million cripples the team.

[Archive]

Posted By: anthony

brett-

"Boston should sing A-Rod and get rid of Lugo somehow. The Yankees hated Damon when he knocked them out of the 2004 playoffs, but they like him when he helps the team win. I think the Red Sox fans would like A-Rod if he helped them win games. Plus, it would piss off the Yankee fans."

sorry but i dont get your thinking here, i think you hate the redsox and wish them bad...

AROD cant help his own team win games, why should boston sign him to help them win games? they won more games without him than the yankees did with him. and i doubt there are many yankee fans that would be pissed off if boston did sign him, he did nothing for them that his ego promised.

[Archive]

Posted By: jay wolt

"i doubt there are many yankee fans that would be pissed off if boston did sign him"

Are you sure?
I would be pretty pissed as a Yankee fan.
Arod was hardly a bust he hit 54 HR's & 156 RBI
and will walk away w/ an MVP, his 2nd in his 4
years as a Yankee.
In the rich history of the Yankees, no 3rd baseman
ever had his #'s, even his worse year of the 4 was damn impressive.
Granted he doesn't do much in the postseason
but w/o him - NY isn't even close to making the
postseason in '07.
With that said how can Boston be worse w/ him replacing
Lugo then w/o him? He was a gold glove SS and played
3rd for NY to coincide w/ Jeter.
He will make any team in baseball better.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jason

7Leave the presence of a fool,
for there you do not meet words of knowledge.
8The wisdom of the prudent is to discern his way,
but the folly of fools is deceiving.
9(M) Fools mock at the guilt offering,
but the upright enjoy acceptance.[b]

16(W) One who is wise is cautious[d] and(X) turns away from evil,
but a fool is reckless and careless.

23In all toil there is profit,
but mere talk(AG) tends only to poverty.
24The crown of the wise is their wealth,
but the folly of fools brings folly.
(Proverbs 14)


Proverbs 1:7
The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge, but fools despise wisdom and discipline.

Proverbs 13:16
Every prudent man acts out of knowledge, but a fool exposes his folly.

Proverbs 14:3
A fool's talk brings a rod to his back, but the lips of the wise protect them.

Proverbs 14:7
Stay away from a foolish man, for you will not find knowledge on his lips.

Proverbs 17:16
Of what use is money in the hand of a fool, since he has no desire to get wisdom?

Proverbs 18:2
A fool finds no pleasure in understanding but delights in airing his own opinions.

Proverbs 19:1
Better a poor man whose walk is blameless than a fool whose lips are perverse.

Proverbs 19:10
It is not fitting for a fool to live in luxury— how much worse for a slave to rule over princes!

Proverbs 26:9
Like a thornbush in a drunkard's hand is a proverb in the mouth of a fool.

Wisdom is too high for a fool; in the assembly at the gate he has nothing to say.

Proverbs 26:3
A whip for the horse, a halter for the donkey, and a rod for the backs of fools!

Many more truths I have no time to type. ENjoy!

[Archive]

Posted By: Brett

Sorry i made some typos in there Anthony. I do like the Red Sox and i wanted them to win the World Series. The Red Sox fans said that they don't want A-Rod on the Red Sox. I'm saying that if ARod helped Boston win another world Series, the fans wouldn't hate him. I was comparing him to Johnny Damon because remember in the 2004 ALCS when Damon hit that grand slam and sunk the Yankees ? That must have pissed off every yankee fan out there... then he goes and signs with the Yankees and the fans like him because he helped the team win. As long as you wear the Yankee pin stripes, pin play well and make the team win then I don't see how the home town fans can hate the player. The fans respect his playing ability.

I don't have a problem with A-Rod playing on my team. If he never used steroids, then i'd say that hes the best player in baseball right now period. I think the fans were too hard on him this year. He basically saved the Yankees early in the season when they had no hitting and pitching. He got them to the post season and the rest of the team didn't help much. The Yankees didnt go anywhere because they had no pitching, not because A-Rod cant hit worth a damn in the post season. You know when you're going to lose the series when you only have one good starter in a 5 man rotation and he pitches the worst out of them...

[Archive]

Posted By: Rhett Yeakley

Not necessarily sticking up for the guy or anything like that, but without Arod this past season the Yankees don't make the playoffs.
-Rhett

[Archive]

Posted By: peter chao

Guys,

If ARod went to Boston Red Sox it would ratchet the New York and Boston rivalry up another notch. This would be great for baseball and the average fan. This would give Boston a chance to truly reverse the Curse of the Babe Ruth trade.

Peter C.

[Archive]

Posted By: davidcycleback

Beyond Yankees and Red Sox fans, many consider the national media's focus on the rivalry a detriment to baseball. It's not that the rivalry is not worthy of attention, but the sports networks focus on them at the expense of other teams ... then lament at playoff time that there is lack of interest in the teams they ignored all season.

[Archive]

Posted By: jay wolt

"This would give Boston a chance to truly reverse the Curse of the Babe Ruth trade"
The Sox have won 2 World Series in 4 years
pretty sure the curse is now dead & buried.

[Archive]

Posted By: peter chao

Torre says there's a chance the Dodger's will enter the A-Rod sweepstakes. The Giants are saying the same. A bidding war between the 2 clubs for A-Rod's services would be even more ridiculous and heighten the rivalry.

Peter C.

[Archive]

Posted By: Steve Murray

Bumping these O/T posts is really obnoxious.

[Archive]

Posted By: peter chao

Steve,

Thanks for letting me know. Sorry.

Peter C.

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

It's probably time to lock it so it slips down the page.

[Archive]

Posted By: Chris Counts

Has A-Rod signed with anybody yet? Why is this thread less relevant than it was a couple days ago? I'm curious why it is "obnoxious" to post on OT threads after a certain point. The A-Rod free agent story clearly has the attention of many board contributers (72 posts). It seems to me that the board either allows OT posts or it doesn't. It seems absurd to cut off comments at a certain point. Especially if they're coming from Peter, who in my estimation has done a nice job of toning down his enthusiasm. And he didn't start the post, either. Personally, I think it's great we have a couple ongoing threads that deal with compelling contemporary baseball issues. We are, after all, some of the most devoted baseball fans you'll ever meet. I can't remember when there haven't been a couple such threads going on. It's not like we're talking about our favorite punk bands (I liked that thread as well!) ...

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Chris- the A-Rod story could go on for weeks, and every couple of days there may be a new wrinkle or twist on the news. Do we really need to keep discussing it on a regular basis? Agreed, it's not the worst thing in the world if we do, but it is off-topic.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jeff Lichtman

Well, I for one am interested in what factors could rachet up the Giants/Dodgers rivalry as well as what can finally reverse that old Red Sox curse. Oh wait....

[Archive]

Posted By: Ted Zanidakis

I say DITTO to what you just said....and, another DITTO for the 4th thread this week regarding GAI's alleged "demise".

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

The Red Sox curse has officially become the Red Sox dynasty.

[Archive]

Posted By: Ted Zanidakis

How many times do I have to repeat this....in 1904 John McGraw put the "1st Curse" on the Boston
Americans by refusing to play them in the World Series. Then he proclaimed his NY Giants as the
World Champs.

During Ruth's tenure with Boston (1914-19), the McGraw "curse" was "suspended"....Ruth was that
powerful.

Finally, 100 years later in 2004 the Red Sox were Champs....after a full century, the ghost of McGraw
no longer haunts them.
And, that guys and gals....as Paul Harvey is fond of saying...."Now you know the rest of the story".

T-Rex TED

[Archive]

Posted By: David Atkatz

Actually, McGraw didn't refuse to play Boston. He refused to play the winner of the A.L. pennant, whoever that may have been.
At the time Little Napolean refused, it was just as likely that the people he hated most--the Greater New York Base Ball Club of the American League--would win, and there was no way McGraw was going to risk losing to them.
As it happened, The New York Americans gave up the pennant to the Boston Americans on the last day of the season--Jack Chesbro's infamous wild pitch--and so it was Boston that was shut out of the second World Series.

How do you turn any of that into a "curse"?

[Archive]

Posted By: Ted Zanidakis

Everything you said is accurate and I have posted all this before....1904 was a fantastic season in BB.

What you didn't mention is McGraw's vendetta against Ban Johnson....who rejected McGraw's request
to be Manager of the NY Highlanders in 1903.

The "behind the scenes" story that I am familiar with, is that McGraw was willing to play the Highland-
ers because he felt his team could beat them and further "rub" it into Johnson And, Pulliam (NL Prez)
and Brush (NY Giants owner) were well aware of the economic significance an all-NYC World Series.

But, when Chesbro committed the "ultimatel sin" and failed to simply waste the pitch on an 0-2 count to
Fred Parent (who Chesbro had struck out twice that day);and, allowed the winning Run to be scored
by Criger....there was no way that McGraw....Brush....and Pulliam were going to play the Boston team.

TED Z

[Archive]

Posted By: David Atkatz

McGraw announced on October 7--when the Highlanders were still leading the A.L.--that they would not play a series with the A.L. winner.

Said McGraw:

“I want to go clearly and emphatically on record in the matter of the refusal of the New York Club to play a post-season series. The people of New York have been kind enough to give me some credit for bringing the pennant to New York, and if there is any just blame or criticism for the club’s action in protecting that highly-prized honor the blame should rest on my shoulders, not Mr. Brush’s, for I alone am responsible.
“When I came to New York three years ago the team was in last place. Since that time, on and off the field, I have worked to bring the pennant to New York. The result is known. Now that the New York team has won this honor, I for one will not stand to see it tossed away like a rag. The pennant means something to me. It is the first I have ever won. It means something to my players, and they are with me in my stand. We never stopped until we clinched the pennant, even if it did rob the game of the interest of a pennant race. The club never complained. When the fight was hot we played to thousands. After the race was won we played to hundreds. But that was square sport and the stockholders never complained. If we didn’t sacrifice our race in our own league to the box office we certainly are not going to put in jeopardy the highest honor in baseball simply for the box office inducements.
“If the National League should see fit to place post-season games on the same plane as championship games, and surround them with the same protection and safeguards for square sport as championship games, then, and not till then, will I ever take part in them.
“Now about the team. A better team never was gotten together. We are afraid of no team. They are with me to a man in my stand. I put it up to them one by one and they showed their colors. We are here and here to stay. We will defend the pennant in 1905 and hope to for many years. We are willing to be judged by our patrons and the supporters of honest sport.”

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

Locking threads is saved for extraordinary situations. Deleting them is almost never done. I would greatly prefer everyone just use good judgement. I don't see the harm if this gets bumped back to the top every now and then...especially if it stays on topic. Even though I could give a rats patoot about major league baseball today I think it's a fair Off Topic to talk about on this board...per the rules....regards

[Archive]

Posted By: jay wolt

Glad this thread hasn't been locked
Ted & David's accounting of the '04 season is a good read

[Archive]

Posted By: Ted Zanidakis

JAY W

I think I'll continue this discussion on a new thread....lest Leon shuts this one down.
This subject matter is pre-war and is worthy of its own thread.

TED Z