Rollins- lots of hot air

[Potomac Yank]

Originally Posted by oldjudge

As in any group in society, there are some good people and there are some jerks--nuf ced. As a Yankee fan I would like to congratulate the Phillies' fans on a great season. The series could have gone either way and I'm just happy we came out ahead.

*

As a fan that had the privilege of watching Keller, DiMag and Henrich patrol the outfield, at the old ball orchard in Da Bronx ..... I agree with everything ced by the guy from Da Bronx.

I salute the formidable Philly team, and their fans.
It could've gone either way.
It wouldn't surprise me if we have a rematch.

As for the author of this thread.
Some people love being wrong ... but this guy loves being wrong LOUD!

[calvindog]

Guys, your proposal would make total sense if in fact all of the teams' owners actually wanted to win more than make money.

[barrysloate]

Doesn't winning make money for a team? What's the downside?

[Jim VB]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

Doesn't winning make money for a team? What's the downside?

It's a very complicated answer. Much depends upon your definition of "making money."

Steinbrenner bought the team in 1973 for $10 million. Estimates are that they are currently worth a little over $1 billion, so that's pretty good money. But, many years, they are cash flow negative. That possibility scares the bejesus out of some owners.

It seems to me that you can make money by winning, and you can make money by losing big and collecting the most money from revenue sharing and luxury taxes, but somewhere in the middle is a dead zone where you don't win enough to profit but don't suck enough to collect big dollars.

This "sea of mediocrity" is where you get killed. (I've heard that term somewhere before...)

But trying to win has it's risks. Spending money alone does not guarantee winning. So if your fans tolerate losing, that's the safer course.


Edited to add: The other thing to consider is that every year, only a couple of teams win enough to be successful, but lots of teams can stink it up.

[barrysloate]

If somebody buys a baseball team with no intention of putting together the best possible ball club, they should kick his sorry butt out of the league.

[Jim VB]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

If somebody buys a baseball team with no intention of putting together the best possible ball club, they should kick his sorry butt out of the league.

I agree, but there are about 20 of those guys in MLB right now.

[tbob]

Then you have the richest family of owners, the Pohlads, who run the Twins and we all know what kind of a payroll they have.
As far as accepting the luxury tax and other shared monies, many of the smaller market teams use that money not for signing free agents or keeping the players they have by paying them more to keep them from leaving, but plunge it in to their farm systems to pay scouts, sign draftees, and pay for their minor league franchises to keep them afloat.

[dstudeba]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

If somebody buys a baseball team with no intention of putting together the best possible ball club, they should kick his sorry butt out of the league.

I don't think there is a single owner out there who doesn't try to put together the best possible club within their financial constraints.

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by dstudeba

I don't think there is a single owner out there who doesn't try to put together the best possible club within their financial constraints.

Obviously. But every owner has a different set of standards as to what their financial constraints are. Some want to spend every last dollar on their teams and others don't. To many this is simply a business in which the bottom line is all that matters. Being competitive, to some owners, is enough.