BELTRAN TO YANKEES IN 48 HOURS??!?! - Fantasy Baseball Cafe 2014 Fantasy Baseball Cafe
100% Deposit Bonus for Cafe Members!

Return to Baseball Leftovers

BELTRAN TO YANKEES IN 48 HOURS??!?!

Moderator: Baseball Moderators

Postby Phenomenon » Thu Jun 24, 2004 5:39 pm

With the good likelyhood that Beltran will end up in NY, I am trying to trade Rolen to a guy in my league for Beltran. I also have A-Rod and M.Cabrera on my team, so i have plenty of guys who can fill the 3B spot for me if the trade goes through. Wish me luck.
Phenomenon
Softball Supervisor
Softball Supervisor


Posts: 32
Joined: 1 May 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball

Postby Smizzy » Thu Jun 24, 2004 5:45 pm

barry4prez wrote:Maybe it's a rivalry from the Red Sox's point of view. I'm not a Yankees fan, but I can't imagine how they'd see it as a rivalry when they never lose.

WHAT????

The best games in MLB played all year are usally the Yanks/Sox games....Last year we playerd so many great games before the ALCS,evrybody knew the series would be amazing,and it was.

Ask any redsox fan here...the games we play are usally great,great ball games even if we do come out on top most of the time.

The redsox are more than dererving of the title Rival
Last edited by Smizzy on Thu Jun 24, 2004 5:49 pm, edited 2 times in total.
"Clutch does exist, I've got one in my car"--BobbyRoberto
Smizzy
Minor League Mentor
Minor League Mentor

User avatar

Posts: 429
Joined: 7 Apr 2004
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Out of my ****ing mind!!

Postby redsox588 » Thu Jun 24, 2004 5:46 pm

dont count out the redsox in the beltran hunt..........

http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/r ... s/thebuzz/

I hope this is true, with beltran in our lineup we'd tear it up with speed and power. Although we need another starter I dont see anyone else out there who would really contribute as it seems freddy is not on our radar. With a lineup of...damon and beltran followed by ortiz and manny, not to mention nomar and nixon behind them we could have almost as potent if not as potent as the yanks, and we've got the pitching ;-D
redsox588
College Coach
College Coach

User avatar

Posts: 293
Joined: 16 Apr 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: New York

Postby Lofunzo » Thu Jun 24, 2004 5:46 pm

DEF.......My point is that both teams operate within the rules. Hate the game and not the player. I also hate the fact that teams like the Royals can't sign a player of their own like Beltran. I am also saying that if they can't afford to pay $80M or so, they can at least bump up their scouting department instead of just putting all of the luxury tax $$ into their pockets.
Lofunzo
Moderator
Moderator

User avatar
ModeratorCafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe RankerEagle EyeHockey ModPick 3 Weekly Winner
Posts: 23698
(Past Year: 18)
Joined: 9 Jul 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Central Jersey

Postby KevB » Thu Jun 24, 2004 6:22 pm

Even if the Royals could afford Beltran's 15 mil/year for 6+ years, he wouldn't sign there. Boras knows the Royals won't be able to compete year after year because of the salary differential. The Royals would have to pay a severe premium to keep a guy like Beltran, and of course, that would preclude them from keeping/signing other players that could help the team win. Small market teams get hit from all sides. They don't have the money to draft and sign the very best players, they don't have the deep pockets to spend on scouting that the Yankees and others have, they don't have the ability to sign the proven players in free agency, etc. Having said all of this, if the organization is run very well, you can win some games with some consistency (Oakland and Minny for example), but they are the exception to the rule.
KevB
Softball Supervisor
Softball Supervisor


Posts: 82
Joined: 28 Apr 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Kansas City

Postby Phenomenon » Thu Jun 24, 2004 6:42 pm

Poor KC, they lost Johnny Damon and Jermaine Dye to the A's in 2001. Now it appears that they are loosing Beltran in 2004 to somebody. If they could have kept these 3 guys in their OF together, they may have had a respectible team this season, and some seasons to come.
Phenomenon
Softball Supervisor
Softball Supervisor


Posts: 32
Joined: 1 May 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball

Postby Rkiivs » Thu Jun 24, 2004 8:28 pm

KevB wrote:...Small market teams get hit from all sides. They don't have the money to draft and sign the very best players, they don't have the deep pockets to spend on scouting that the Yankees and others have, they don't have the ability to sign the proven players in free agency, etc.


Small market schmall market.

ALL the MLB teams have the money to hire players. They have licensing, they have broadcast rights, and they have a lucrative TV contract. The last I checked the current TV contract which they share is worth $2.5 billion.

Here's a good example: Yankees and Brewers. Both were purchased by the present owners at about the same time for identical prices. The Yankees were purchased for $12 million in 1973 and the Brewers were purchased for $11 million in 1970 (see: Forbes). Today the Yankees consistently win and team revenue triples the Brewers. How is this? While other owners have been pocketing their cash George has been building up his product and putting it back in the team.

Bottomline: if the owners are losing money then they are inept to run a team.
Rkiivs Beginner
Minor League Mentor
Minor League Mentor

User avatar
Innovative Member
Posts: 927
Joined: 9 Apr 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball

Postby beltrans_boy » Thu Jun 24, 2004 8:31 pm

Rkiivs wrote:
KevB wrote:...Small market teams get hit from all sides. They don't have the money to draft and sign the very best players, they don't have the deep pockets to spend on scouting that the Yankees and others have, they don't have the ability to sign the proven players in free agency, etc.


Small market schmall market.

ALL the MLB teams have the money to hire players. They have licensing, they have broadcast rights, and they have a lucrative TV contract. The last I checked the current TV contract which they share is worth $2.5 billion.

Here's a good example: Yankees and Brewers. Both were purchased by the present owners at about the same time for identical prices. The Yankees were purchased for $12 million in 1973 and the Brewers were purchased for $11 million in 1970 (see: Forbes). Today the Yankees consistently win and team revenue triples the Brewers. How is this? While other owners have been pocketing their cash George has been building up his product and putting it back in the team.

Bottomline: if the owners are losing money then they are inept to run a team.


You're forgetting that New York is a MUCH larger market than Milwaukee.
[size=10]"Men are apt to mistake the strength of their feeling for the strength of their argument." [/size]
beltrans_boy
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar

Posts: 3092
Joined: 15 Apr 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: crusing down the street in my six-fo'

Postby nmarq8 » Fri Jun 25, 2004 1:49 am

beltrans_boy wrote:
Rkiivs wrote:Small market schmall market.

ALL the MLB teams have the money to hire players. They have licensing, they have broadcast rights, and they have a lucrative TV contract. The last I checked the current TV contract which they share is worth $2.5 billion.

Here's a good example: Yankees and Brewers. Both were purchased by the present owners at about the same time for identical prices. The Yankees were purchased for $12 million in 1973 and the Brewers were purchased for $11 million in 1970 (see: Forbes). Today the Yankees consistently win and team revenue triples the Brewers. How is this? While other owners have been pocketing their cash George has been building up his product and putting it back in the team.

Bottomline: if the owners are losing money then they are inept to run a team.


You're forgetting that New York is a MUCH larger market than Milwaukee.


Good point about the market size, obviously, but it also has a lot to do with the nature of the owner. There are some owners who buy teams strictly as a business acquisition with the only goal of receiving an annual profit (i.e. donald sterling of the clippers). whenever a corporation, or team, is built with on an equity containing retained earnings (the yankees), there is risk involved that you're investment might tank and you'll never see a dime. on the other hand, george knew the ny market would level that risk out. try doing what he did in milwaukee or montreal and your risk at least quadruples.

true, don't hate the player (team/owner), hate the game (mlb)... but when one of the players controls the game, you can kind of hate both.

bottom line, behind the players, owners like george are manipulating the mlb (and its policies) to "buy" an all-star team. the fact that you can trade for a player while another team is paying for him (or in part) is ridiculous. but every david needs his goliath, so go A's.
"24 hours in a day, 24 beers in a case. Coincidence? I think not."
nmarq8
Minor League Mentor
Minor League Mentor

User avatar

Posts: 585
Joined: 29 Apr 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: moe's

Postby DEF » Fri Jun 25, 2004 5:38 am

Lofunzo wrote:DEF.......My point is that both teams operate within the rules. Hate the game and not the player. I also hate the fact that teams like the Royals can't sign a player of their own like Beltran. I am also saying that if they can't afford to pay $80M or so, they can at least bump up their scouting department instead of just putting all of the luxury tax $$ into their pockets.


Had to go to work so I couldn't continue the discussion this afternoon. I agree that small market teams should put the money they get from the luxury tax back into the product, whether it be players' salaries, scouting or signing picks (though you have to admit what teams get from the luxury tax is very small in the larger scheme of things and doesn't do much if anything to close the gap between small and large market teams).

But I still think you're missing my main point. Your initial comments in this thread defended the Yankees by saying they "developed" many of their players, or at least developed more than the Sox have. But the fact is that it takes a lot of money to sign and develop the best players, and just as the Yankees have an advantage on the free-agent market with their superior revenue streams, so too do they have an advantage using that additional money in developing players.

Hey, I never once said anything they do is not within the rules. The rules, or lack thereof, is in fact the main problem. I'm not claiming the Yankees are doing anything illegal the way things are set up now, and actually I at least appreciate Steinbrenner does put so much money back into the product. But I think it's misguided to praise them for "developing" players when they are clearly operating at a huge advantage in that area as well.
"I'm telling ya, he jumped us. Gloves off, stick down, no warning. He challenged the Chiefs. Called us names. But Dave was there."

"Dave's a killer."

"Yeah, Dave's a killer."

"Dave's a mess."
DEF
College Coach
College Coach

User avatar

Posts: 309
Joined: 18 Jun 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Boston

PreviousNext

Return to Baseball Leftovers

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: eatyun, NikkiSixx, unioreimi and 6 guests

Forums Articles & Tips Sleepers Rankings Leagues


Today's Games
Friday, Apr. 18
(All times are EST, weather icons show forecast for game time)

Toronto at Cleveland
(2:20 pm)
LA Angels at Detroit
(7:05 pm)
Milwaukee at Pittsburgh
(7:05 pm)
St. Louis at Washington
(7:05 pm)
Miami at Miami
(7:08 pm)
indoors
NY Yankees at Tampa Bay
(7:10 pm)
indoors
Seattle at Seattle
(7:10 pm)
Atlanta at NY Mets
(7:10 pm)
Baltimore at Boston
(7:10 pm)
Chi White Sox at Texas
(8:05 pm)
Minnesota at Kansas City
(8:10 pm)
Philadelphia at Colorado
(8:40 pm)
Houston at Oakland
(10:05 pm)
Arizona at LA Dodgers
(10:10 pm)
San Francisco at San Diego
(10:10 pm)

  • Fantasy Baseball
  • Article Submissions
  • Privacy Statement
  • Site Survey 
  • Contact