Wouldn't it be just GREAT to see Yankees playing just one season using 40-70 Million $$ like most of the teams

Question

How would they compare not being so rich, and being a low marketer?

Boy oh boy, think of how many of there players they would have to BEG to play for free...

You know, i wouldn't mind seeing that, Yankees play "Low-Market Team" for a year.

Anyone think they will do good?

Seeing most teams use only 40 Million compared to the Yankees 100 some ,millions.

Answer 1

Yeah, that would be great. Only problem is they'd only have 2 players on the team!

Answer 2

I personally think the Yankees mistake these past six years is in trying to rebuild by being the highest bidder in the free agent wars. If you like diversity in winning than there's nothing wrong with baseball as it is constructed today. Granted the players are making a ton of money but it's the owners that are spreading the wealth and it's the fans buying the merchandise and paying the cost of the tickets that help contribute to the high salaries. I don't have a problem with that because the majority of the players are philanthropists and give quite a bit of their money to charity.

The last seven MLB seasons have seen 7 different World Series Champions: (which is a good thing)

2000: New York Yankees
2001: Arizona Diamondbacks
2002: Anaheim Angels
2003: Florida Marlins
2004: Boston Red Sox
2005: Chicago White Sox
2006: St Louis Cardinals

The core of the World Champion Yankee's teams from 1998-2000 were pretty much the same:

1998
C Jorge Posada
1B Tino Martinez
2B Chuck Knoblauch
3B Scott Brosius
SS Derek Jeter
LF Chad Curtis
CF Bernie Williams
RF Paul O'Neill
DH Darryl Strawberry

SP Andy Pettitte
SP David Cone
SP David Wells
SP Hideki Irabu
SP Orlando Hernandez
CL Mariano Rivera

2000
C Jorge Posada
1B Tino Martinez
2B Chuck Knoblauch
3B Scott Brosius
SS Derek Jeter
LF Ricky Ledee
CF Bernie Williams
RF Paul O'Neill
DH Shane Spencer

SP Roger Clemens
SP Andy Pettitte
SP David Cone
SP Orlando Hernandez
SP Denny Neagle
CL Mariano Rivera

I think the Yankees still are still trying to build strong teams but the chemistry (cliche') apparently is not there. And the odds are tougher with the inclusion of the wild-card team. Just another barrier to hurdle and anything can happen with a hot team winning down the stretch, carrying into the playoffs.

The 1996, 1998-2000 Yankees were pretty remarkable and I just don't see a team repeating that many times in a 5-year stretch. There's nothing wrong with the Yankees payroll and there's nothing wrong with George trying to buy a championship team - it's just hard to predict talent and you can't predict injuries and you can't predict what team (and players) will get hot down the stretch.

And all this comes from a New York Mets fan!!! :o)

Answer 3

I'm a Yankee fan and I wouldn't mind seeing it. I sincerely believe that too many teams are eliminated before the first pitch of a new season is even thrown because of the financial disparity between teams. Sports are popular because it's about fair play. There is no nepotism, no favortism, no backdoor deals or shaddy deals to better position yourself. It should always be about what the "warriors" bring to the field not about the "rich getting richer" because they can afford the best warriors.

I think the Yankees (because of their legacy, history and position in baseball) would do well under any circumstances. Of course, this is the fan in me speaking as I believe in my team (as other fans believe in their teams).

A good question to ask (and I rarely see it) is how many teams can you completely eliminate from competition before the season starts?

In the 1990s the Yankees had developed and groomed a wonderful farm system (because the baseball people were running the team after the Steinbrenner-Winfield fiasco). It produced a dynasty. None of the players wanted to leave because of the stable, professional and winning environment that the baseball people produced. Team chemistry is built over time...

Steinbrenner, who was thrown out of the game, re-entered the picture (the Clemens signing was the turning point) and changed all that once again. For me personally, it was a major disappointment and has produced the teams that you see today and the same kind of teams we saw in the 80s (new roster every year of aging and expensive veterans).

Throwing money at a team without an intelligent long-term infrastructure once again forces me to look at the roster every year to figure out what the *new* team looks like. It's Deja Vu all over again (Yogi is always right) when compared to the Steinbrenner team of the 80s.

This is a salary cap question (but also a question about owner responsibility and dedication ($$) to their teams and it's fans).

To be fair, there are other teams that are out-financing the financially strapped -- Red Sox, Mets, etc..

Team owners are only part of the problem nowadays. The player's union is the other part of the problem. These two pieces have produced and will continue to produce this continuing disparity with GREED as the almighty mesiah. Until this is corrected, we'll continue to see major league teams act as minor-league/farm teams to those who have the money to take their players away. It started with the Oakland A's of the 70s and continued with teams like the Pittsburgh Pirates (bonds, bonilla, drabek, etc..); Montreal Expos (franchised moved), and many more.

The greed is so prevalent that there was a time (I forget exactly when...) when baseball seriously considered putting selected regular season games on Pay-Per-View! Amazing as this is, this short-term thinking would have been the deathblow of the sport that already suffered from reduced ratings.

Didn't mean to write so much, sorry about that... but I completely agree with the current issues in baseball. I think it endangers the sport as a whole (since, geographically speaking - interest in baseball continues to wane because of the reduced competition).

edit: in 2006, there were 14 (out of 30) teams under 70 million in payroll. 20 teams under 90 million.

Answer 4

Well. technically, most teams don't have 40-70 Mill in there Salary, but i see what your trying to say.

And yes, i would like to see them.

Fans are always saying Yankees are better because they have twince as much money as other teams and 3 times more money than low marketers. For Florida as an example, only have about 20 Mill in there salary.

I wouldn't mind having the Yankees be a low-marketing team, for a year.

Just to show Yankee fans (Especially rude ones) how other fans struggle because there teams don't have alot of money, and do not deserve to be laughed at because no team comes close to there 26 Rings.

Though this is never going to happen, it would show the Yankee Fans what it's like being a fan of a low marketing team, and hoping for the best but then shut down because we don't have much money.

Answer 5

The better teams spend more; it makes sense. You pay more for a better product. . . However, it is sad that both the Red Sox and Yankees, with the two highest payrolls, did so poorly last season. Red Sox did nothing in playoffs, and Yankees started with such a sad season, and then a lousy ending! So it just proves that even though they are willing to spend a lot more it doesn't ALWAYS make it worth it. Plus I think it is getting a little out of hand with the spending.

Answer 6

I am a die hard Yankee Fan and have been for 35 years now. One thing i know is that G.S puts the fans in the seats. He does whatever it takes to have a winning team. There are alot of owners who could do the same but choice not to for whatever reason. I don't agree with every move the Yanks do but you got to say there would be no Baseball without the Yankees. No better rival then NYY and Boston. Go NYY for 27.

Answer 7

It would be great, but at $40 Million, they could only field 3 or 4 players. It will NEVER happen. They are not smart enough to survive on a small market payroll. They only know how to build a team with CA$H!!!!!! No wonder their general manager is Brian Ca$hman!

Answer 8

The Yankees payroll is about $190-200 million. I would allow them half of that (as much or even a bit more than most teams) and see how they fare.

Answer 9

What then would the teams who make buckets of money off of the Yankees in the form of revenue sharing and luxury tax do? Baseball has profitted from the era of free spending. The whole of baseball.

Answer 10

well thats going 2 be impossible since just 2 players in the yankees make more than 40 millon. (A-Rod w/ 25mil and Jeter w/20mil). so the yanks will never see a payroll like that

Answer 11

What i marvel at with all you haters is the fact that you ALL seem to forget the FACT that 95-98, the Yankees where better than they are now and spent ALOT less money than they do now... You all cry about boo freegin hoo, they have more money *sniffle*sniffle*sniffle*... But from 99 thru now is when they were buying everything in sight under the direction of the moron steinbrenner and theyve won DICK. If any team in NY didnt spend when you consider how much the teams in this town make yould all be whining about how cheap they are, gimme a Fu**in break!! I could see if they were winning constatly you people crying about them buying titles, but the 4 titles they got, they got with the likes of Oneill, Jeter, Williams, Posada, Girardi, Curtis, Brosius, Tino Martinez and the like BEFORE any of them began making sick money. Stop Crying, PLEASE! they havent won since 2000.. worry about your own teams... it always strikes me as odd when people care more about how much a team theyre not a fan of is spending than what their own team is doing. STOP WHINING!!!