ImageImageImageImageImage

Johan Santana for Kennedy and Melky

Moderator: nykgeneralmanager

User avatar
nykgeneralmanager
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 14,172
And1: 306
Joined: Apr 10, 2001

 

Post#101 » by nykgeneralmanager » Fri Oct 12, 2007 5:42 pm

It is hard trying to put the blame on one group of people. You can blame the agents all you want for asking for that amount of money, but what about the owners who give in? Hicks didn't have to give ARod $252 million, nobody in baseball was offering $251 million or anything close to it. The Giants didn't have to give Barry Zito $18 million.

But at the same time, maybe these guys are worth it (some of them). Boras can put something together that proves ARod is going to be worth $500 million to a franchise over the next 10 years, so how can that team not give ARod a $400 million contract? They would still be profiting $100 million.
User avatar
TKF
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 63,138
And1: 116
Joined: May 21, 2001
Location: Atlanta GA, via The Bronx.

 

Post#102 » by TKF » Fri Oct 12, 2007 5:56 pm

nykgeneralmanager wrote:It is hard trying to put the blame on one group of people. You can blame the agents all you want for asking for that amount of money, but what about the owners who give in? Hicks didn't have to give ARod $252 million, nobody in baseball was offering $251 million or anything close to it. The Giants didn't have to give Barry Zito $18 million.

But at the same time, maybe these guys are worth it (some of them). Boras can put something together that proves ARod is going to be worth $500 million to a franchise over the next 10 years, so how can that team not give ARod a $400 million contract? They would still be profiting $100 million.


yea, hicks was an idiot for giving in. he helped create this stupid market, but I am not buying these voodoo economics that agents try to sell teams. A-rod or any player is not going to be worth that much to a team. Ever... winning is more important, winning brings money. I understand people like to see stars but there are only a few teams in this league that can realistically afford a-rod, not even a handful, so boras can play this hard to get role, If I were the yankees and he opts out. I am like see ya!!

then he is trying to sell Andrew jones as a 20 mil per year player. This sorry fool hit .222 this past year. Boras is just being a jerk. Is he really good for baseball?
Image
User avatar
nykgeneralmanager
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 14,172
And1: 306
Joined: Apr 10, 2001

 

Post#103 » by nykgeneralmanager » Fri Oct 12, 2007 6:06 pm

TKF wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



yea, hicks was an idiot for giving in. he helped create this stupid market, but I am not buying these voodoo economics that agents try to sell teams. A-rod or any player is not going to be worth that much to a team. Ever... winning is more important, winning brings money. I understand people like to see stars but there are only a few teams in this league that can realistically afford a-rod, not even a handful, so boras can play this hard to get role, If I were the yankees and he opts out. I am like see ya!!

then he is trying to sell Andrew jones as a 20 mil per year player. This sorry fool hit .222 this past year. Boras is just being a jerk. Is he really good for baseball?

I see what you're saying. But I don't agree that winning is what brings money. Sadly, the SF Giants probably sold more seats and made more money this season as a 71-91 team with Bonds chasing the record than they would've made as a 91-71 team without Bonds.

You can say you don't buy those voodoo economics, but I do. Boras wouldn't be able to make them up if they were such BS, and no way would owners buy into them. While these owners may not know what is best for their baseball team, they are owners because one thing that they certainly do know is their economics. ARod is going to be chasing the home run record, RBI record, perhaps the hits record if he can play over 10 more seasons (and why can't he? he is the healthiest person in all of baseball). The amount of seats that would sell (home and away), the amound of money he would bring in for the team, organization, and the stadium through advertising (everybody will be watching this team play), and the amount of memorabilia and apparel he would sell. I can't even put a figure on the type of money he would bring in, but Boras certainly can and will. That's why ARod HAS gotten his, and WILL get his.
User avatar
TKF
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 63,138
And1: 116
Joined: May 21, 2001
Location: Atlanta GA, via The Bronx.

 

Post#104 » by TKF » Sat Oct 13, 2007 7:15 am

nykgeneralmanager wrote:-= original quote snipped =-


I see what you're saying. But I don't agree that winning is what brings money. Sadly, the SF Giants probably sold more seats and made more money this season as a 71-91 team with Bonds chasing the record than they would've made as a 91-71 team without Bonds.

You can say you don't buy those voodoo economics, but I do. Boras wouldn't be able to make them up if they were such BS, and no way would owners buy into them. While these owners may not know what is best for their baseball team, they are owners because one thing that they certainly do know is their economics. ARod is going to be chasing the home run record, RBI record, perhaps the hits record if he can play over 10 more seasons (and why can't he? he is the healthiest person in all of baseball). The amount of seats that would sell (home and away), the amound of money he would bring in for the team, organization, and the stadium through advertising (everybody will be watching this team play), and the amount of memorabilia and apparel he would sell. I can't even put a figure on the type of money he would bring in, but Boras certainly can and will. That's why ARod HAS gotten his, and WILL get his.



Well I really wonder how much financially the rangers beneifitted from having A-rod? Boras sold hicks with his voodoo economics and hicks is still paying a hefty sum for A-rod to hit homers for the yankees. Yea I know A-rod will be chasing the HR record and he can put but in seats, but does it really justify that kind of money? Boras can put a figure on whatever he wants, but he is just projecting and fooling with numbers until they seem to make sense, but really there is no sense when it comes to giving a player that much money. fans are not stupid, at some point the novelty of that star wears off some, and if your team is not winning, people don't come, and don't watch.
Image
User avatar
Jitpal
General Manager
Posts: 8,149
And1: 0
Joined: Nov 21, 2004
Location: Long Island
Contact:

 

Post#105 » by Jitpal » Sat Oct 13, 2007 3:06 pm

TKF wrote:-= original quote snipped =-




Well I really wonder how much financially the rangers beneifitted from having A-rod? Boras sold hicks with his voodoo economics and hicks is still paying a hefty sum for A-rod to hit homers for the yankees. Yea I know A-rod will be chasing the HR record and he can put but in seats, but does it really justify that kind of money? Boras can put a figure on whatever he wants, but he is just projecting and fooling with numbers until they seem to make sense, but really there is no sense when it comes to giving a player that much money. fans are not stupid, at some point the novelty of that star wears off some, and if your team is not winning, people don't come, and don't watch.

Boras's defense to that whole thing would be something along the lines of it being easier to win with a player of Arods caliber than without him. Boras could sell that to a team like Baltimore. Replace most of the money by getting rid of Tejada and replace him with Arod. Now they have incentive to break the bank and go after Nathan or Cordero. Instantly they have a top flight closer, at least one ace, 3-4 quality hitters and if that team stay healthy they make noise. Plus, just because you have Arod you fill up the stadium almost every night. Mighty tempting.

I don't think you can look at a player the way you are, you look at the player as an investment. In this case a very expensive investment but if it pans out you make more than double. About the winning team doing just as well; Boras was on the Michael Kay show yesterday and mentioned that very thing. Before Arod in the 95-2003 time the Yankees pulled in close to 3 million fans a year, with Arod the Yankees brought in over 4 million every year so far. He also mentioned that when the YES network was started it was worth about 1 Billion dollars(pre-Arod) but now it worth 3.5 billion dollars with Arod. He did admit that Arod wasn't the sole cause for 2.5 billion increase but he said Arod was a big part of it. Looking at all that, I think Arod is worth it to the Yankees. I think he is worth it to a lot of teams on the cusp. Not to a team like the Rangers who were going no where fast. Just like the mistake Isiah Thomas made, you don't bring in a star(Marbury) until you have the pieces to surround him. Hicks did the same thing, he brought in Arod, destroyed his budget without having the complimentary pieces to protect Arod. -Jitpal
User avatar
TKF
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 63,138
And1: 116
Joined: May 21, 2001
Location: Atlanta GA, via The Bronx.

 

Post#106 » by TKF » Sat Oct 13, 2007 5:24 pm

Jitpal wrote:-= original quote snipped =-


Boras's defense to that whole thing would be something along the lines of it being easier to win with a player of Arods caliber than without him. Boras could sell that to a team like Baltimore. Replace most of the money by getting rid of Tejada and replace him with Arod. Now they have incentive to break the bank and go after Nathan or Cordero. Instantly they have a top flight closer, at least one ace, 3-4 quality hitters and if that team stay healthy they make noise. Plus, just because you have Arod you fill up the stadium almost every night. Mighty tempting.

I don't think you can look at a player the way you are, you look at the player as an investment. In this case a very expensive investment but if it pans out you make more than double. About the winning team doing just as well; Boras was on the Michael Kay show yesterday and mentioned that very thing. Before Arod in the 95-2003 time the Yankees pulled in close to 3 million fans a year, with Arod the Yankees brought in over 4 million every year so far. He also mentioned that when the YES network was started it was worth about 1 Billion dollars(pre-Arod) but now it worth 3.5 billion dollars with Arod. He did admit that Arod wasn't the sole cause for 2.5 billion increase but he said Arod was a big part of it. Looking at all that, I think Arod is worth it to the Yankees. I think he is worth it to a lot of teams on the cusp. Not to a team like the Rangers who were going no where fast. Just like the mistake Isiah Thomas made, you don't bring in a star(Marbury) until you have the pieces to surround him. Hicks did the same thing, he brought in Arod, destroyed his budget without having the complimentary pieces to protect Arod. -Jitpal



you guys make good points, and I do think with the new stadium the yankees will need the marquee name of A-rod, but at some point, these voodoo economics don't make sense. The yankees have always been a marquee name and a leading seller in sports apparel long before A-rod was a pro player. At some point it just doesn't make sense. That scenario you gave with baltimore sounds good, but what happens when that team doesn't make the playoffs that year? Baltimore is just not a big enough market to sustain that kind of blow, especially long term. Lets be real, A-rod has a small market, NY, Boston, and LA.. that is is. And he is not going to the mets, they have wright, the angels don't spend money, and A-rod just doesn't fit in boston, blue collar city, and A-rod is a caviar guy.... So his market is NY and probably the dogers. And believe it or not, NY contrary to popular beliefs is a basketball town first. Remember when the yankees at the stadium could not sell out a single game? it was not that long ago. Winning, torre, Jeter, rivera and the rings has brought a lot of the fans back over the past decade. I just don't think for big market teams that overpaying A-rod to the max is going to take them to that level financially that will justify such a move.. That is just my opionin, I may be wrong, but this is NY, they love stars, so who knows.. But at some point, does it make sense? I heard this same kind of logic with David Beckam comming over to play soccer, and guess what? has MLS soccer gotten any more interesting this past year? I know it has done nothing for me......
Image

Return to New York Yankees