|
|
Post by flyfishinbeav on Sept 18, 2024 11:02:42 GMT -8
Great thing about the NFL is even the best teams aren't that much better than the bad teams. Carolina is a few pieces from being competitive. The salary cap, and restricted free agency keeps the playing field even.......and then there's college football where it's the wild West, complete with body bags. As a young kid I was much more of an NFL fan. As a young adult I became much more of college fan. As a grumpy, middle aged man, I'm going back to the NFL because the NCAA is a joke, and the lack of parity, not parody......we actually looked like a parody of a D1 football team in the second half on Saturday. No salary cap is also a problem in MLB Yes it is.....small market teams develop talent for the dodgers/Yankees/bosox/giants. It's a joke....but the machine keeps rolling along, and people keep throwing money at it....so it goes |
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Sept 18, 2024 11:37:23 GMT -8
Great thing about the NFL is even the best teams aren't that much better than the bad teams. Carolina is a few pieces from being competitive. The salary cap, and restricted free agency keeps the playing field even.......and then there's college football where it's the wild West, complete with body bags. As a young kid I was much more of an NFL fan. As a young adult I became much more of college fan. As a grumpy, middle aged man, I'm going back to the NFL because the NCAA is a joke, and the lack of parity, not parody......we actually looked like a parody of a D1 football team in the second half on Saturday. No salary cap is also a problem in MLB It is far more interesting to me to see small market teams try to defeat big market teams. MLB is a much more interesting dynamic than the largely cookie-cutter NBA and NFL. There are no Davids and Goliaths in the NBA and NFL. 32 of the same team in the NFL with the same budgets. Incredibly tedious and boring. As a Beaver fan, it is very entertaining to see the David-Goliath dynamic. Moneyball. All great stuff. |
|
|
|
Post by flyfishinbeav on Sept 18, 2024 13:19:22 GMT -8
No salary cap is also a problem in MLB It is far more interesting to me to see small market teams try to defeat big market teams. MLB is a much more interesting dynamic than the largely cookie-cutter NBA and NFL. There are no Davids and Goliaths in the NBA and NFL. 32 of the same team in the NFL with the same budgets. Incredibly tedious and boring. As a Beaver fan, it is very entertaining to see the David-Goliath dynamic. Moneyball. All great stuff. Wow, this completely opposite of how I feel. How frustrating it must be to develop a guy for years in the minors, have him become a star, and then watch him sign with Yankees for massive pay day. I do take pleasure in watching teams like the Yankees and Dodgers spend astronomical amounts of money and come up short. The great thing about the NFL is you have this much to work.....that's it. It becomes much more about the front office making the right moves......that, and getting a franchise QB on a rookie deal so you can build the rest of your team out for a run. I just think it's cool to feel like your team truly has a shot at the Super Bowl each season. As for the NBA, I haven't watched it in years. I have zero interest in it. I was a Magic vs Bird guy.......Lebron and his whole special on ESPN to announce where he was "taking his talents" was about where the NBA jumped the shark, imo. |
|
|
|
Post by Henry Skrimshander on Sept 18, 2024 13:45:24 GMT -8
No salary cap is also a problem in MLB Yes it is.....small market teams develop talent for the dodgers/Yankees/bosox/giants. It's a joke....but the machine keeps rolling along, and people keep throwing money at it....so it goes So not true, as far as the Yankees go. The Yankees defeated Seattle last night. They used 12 players. Six (Torres, Judge, Wells, Dominguez, Cabrera and Gil) are products of their farm system. Three (Soto, Chisholm, Verdugo) were acquired via trade. Mayza was signed as a FA after Toronto released him; anyone could have signed him. The only players the Yankees "bought" were Rizzo and Stroman, average MLB players at this point in their careers. That doesn't include their regular SS, Volpe, another farm-system product who had the night off. |
|
|
|
Post by flyfishinbeav on Sept 18, 2024 13:52:02 GMT -8
Yes it is.....small market teams develop talent for the dodgers/Yankees/bosox/giants. It's a joke....but the machine keeps rolling along, and people keep throwing money at it....so it goes So not true, as far as the Yankees go. The Yankees defeated Seattle last night. They used 12 players. Six (Torres, Judge, Wells, Dominguez, Cabrera and Gil) are products of their farm system. Three (Soto, Chisholm, Verdugo) were acquired via trade. Mayza was signed as a FA after Toronto released him; anyone could have signed him. The only players the Yankees "bought" were Rizzo and Stroman, average MLB players at this point in their careers. That doesn't include their regular SS, Volpe, another farm-system product who had the night off. Oh come on man! Over the years the Yankees have stolen talent from all over the league! |
|
|
|
Post by Judge Smails on Sept 18, 2024 14:02:58 GMT -8
Yes it is.....small market teams develop talent for the dodgers/Yankees/bosox/giants. It's a joke....but the machine keeps rolling along, and people keep throwing money at it....so it goes So not true, as far as the Yankees go. The Yankees defeated Seattle last night. They used 12 players. Six (Torres, Judge, Wells, Dominguez, Cabrera and Gil) are products of their farm system. Three (Soto, Chisholm, Verdugo) were acquired via trade. Mayza was signed as a FA after Toronto released him; anyone could have signed him. The only players the Yankees "bought" were Rizzo and Stroman, average MLB players at this point in their careers. That doesn't include their regular SS, Volpe, another farm-system product who had the night off. Not including Stanton, Cole, Rodon, Holmes.....etc. |
|
|
|
Post by kersting13 on Sept 18, 2024 14:12:54 GMT -8
It is far more interesting to me to see small market teams try to defeat big market teams. MLB is a much more interesting dynamic than the largely cookie-cutter NBA and NFL. There are no Davids and Goliaths in the NBA and NFL. 32 of the same team in the NFL with the same budgets. Incredibly tedious and boring. As a Beaver fan, it is very entertaining to see the David-Goliath dynamic. Moneyball. All great stuff. Wow, this completely opposite of how I feel. How frustrating it must be to develop a guy for years in the minors, have him become a star, and then watch him sign with Yankees for massive pay day. I do take pleasure in watching teams like the Yankees and Dodgers spend astronomical amounts of money and come up short. The great thing about the NFL is you have this much to work.....that's it. It becomes much more about the front office making the right moves......that, and getting a franchise QB on a rookie deal so you can build the rest of your team out for a run. I just think it's cool to feel like your team truly has a shot at the Super Bowl each season. As for the NBA, I haven't watched it in years. I have zero interest in it. I was a Magic vs Bird guy.......Lebron and his whole special on ESPN to announce where he was "taking his talents" was about where the NBA jumped the shark, imo. Agree with you wholeheartedly. And completely disagree with Wilky that the NFLs parity is "boring". And I think the relative popularity of the leagues reflects what most fans prefer as well. IMO, the NFL can lay their success at the feet of the big market teams (NYG mostly) at the time when the league decided to keep all TV broadcasting as a league-wide venture. The big market teams could have taken the same path as the Big Boys of NCAA football and said, "No, WE are the draw, WE don't want to split the TV revenue evenly with our partners", and now we have the system that we have now in NCAA, and we have the system we have in the NFL. The same can be said for MLB. MLB teams run all of their local TV and radio deals, the national media deals are small in comparison. Nothing is going to convince the NYY of 2024 to lump their media rights in with KCR or PIT. |
|
sessbeav
Freshman
Posts: 488 
Grad Year: Should’ve been 1991. Actual…..2006. Beer derailed me.
|
Post by sessbeav on Sept 18, 2024 14:50:32 GMT -8
So not true, as far as the Yankees go. The Yankees defeated Seattle last night. They used 12 players. Six (Torres, Judge, Wells, Dominguez, Cabrera and Gil) are products of their farm system. Three (Soto, Chisholm, Verdugo) were acquired via trade. Mayza was signed as a FA after Toronto released him; anyone could have signed him. The only players the Yankees "bought" were Rizzo and Stroman, average MLB players at this point in their careers. That doesn't include their regular SS, Volpe, another farm-system product who had the night off. Oh come on man! Over the years the Yankees have stolen talent from all over the league! TLDR - just here to say F the Dodgers.........forever. |
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Sept 18, 2024 15:01:53 GMT -8
Wow, this completely opposite of how I feel. How frustrating it must be to develop a guy for years in the minors, have him become a star, and then watch him sign with Yankees for massive pay day. I do take pleasure in watching teams like the Yankees and Dodgers spend astronomical amounts of money and come up short. The great thing about the NFL is you have this much to work.....that's it. It becomes much more about the front office making the right moves......that, and getting a franchise QB on a rookie deal so you can build the rest of your team out for a run. I just think it's cool to feel like your team truly has a shot at the Super Bowl each season. As for the NBA, I haven't watched it in years. I have zero interest in it. I was a Magic vs Bird guy.......Lebron and his whole special on ESPN to announce where he was "taking his talents" was about where the NBA jumped the shark, imo. Agree with you wholeheartedly. And completely disagree with Wilky that the NFLs parity is "boring". And I think the relative popularity of the leagues reflects what most fans prefer as well. IMO, the NFL can lay their success at the feet of the big market teams (NYG mostly) at the time when the league decided to keep all TV broadcasting as a league-wide venture. The big market teams could have taken the same path as the Big Boys of NCAA football and said, "No, WE are the draw, WE don't want to split the TV revenue evenly with our partners", and now we have the system that we have now in NCAA, and we have the system we have in the NFL. The same can be said for MLB. MLB teams run all of their local TV and radio deals, the national media deals are small in comparison. Nothing is going to convince the NYY of 2024 to lump their media rights in with KCR or PIT. The problem is that it is so sterile. Watching Leicester City win the Premier League in 2016:  What is like that in the NBA or the NFL? Nothing. Everyone is on the same playing field. Dull and uninteresting. The only time that I care is when there is a Beaver in uniform or when I have a fantasy team, which is like a twice a decade thing for me. Where is the Athletics battling the Yankees?  Then, I get to hear that it is "exciting," because one office with equal resource made "the right move." Sterile and uninspiring. Oregon State 27 - USC 21 Where are the Giant Killers? Where are the astounding upsets? Who gives a rat's ass in your average Colts-Texans game? Where is that movie? Hard pass. |
|
|
|
Post by Henry Skrimshander on Sept 18, 2024 16:56:41 GMT -8
So not true, as far as the Yankees go. The Yankees defeated Seattle last night. They used 12 players. Six (Torres, Judge, Wells, Dominguez, Cabrera and Gil) are products of their farm system. Three (Soto, Chisholm, Verdugo) were acquired via trade. Mayza was signed as a FA after Toronto released him; anyone could have signed him. The only players the Yankees "bought" were Rizzo and Stroman, average MLB players at this point in their careers. That doesn't include their regular SS, Volpe, another farm-system product who had the night off. Not including Stanton, Cole, Rodon, Holmes.....etc. Stanton was acquired via trade with Miami; Holes was acquired via trade with Pittsburgh. Rodon was a free agent; he'd also been signed by the White Sox and Giants after being granted free agency, so the Yankees got the third bite at the apple. Now Cole, yes, they bought him. But the majority of the team was built via the draft or by trades, not by simply buying players. I'm not even a Yankee fan. But the premise that they simply bought the team is totally incorrect. |
|
|
|
Post by kersting13 on Sept 19, 2024 7:56:31 GMT -8
Agree with you wholeheartedly. And completely disagree with Wilky that the NFLs parity is "boring". And I think the relative popularity of the leagues reflects what most fans prefer as well. IMO, the NFL can lay their success at the feet of the big market teams (NYG mostly) at the time when the league decided to keep all TV broadcasting as a league-wide venture. The big market teams could have taken the same path as the Big Boys of NCAA football and said, "No, WE are the draw, WE don't want to split the TV revenue evenly with our partners", and now we have the system that we have now in NCAA, and we have the system we have in the NFL. The same can be said for MLB. MLB teams run all of their local TV and radio deals, the national media deals are small in comparison. Nothing is going to convince the NYY of 2024 to lump their media rights in with KCR or PIT. The problem is that it is so sterile. Watching Leicester City win the Premier League in 2016: What is like that in the NBA or the NFL? Nothing. Everyone is on the same playing field. Dull and uninteresting. The only time that I care is when there is a Beaver in uniform or when I have a fantasy team, which is like a twice a decade thing for me. Where is the Athletics battling the Yankees? Then, I get to hear that it is "exciting," because one office with equal resource made "the right move." Sterile and uninspiring. Oregon State 27 - USC 21 Where are the Giant Killers? Where are the astounding upsets? Who gives a rat's ass in your average Colts-Texans game? Where is that movie? Hard pass. I'm sorry if playing on a level playing field feels "sterile and uninteresting" to you. Seeing the Yankees and Dodgers compete for the top spots in their respective leagues each year in MLB seems FAAAAAAAAAR more sterile and uninteresting to me than knowing that teams from Pittsburgh, Kansas City, or Buffalo have ALMOST an equal shot to create a dynasty as teams from New York, LA, or Chicago in the NFL. I don't need to see a $60 million payroll A's team play a $300 million Yankees team to make things "interesting". Seems HIGHLY uninteresting to anyone who isn't a Yankees fan. You're not getting 3 Championships in 3 years from the MLB's KC franchise, because the deck is stacked. I hardly see how that makes up for a WS victory from a bottom tier team once every 10 years interesting enough to make up for it. But, you do you. |
|
|
|
Post by kersting13 on Sept 19, 2024 8:03:49 GMT -8
Not including Stanton, Cole, Rodon, Holmes.....etc. Stanton was acquired via trade with Miami; Holes was acquired via trade with Pittsburgh. Rodon was a free agent; he'd also been signed by the White Sox and Giants after being granted free agency, so the Yankees got the third bite at the apple. Now Cole, yes, they bought him. But the majority of the team was built via the draft or by trades, not by simply buying players. I'm not even a Yankee fan. But the premise that they simply bought the team is totally incorrect. Talk about trying to reach for justifications - trades for guys like Stanton or Soto are basically = to FA signings. The Marlins signed Stanton to a contract they knew they couldn't afford, and knew they'd be trading it away to a big market team when it got too expensive for them. As for "home grown talent". The Yankees can keep their home grown talent because they can afford to pay the guys after their arbitration years. The fact is that the Yankees have a $300 million payroll, and MAYBE 5 teams can compete with them on that level. 20 MLB teams have payrolls under $180 million. Median MLB payroll is $142 million. To pretend that the Yankees/Mets/Dodgers aren't buying wins is to ignore reality. |
|
|
|
Post by Henry Skrimshander on Sept 19, 2024 9:01:41 GMT -8
Stanton was acquired via trade with Miami; Holes was acquired via trade with Pittsburgh. Rodon was a free agent; he'd also been signed by the White Sox and Giants after being granted free agency, so the Yankees got the third bite at the apple. Now Cole, yes, they bought him. But the majority of the team was built via the draft or by trades, not by simply buying players. I'm not even a Yankee fan. But the premise that they simply bought the team is totally incorrect. Talk about trying to reach for justifications - trades for guys like Stanton or Soto are basically = to FA signings. The Marlins signed Stanton to a contract they knew they couldn't afford, and knew they'd be trading it away to a big market team when it got too expensive for them. As for "home grown talent". The Yankees can keep their home grown talent because they can afford to pay the guys after their arbitration years. The fact is that the Yankees have a $300 million payroll, and MAYBE 5 teams can compete with them on that level. 20 MLB teams have payrolls under $180 million. Median MLB payroll is $142 million. To pretend that the Yankees/Mets/Dodgers aren't buying wins is to ignore reality. Nope, I'm recognizing and embracing reality. New York is one of the most expensive cities in the country. So of course the Mets and Yankees are going to pay their players more. The cost of living is higher. Ditto with Los Angeles. If you don't want to win, and can't afford to play the game, don't buy a pro franchise. Trades are nothing even remotely close to free-agent signings. The Marlins got players in return for Stanton, as did the Padres for Soto. And if the Dodgers, Mets and Yankees were buying wins, you'd think they'd have won at least one full-season, legit World Series since 2009. But they haven't. I'm not even a Yankees fan. But I can recognize a competent front office that can evaluate talent and then pay for it to win games, something the Mariners can't figure out. |
|
|
|
Post by kersting13 on Sept 19, 2024 11:06:48 GMT -8
Talk about trying to reach for justifications - trades for guys like Stanton or Soto are basically = to FA signings. The Marlins signed Stanton to a contract they knew they couldn't afford, and knew they'd be trading it away to a big market team when it got too expensive for them. As for "home grown talent". The Yankees can keep their home grown talent because they can afford to pay the guys after their arbitration years. The fact is that the Yankees have a $300 million payroll, and MAYBE 5 teams can compete with them on that level. 20 MLB teams have payrolls under $180 million. Median MLB payroll is $142 million. To pretend that the Yankees/Mets/Dodgers aren't buying wins is to ignore reality. Nope, I'm recognizing and embracing reality. New York is one of the most expensive cities in the country. So of course the Mets and Yankees are going to pay their players more. The cost of living is higher. Ditto with Los Angeles. If you don't want to win, and can't afford to play the game, don't buy a pro franchise. Trades are nothing even remotely close to free-agent signings. The Marlins got players in return for Stanton, as did the Padres for Soto. And if the Dodgers, Mets and Yankees were buying wins, you'd think they'd have won at least one full-season, legit World Series since 2009. But they haven't. I'm not even a Yankees fan. But I can recognize a competent front office that can evaluate talent and then pay for it to win games, something the Mariners can't figure out. Right. Cost of living. That's the ticket. The Marlins got discount returns for Stanton because the Yankees were taking the huge salary off their hands: A washed up Starlin Castro, Jose Devers, and Jorge Guzman. Great return there on that trade, and it's not because the players didn't work out, it's because they were trading the contract as much as the player for discount pieces. And sure, the Padres got a few guys for Soto, but don't you think they would have rather just paid Soto to keep him? The Padres can't afford to carry a $300 million payroll. That's the only reason they traded one of the best players in MLB in his prime for some relatively underwhelming prospects. Cost of living? Seriously? |
|
|
|
Post by rgeorge on Sept 19, 2024 11:25:41 GMT -8
Nope, I'm recognizing and embracing reality. New York is one of the most expensive cities in the country. So of course the Mets and Yankees are going to pay their players more. The cost of living is higher. Ditto with Los Angeles. If you don't want to win, and can't afford to play the game, don't buy a pro franchise. Trades are nothing even remotely close to free-agent signings. The Marlins got players in return for Stanton, as did the Padres for Soto. And if the Dodgers, Mets and Yankees were buying wins, you'd think they'd have won at least one full-season, legit World Series since 2009. But they haven't. I'm not even a Yankees fan. But I can recognize a competent front office that can evaluate talent and then pay for it to win games, something the Mariners can't figure out. Right. Cost of living. That's the ticket. The Marlins got discount returns for Stanton because the Yankees were taking the huge salary off their hands: A washed up Starlin Castro, Jose Devers, and Jorge Guzman. Great return there on that trade, and it's not because the players didn't work out, it's because they were trading the contract as much as the player for discount pieces. And sure, the Padres got a few guys for Soto, but don't you think they would have rather just paid Soto to keep him? The Padres can't afford to carry a $300 million payroll. That's the only reason they traded one of the best players in MLB in his prime for some relatively underwhelming prospects. Cost of living? Seriously? Yeah... COL excuse is funny as hell. I guess that means Toronto should have the highest payroll by far... just with taxes. But, of course every knows trades just like free agency are heavily tilted toward big $$ teams. Stars being traded for prospects then signed to huge extensions. Hell, not even a team like Boston can keep up any more. The cost cutting move to shrink MiLB and the extra development costs helped every team, but none more than the "rich"... they can simply wait until it's big contract time or for free agents to hit the market. |
|
