What kind of a jerk of a free agent in baseball opts out of his contract as he is contractually able to do and is friends with Warren Buffett? Give up? It’s Alex Rodrasshole, that’s who. Scott Miller is here to call him out on it!*
*with jokes!
Phew, good thing newly minted American League Most Valuable Player Alex Rodriguez was advised by Warren Buffett, not singer Jimmy Buffett, in closing his spanking new 10-year, $275 million deal with the Yankees.
I get it. They have the same last name, but vastly different vocations!
Now officially armed with a third AL MVP award and another record-setting contract (soon as the ink dries), our favorite opt-out action hero has enough dough to buy pretty much all of South Florida, not just his hometown of Miami.
He could try from now until he wins a World Series ring to squander these riches. It ain't happening. But oh, if only money could purchase a World Series ring. ...
Oh my god you’re right – he’s never made a World Series. I haven’t heard that before. He’s the highest paid player in baseball but has been unable to personally deliver his team a championship. Is any writer for a mainstream site, anywhere, at all original?
He does have a pirate's plunder worth of image rehabbing to do, though he's not quite there yet. A-Rod made it quite clear in a conference call Monday that he only wanted to talk about the 2007 season, and while he knows that "everything that's been going on since the end of the season has been news" he prefers not to delve into other subjects until later, reminding that "the finish line is in sight."
I have a hard time seeing what is wrong with that. But, of course, I don’t have a deadline to meet to write strained and pointless column.
Presumably, he'll open up after the i's are dotted and the t's crossed in his new Yankees deal, and it sounds as if he's preparing for a formal news conference in the Bronx sometime next week. It may be the first news conference that requires attendance from Mr. Opt Out, the Sons of Steinbrenner, the New York Times, Warren Buffett and Dr. Phil. Yikes.
Yikes is right. So far this column has been widely known information and terrible anecdotes.
(2 paragraphs deleted - nothing new)
Seriously, though ... have we reached a point in the Grand Old Game where Warren Buffett plays Henry Kissinger in the peace talks? Commissioner Bud Selig must not be kidding when he speaks of the game's record-setting $6 billion in revenues in '07. It's like those old E.F. Hutton commercials -- even Warren Buffett pays attention.
A lot of Warren Buffett references, right? Yeah, he's not close to being done. Why is it to A-Rod’s discredit that he is friends with Warren Buffett, who is by most accounts a smart, generous, ethical businessman? Can this guy do anything right? Other than hit baseballs of course, which is the only thing we should care about.
"Warren and I have a wonderful relationship," Rodriguez said. "I can expand on that when all of this is done and finished."
Asshole. Scott Miller wants to know now.
But it is true the ol' financial mogul said late last summer he knew A-Rod was going to have a slam-bang season based on a conversation between the two early in the year.
"I don't know," Rodriguez said. "We usually visit every year. Warren and I are friends. He maybe saw the passion in my eyes. You've got to ask Warren. He's very reachable in Omaha.
"He's good at foreseeing things in business, and now he's doing it in baseball, too. That's pretty good."
Lord, this does get more twisted with every turn. There are more angles to this guy than in a geometry classroom.
What? What is confusing about this? Or twisted? Or at all worthy of being made fun of? I seriously think Scott just hit a deadline and had nothing to write about. He’s barely adding anything here. His formula is Quote + Pop culture reference + A-Rod insult = Gold.
The latest, most up-to-date field guide on the new AL MVP:
He then goes on to tell us each of the media’s terrible nicknames for Rodriguez and their origins. Yes, it’s as interesting as it sounds. I’ll just show you the nicknames and cut all the bullshit out. You can seriously surmise everything that Scott said just by reading the names, because he added no value.
A-Rod
Pay-Rod
Stray-Rod
E-Rod
A-Fraud
K-Rod: Angels closer Francisco Rodriguez. The term "K-Rod" actually has nothing to do with "A-Rod."
Soooo, is that a joke? Was I supposed to laugh there? It is as relevant as all this other bullshit you’re throwing in here anyway.
Nim-Rod
The Cooler
LA-Rod
Stay-Rod
Listening to his dreamy descriptions, he felt, we can be sure, almost like a Cheeseburger in Paradise. Had he been on the receiving end of tips from Jimmy Buffett instead of Warren, of course.
Column ends there. Some problems with this reference/joke:
1. How do you feel like a Cheeseburger?
2. If you feel like a Cheeseburger, how do you have ears to listen with?
3. You already used the Jimmy/Warren Buffett “angle”.
4. It doesn’t make any sense.
5. It is not funny.
Showing posts with label Alex Rodriguez. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Alex Rodriguez. Show all posts
Tuesday, November 20, 2007
Friday, November 9, 2007
This Sounds Like the Work of Crazy Old Jemele Hill
Firejaymariotti scooped me on this (even though we’re both a week late). I did have this written and ready to post it just needed some review, but screw that nerdy shit.
Jemele Hill has decided to write an article that compares Alex Rodriguez to Kobe Bryant. The column defends Bryant and points out his differences to A-Rod and, in general, why she would choose to have Kobe over A-Rod (ignoring the fact that they play different sports). Mainly that A-Rod was a distraction to his team during the playoffs during his rape trial, hasn’t gotten his team out of the first round in three years and seems to be whining all off-season every year. Oh wait, that’s Kobe Bryant. Those items either aren’t mentioned or are glossed over. The column defends Kobe’s antics because he just wants to win while A-Rod’s are lambasted as signs that he only cares about himself.
Give me Kobe over A-Rod any day
Say what you will about Kobe Bryant, but at least he's not a mercenary who wants all of the money, but none of the pressure, and doesn't perform in the playoffs.
In other words, at least he's not Alex Rodriguez.
Okay. So we’re comparing an NBA player to an MLB player. Good to recognize this up front, because the leagues and sports are VERY different. Like, if the NBA was set up like MLB, Kobe Bryant wouldn’t have led his team to the playoffs last year or the year before, where he lost in the first round (both years). Also he wouldn’t have led his team to the playoffs the year prior to that, when he…didn’t…lead..his…team to the playoffs. That’s if the performance of these players, in these sports, was really capable of being easily analogized, which they are not.
Both players are generally viewed as selfish, whiny divas. But as we approach the unusual sports phenomenon of having the best player in baseball head to a new team and arguably the best player in basketball also potentially on the move, understand that A-Rod and Kobe are two very different creatures.
Right, one plays baseball and one plays basketball. This is easy, because those sports are very dissimilar. If you try to play baseball using a basketball, pitchers would never throw a strike. So there's one difference. There's probably 2 or 3 more. There are no bases in basketball, no baskets in baseball. One is a sport of 5 guys playing in unison where 1 player can have a dramatic impact on the success of every game, the other is mostly a sport of individual achievements where a team needs many different individuals to achieve, all by themselves, in order for the team to win. In baseball, they have to play as a team, sure, but not like basketball. So I agree, very different.
A-Rod's decision to opt-out of New York is far more self-absorbed than Kobe's finagling to get out of Los Angeles.
How do you know? What if he just didn’t want to play in New York anymore because the media never left him alone, he was unfairly blamed for just about everything that went wrong, and a certain star teammate didn’t want to have sleepovers anymore?
Now, A-Rod’s opting out is likely due to a great deal of greed, and is pretty much the worst thing he can do for his image. But, let’s not be too easy on Kobe, okay? He pretty much imploded the team so it could be “his team” and then put up the gawdy numbers he wanted before noticing that people generally aren’t that impressed by gawdy numbers in the NBA when you can’t get your team out of the first round. Because this is the NBA, where individual players can have a large impact on the success of the team, this is somewhat damaging to Kobe’s legacy.
Despite Kobe's flaws, we at least know he is consumed with winning championships. A-Rod is consumed with being A-Rod.
Michael Jordan took a pay cut so the Bulls could sign Dennis Hopson, who they thought could help them reach the next level. Dennis Hopson sucked. Kobe Bryant couldn’t get along with Shaquille O’Neal in the interest of winning championships.
A-Rod is consumed with being, like, one of the best players ever – and getting paid like it.
Kobe doesn't always demonstrate his aspirations maturely. It also can't be ignored that a key aspect of his championship ambitions is that he has to be the guy in the lead role. But if the worst you can say about Kobe -- whose competitive streak was cloned from Michael Jordan's -- is he no longer wanted to play alongside a once-dominant, but injury-prone center, it's not exactly a sign of the apocalypse.
I love how she brushed by Kobe’s flaws by setting such a high hurdle for it to be newsworthy (um, the apocalypse). Is it a sign of a selfish player, Jemele? Is it a sign of a player who was maybe putting the possibility of winning a championship somewhere other than “first” on his list of priorities?
The worst I can say about Kobe is that he may have raped a girl. The worst I can say about him on the court is that he has not exhibited himself as the best team player that he could be. When criticized about shooting too much, he’s even pouted and then he won’t take shots that he should be taking. He’s sort of a baby that way.
Phil Jackson, arguably the best coach in NBA history, called Kobe Bryant “uncoachable” in his book.
And considering some of the things that Lakers owner Jerry Buss has said about Kobe in recent weeks, we've seen that Buss is his own man -- if he really wanted to keep Shaq, he would have kept him. Buss' main concern was dumping another $100 million into the fourth Fu-Schniken.
Um, right. He could have kept Shaq, and Phil Jackson, and Kobe Bryant would have signed with the LA Clippers. That was Kobe’s move; he was a free agent threatening to sign elsewhere unless Shaq was traded. So Kobe Bryant is absolved from his role in Shaq being traded because Jerry Buss is his “own man”? You don’t think that Kobe could have helped keep Shaq in town, if he really wanted to keep winning? Considering that both Phil Jackson and Shaq were exited from LA, and that's what Kobe wanted, I'm pretty sure he could have had a big say in them staying. The fact is, even if Buss wouldn't have listened to him, what happened was what Kobe wanted to happen.
But does anything in A-Rod's history or demeanor suggest he's remotely obsessed with winning the way Kobe is? A-Rod seems more obsessed with being loved than winning. He wants all the perks, but none of the responsibility. He wants 100-plus RBIs, and to eventually be the home run king. Just don't expect him to bring any of the necessary intangibles it takes to win something meaningful.
Does A-Rod really seem obsessed with being loved? Opting out of his contract during the 8th inning of the deciding game of the World Series is hardly the act of a player who wants to be loved. While I may not expect him to bring any of the necessary intangibles it takes to win, because I don’t know what those are, I do expect him to bring very necessary TANGIBLES for winning. Things like “hits” and “home runs”.
Sounds like a perfect fit for the Chicago Cubs.
What?
A-Rod isn't a leader, comes off as insecure and teams mysteriously seem better off when he's gone. Kobe? The three-time champion thrives under pressure and the low opinions some people have of him.
Hmm, okay. Has Kobe really performed better as an NBA player than A-Rod has as an MLB player since those low opinions were formed, primarily during his rape trial and him being accused of pushing Shaq out? Has Kobe really outperformed A-Rod in the last 3 years? A-Rod should soon have two league MVPs in that time and has helped his team get to the playoffs in each of those years. Kobe hasn’t made it out of the first round w/out Shaq. It’s a lot easier to make the NBA playoffs than the MLB playoffs – and it’s a lot easier for one player to impact his team making the playoffs in the NBA. Now, there are a million other factors at play here, but if you’re going to oversimplify to make convenient arguments then so am I.
Also – see FireJay’s post for numbers regarding A-Rod’s teams after he leaves. You are mentally retarded if you think that teams are better without the best player on the planet because he left….you can’t just look at records and ignore ALL other factors driving the change in records.
Kobe was criticized for brutally assessing the Lakers' lack of progress. But when A-Rod was a Yankee, the only thing that seemed to bother him was his own personal slumps.
Well what the fuck else should bother him? Should A-Rod criticize Brian Cashman for the Yankees’ pitching woes at points in the season? Should Derek Jeter’s slumps bother him? Should he be riding Roger Clemens, Mike Mussina and Andy Pettite to pitch better? People like you would be all over him.
Wouldn't you prefer a player who gets upset about losing more than a player who seems fine with it as long as he can stare at his pretty statistics and pay stubs? Can you blame Kobe for complaining about any plan that included passing on a skilled player who could help the Lakers in the present in favor of the long-term coddling of Andrew Bynum? Has A-Rod ever exhibited that kind of passion and determination? Has he ever given answers that didn't sound rehearsed?
Did Michael Jordan ever give answers that didn’t sound rehearsed (no)? Did Dennis Rodman (yes)? What’s your point? What reason did A-Rod have for lashing out at Yankee management? Should he just invent one to seem more passionate?
Even if A-Rod somehow wound up playing for the world champion Red Sox -- and if you're listening Boston, adding this guy to your clubhouse is akin to putting Britney Spears on "Nanny 911" -- it would be difficult to interpret A-Rod's actions as that of a man driven to win.
Putting up the best numbers in baseball = not the actions of a man driven to win.
A-Rod, of course, has the right to chase as much money as he wants. It's not his fault if the market dictates he earn an astronomical figure. There's no denying there were times he was unfairly brutalized in New York. The stalking by the tabloids was unacceptable, as was the fascination with his personal life. But the problems he had there will follow him into his next clubhouse.
Really? Did they exist in Seattle? What about Texas?
It's fair to accuse A-Rod and Kobe of being types who can't operate in a locker room unless they control it.
The difference is, there've been signs that Kobe has outgrown some of that. A-Rod doesn't seem like he ever will.
Right, because Kobe has been really mature this off-season.
There are two fundamental points not addressed by Jemele at all, as follows:
1. In the hypothetical situation that you own an NBA team and an MLB team, and you get one player to start that team (say, for 1 season, because of the impact of age in the two sports is so disparate), of course you take Kobe Bryant. But that’s because of the make-up of the sports. In the NBA, a top notch superstar helps to assure fans in the seats and a much better shot at a title contention. Baseball is just different. I don’t know how she can’t address this. If baseball was played on a smaller field with 5 players on the field and at bat, and A-Rod was able to get the most AB’s on the team by far, then the impact of Alex Rodriguez would be much much greater and he would be as valuable as a Kobe Bryant is in the NBA – probably more valuable.
2. A-Rod is all about the money and the personal accolades. That’s what she implies. He isn’t as interested in winning as Kobe. Let’s break this down:
Money: There is no salary cap in baseball. Baseball players who become free agents are truly paid market value for their services. Rodriguez, being the best player in the game, thinks he should be paid a lot of money for his services, so he gets it. You never hear about Kobe Bryant and money problems for a simple reason. In the NBA, it’s very structured. He makes damn near the most money he can possible make, per the CBA/Salary cap structure. By the way, he makes close to A-Rod money in salary. There is literally nothing for Kobe to complain about, money-wise. If it was truly a free market – with no limit on how much teams could sign free agents for and no salary cap - and Charlotte offered Kobe Bryant $40 million a year, and that was much more than anyone else was offering, would he take it? Would you fault him for taking it? This is another fundamental unfairness that never gets addressed.
Statistics/accolades/records: I don’t see a problem with an offensive player in baseball being concerned with putting up the best offensive statistics he can. It’s mind-boggling how this is turned into a negative quality in baseball.
“Boy, look at Johnny Hanrahan, that guy hit .215 last year and he doesn’t give a shit! He doesn’t care about his numbers! He just wants to win! Now look at selfish Bobby Smith who hit 55 home runs but cared more about hitting those home runs than he did winning. I know this because Johnny Hanrahan is killing himself out there and Bobby Smith is playing in a very smooth, unemotional manner.”
Seriously, why is this hard to understand? A-Rod, by putting up crazy numbers, is trying to win. Yes, the last few postseason series were not up to par. But it’s like 70 at-bats spread out over 4 years. He’s the best player at baseball at getting you to the playoffs, and that’s the hard part. The playoffs are a crap shoot.
Nothing against Kobe, who is an unreal basketball player, but please remember that MLB is a free market system. Also, an NBA player has significantly more impact on his team’s overall success than an MLB player who gets 4-5 at-bats a game and 2-3 balls hit to him.
Jemele Hill has decided to write an article that compares Alex Rodriguez to Kobe Bryant. The column defends Bryant and points out his differences to A-Rod and, in general, why she would choose to have Kobe over A-Rod (ignoring the fact that they play different sports). Mainly that A-Rod was a distraction to his team during the playoffs during his rape trial, hasn’t gotten his team out of the first round in three years and seems to be whining all off-season every year. Oh wait, that’s Kobe Bryant. Those items either aren’t mentioned or are glossed over. The column defends Kobe’s antics because he just wants to win while A-Rod’s are lambasted as signs that he only cares about himself.
Give me Kobe over A-Rod any day
Say what you will about Kobe Bryant, but at least he's not a mercenary who wants all of the money, but none of the pressure, and doesn't perform in the playoffs.
In other words, at least he's not Alex Rodriguez.
Okay. So we’re comparing an NBA player to an MLB player. Good to recognize this up front, because the leagues and sports are VERY different. Like, if the NBA was set up like MLB, Kobe Bryant wouldn’t have led his team to the playoffs last year or the year before, where he lost in the first round (both years). Also he wouldn’t have led his team to the playoffs the year prior to that, when he…didn’t…lead..his…team to the playoffs. That’s if the performance of these players, in these sports, was really capable of being easily analogized, which they are not.
Both players are generally viewed as selfish, whiny divas. But as we approach the unusual sports phenomenon of having the best player in baseball head to a new team and arguably the best player in basketball also potentially on the move, understand that A-Rod and Kobe are two very different creatures.
Right, one plays baseball and one plays basketball. This is easy, because those sports are very dissimilar. If you try to play baseball using a basketball, pitchers would never throw a strike. So there's one difference. There's probably 2 or 3 more. There are no bases in basketball, no baskets in baseball. One is a sport of 5 guys playing in unison where 1 player can have a dramatic impact on the success of every game, the other is mostly a sport of individual achievements where a team needs many different individuals to achieve, all by themselves, in order for the team to win. In baseball, they have to play as a team, sure, but not like basketball. So I agree, very different.
A-Rod's decision to opt-out of New York is far more self-absorbed than Kobe's finagling to get out of Los Angeles.
How do you know? What if he just didn’t want to play in New York anymore because the media never left him alone, he was unfairly blamed for just about everything that went wrong, and a certain star teammate didn’t want to have sleepovers anymore?
Now, A-Rod’s opting out is likely due to a great deal of greed, and is pretty much the worst thing he can do for his image. But, let’s not be too easy on Kobe, okay? He pretty much imploded the team so it could be “his team” and then put up the gawdy numbers he wanted before noticing that people generally aren’t that impressed by gawdy numbers in the NBA when you can’t get your team out of the first round. Because this is the NBA, where individual players can have a large impact on the success of the team, this is somewhat damaging to Kobe’s legacy.
Despite Kobe's flaws, we at least know he is consumed with winning championships. A-Rod is consumed with being A-Rod.
Michael Jordan took a pay cut so the Bulls could sign Dennis Hopson, who they thought could help them reach the next level. Dennis Hopson sucked. Kobe Bryant couldn’t get along with Shaquille O’Neal in the interest of winning championships.
A-Rod is consumed with being, like, one of the best players ever – and getting paid like it.
Kobe doesn't always demonstrate his aspirations maturely. It also can't be ignored that a key aspect of his championship ambitions is that he has to be the guy in the lead role. But if the worst you can say about Kobe -- whose competitive streak was cloned from Michael Jordan's -- is he no longer wanted to play alongside a once-dominant, but injury-prone center, it's not exactly a sign of the apocalypse.
I love how she brushed by Kobe’s flaws by setting such a high hurdle for it to be newsworthy (um, the apocalypse). Is it a sign of a selfish player, Jemele? Is it a sign of a player who was maybe putting the possibility of winning a championship somewhere other than “first” on his list of priorities?
The worst I can say about Kobe is that he may have raped a girl. The worst I can say about him on the court is that he has not exhibited himself as the best team player that he could be. When criticized about shooting too much, he’s even pouted and then he won’t take shots that he should be taking. He’s sort of a baby that way.
Phil Jackson, arguably the best coach in NBA history, called Kobe Bryant “uncoachable” in his book.
And considering some of the things that Lakers owner Jerry Buss has said about Kobe in recent weeks, we've seen that Buss is his own man -- if he really wanted to keep Shaq, he would have kept him. Buss' main concern was dumping another $100 million into the fourth Fu-Schniken.
Um, right. He could have kept Shaq, and Phil Jackson, and Kobe Bryant would have signed with the LA Clippers. That was Kobe’s move; he was a free agent threatening to sign elsewhere unless Shaq was traded. So Kobe Bryant is absolved from his role in Shaq being traded because Jerry Buss is his “own man”? You don’t think that Kobe could have helped keep Shaq in town, if he really wanted to keep winning? Considering that both Phil Jackson and Shaq were exited from LA, and that's what Kobe wanted, I'm pretty sure he could have had a big say in them staying. The fact is, even if Buss wouldn't have listened to him, what happened was what Kobe wanted to happen.
But does anything in A-Rod's history or demeanor suggest he's remotely obsessed with winning the way Kobe is? A-Rod seems more obsessed with being loved than winning. He wants all the perks, but none of the responsibility. He wants 100-plus RBIs, and to eventually be the home run king. Just don't expect him to bring any of the necessary intangibles it takes to win something meaningful.
Does A-Rod really seem obsessed with being loved? Opting out of his contract during the 8th inning of the deciding game of the World Series is hardly the act of a player who wants to be loved. While I may not expect him to bring any of the necessary intangibles it takes to win, because I don’t know what those are, I do expect him to bring very necessary TANGIBLES for winning. Things like “hits” and “home runs”.
Sounds like a perfect fit for the Chicago Cubs.
What?
A-Rod isn't a leader, comes off as insecure and teams mysteriously seem better off when he's gone. Kobe? The three-time champion thrives under pressure and the low opinions some people have of him.
Hmm, okay. Has Kobe really performed better as an NBA player than A-Rod has as an MLB player since those low opinions were formed, primarily during his rape trial and him being accused of pushing Shaq out? Has Kobe really outperformed A-Rod in the last 3 years? A-Rod should soon have two league MVPs in that time and has helped his team get to the playoffs in each of those years. Kobe hasn’t made it out of the first round w/out Shaq. It’s a lot easier to make the NBA playoffs than the MLB playoffs – and it’s a lot easier for one player to impact his team making the playoffs in the NBA. Now, there are a million other factors at play here, but if you’re going to oversimplify to make convenient arguments then so am I.
Also – see FireJay’s post for numbers regarding A-Rod’s teams after he leaves. You are mentally retarded if you think that teams are better without the best player on the planet because he left….you can’t just look at records and ignore ALL other factors driving the change in records.
Kobe was criticized for brutally assessing the Lakers' lack of progress. But when A-Rod was a Yankee, the only thing that seemed to bother him was his own personal slumps.
Well what the fuck else should bother him? Should A-Rod criticize Brian Cashman for the Yankees’ pitching woes at points in the season? Should Derek Jeter’s slumps bother him? Should he be riding Roger Clemens, Mike Mussina and Andy Pettite to pitch better? People like you would be all over him.
Wouldn't you prefer a player who gets upset about losing more than a player who seems fine with it as long as he can stare at his pretty statistics and pay stubs? Can you blame Kobe for complaining about any plan that included passing on a skilled player who could help the Lakers in the present in favor of the long-term coddling of Andrew Bynum? Has A-Rod ever exhibited that kind of passion and determination? Has he ever given answers that didn't sound rehearsed?
Did Michael Jordan ever give answers that didn’t sound rehearsed (no)? Did Dennis Rodman (yes)? What’s your point? What reason did A-Rod have for lashing out at Yankee management? Should he just invent one to seem more passionate?
Even if A-Rod somehow wound up playing for the world champion Red Sox -- and if you're listening Boston, adding this guy to your clubhouse is akin to putting Britney Spears on "Nanny 911" -- it would be difficult to interpret A-Rod's actions as that of a man driven to win.
Putting up the best numbers in baseball = not the actions of a man driven to win.
A-Rod, of course, has the right to chase as much money as he wants. It's not his fault if the market dictates he earn an astronomical figure. There's no denying there were times he was unfairly brutalized in New York. The stalking by the tabloids was unacceptable, as was the fascination with his personal life. But the problems he had there will follow him into his next clubhouse.
Really? Did they exist in Seattle? What about Texas?
It's fair to accuse A-Rod and Kobe of being types who can't operate in a locker room unless they control it.
The difference is, there've been signs that Kobe has outgrown some of that. A-Rod doesn't seem like he ever will.
Right, because Kobe has been really mature this off-season.
There are two fundamental points not addressed by Jemele at all, as follows:
1. In the hypothetical situation that you own an NBA team and an MLB team, and you get one player to start that team (say, for 1 season, because of the impact of age in the two sports is so disparate), of course you take Kobe Bryant. But that’s because of the make-up of the sports. In the NBA, a top notch superstar helps to assure fans in the seats and a much better shot at a title contention. Baseball is just different. I don’t know how she can’t address this. If baseball was played on a smaller field with 5 players on the field and at bat, and A-Rod was able to get the most AB’s on the team by far, then the impact of Alex Rodriguez would be much much greater and he would be as valuable as a Kobe Bryant is in the NBA – probably more valuable.
2. A-Rod is all about the money and the personal accolades. That’s what she implies. He isn’t as interested in winning as Kobe. Let’s break this down:
Money: There is no salary cap in baseball. Baseball players who become free agents are truly paid market value for their services. Rodriguez, being the best player in the game, thinks he should be paid a lot of money for his services, so he gets it. You never hear about Kobe Bryant and money problems for a simple reason. In the NBA, it’s very structured. He makes damn near the most money he can possible make, per the CBA/Salary cap structure. By the way, he makes close to A-Rod money in salary. There is literally nothing for Kobe to complain about, money-wise. If it was truly a free market – with no limit on how much teams could sign free agents for and no salary cap - and Charlotte offered Kobe Bryant $40 million a year, and that was much more than anyone else was offering, would he take it? Would you fault him for taking it? This is another fundamental unfairness that never gets addressed.
Statistics/accolades/records: I don’t see a problem with an offensive player in baseball being concerned with putting up the best offensive statistics he can. It’s mind-boggling how this is turned into a negative quality in baseball.
“Boy, look at Johnny Hanrahan, that guy hit .215 last year and he doesn’t give a shit! He doesn’t care about his numbers! He just wants to win! Now look at selfish Bobby Smith who hit 55 home runs but cared more about hitting those home runs than he did winning. I know this because Johnny Hanrahan is killing himself out there and Bobby Smith is playing in a very smooth, unemotional manner.”
Seriously, why is this hard to understand? A-Rod, by putting up crazy numbers, is trying to win. Yes, the last few postseason series were not up to par. But it’s like 70 at-bats spread out over 4 years. He’s the best player at baseball at getting you to the playoffs, and that’s the hard part. The playoffs are a crap shoot.
Nothing against Kobe, who is an unreal basketball player, but please remember that MLB is a free market system. Also, an NBA player has significantly more impact on his team’s overall success than an MLB player who gets 4-5 at-bats a game and 2-3 balls hit to him.
Tuesday, October 30, 2007
Jon Heyman: 7% Chance That A-Rod Retires or Dies This Off-Season
You may remember John Heyman as the SI writer who was befuddled at the Rockies Vegas odds of 28% to beat the Red Sox in the World Series when he himself gave them an implied 27% chance of beating the Red Sox before the playoffs even started. He changed his pick before the WS to the Rockies winning in 7, and then they were swept. I guess what I’m saying is that this guy is a trainwreck when it comes to numbers. He’s also the guy who made fun of sabermetric stats and then wrote an article about stupid made-up attributes like Fun Factor. This time he’s writing about potential suitors for Alex Rodriguez in the free agent market. The analysis is boring and pretty much common knowledge, but the fun is in the odds that Jon provides that Rodriguez will land with certain teams. Let’s take a look at those odds (I’ve added the percentages):
Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim: 4-1 – 20%
Boston Red Sox: 6-1 – 14%
San Francisco Giants: 7-1 – 13%
Los Angeles Dodgers: 8-1 – 11%
New York Mets: 10-1 – 9%
Chicago Cubs: 20-1 – 5%
New York Yankees: 25-1 – 4%
Philadelphia Phillies: 30-1 – 3%
The Rest of the Field: 6-1 – 14%
Total: 93%
I see. Since there are 30 teams in MLB, Heyman basically thinks the Yankees odds are about equal to those of the average MLB team and there is really no point in separating out the Phillies at all. Also, the Angels are 5 times more likely to sign A-Rod than the Yankees. I guess what I’m saying is, bad blood and all, I would have had the Yankees a little higher since they are one of a handful of teams that can afford him and have shown a willingness to shell out for expensive players.
I suppose that last 7% is Heyman's sneaky way of saying that maybe no one will pony up for A-Rod. But I think he would have told us that.
Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim: 4-1 – 20%
Boston Red Sox: 6-1 – 14%
San Francisco Giants: 7-1 – 13%
Los Angeles Dodgers: 8-1 – 11%
New York Mets: 10-1 – 9%
Chicago Cubs: 20-1 – 5%
New York Yankees: 25-1 – 4%
Philadelphia Phillies: 30-1 – 3%
The Rest of the Field: 6-1 – 14%
Total: 93%
I see. Since there are 30 teams in MLB, Heyman basically thinks the Yankees odds are about equal to those of the average MLB team and there is really no point in separating out the Phillies at all. Also, the Angels are 5 times more likely to sign A-Rod than the Yankees. I guess what I’m saying is, bad blood and all, I would have had the Yankees a little higher since they are one of a handful of teams that can afford him and have shown a willingness to shell out for expensive players.
I suppose that last 7% is Heyman's sneaky way of saying that maybe no one will pony up for A-Rod. But I think he would have told us that.
Thursday, August 16, 2007
Steve Phillips, I Don't Like You
Has anyone ever noticed that Steve Phillips either doesn’t move his hands at all when he talks, or he moves them around like a mad man – like every word gets some dramatic hand movement?
Yeah… me neither…let’s look at some chat answers. These aren’t Joe Morgan level bad but I’ve already started typing.
Greg (Gig Harbor, WA): Morning Steve. I'm curious about your thoughts on the Mariners. Do you think they have the starting pitching to reach the playoffs? They seem to just be steady and I think that's a great asset in this league.
Steve Phillips: Here is something you should know, there have been only two teams to ever make the playoffs with a starting rotation with a record below .500. The Mariners starting pitchers are currently just under the .500 mark. But with the improvement in the offense and one of the best bullpens aound, I think the Mariners have a great chance to win a Wild Card and even the West if they get hot.
Summary – Mariners’ starting pitching is not that good, but offense is “improved” and they have one of the best bullpens. They have a great chance to make the playoffs.
I’m going to reorder a couple of questions here to get this one next:
Mike (Fresno): True or false - the Yankees will make the playoffs.
Steve Phillips: False. The easy thing to say right now is that they will make it because of how they have played out of the All-Star break. But the reason they are winning now is because of their offense, which is very, very good. But to be a playoff team you have to pitch. And I have my doubts that the offense will continue to go as it is going, and I do not think they have the pitching to bail them out when the offense is not there. But they deserve a lot of credit for fighting their way back into this race, because myself, along with many others, counted them out a long time ago.
Summary – Very, very good offense (an understatement), but pitching not good enough.
Let’s take a crude look at some quick stats:
Post All-Star Break:
Runs Scored:
Mariners – 157 – 7th in AL
Yankees – 246 – 1st in AL
Team ERA:
Mariners – 4.98
Yankees – 4.48
To me, this is an odd train of thought. The Yankees have better hitting and better starters, but the Mariners will get in because their hitting is “improved” and their bullpen is very good. The Yankees score substantially more runs and give up less runs, but their pitching is not good enough, in comparison to the Mariners, whose starters have a sub .500 W/L record, which to you (Steve Phillips) is meaningful in a historical sense. Oh okay.
The Mariners run differential so far this year is 6. The Yankees’ is 149.
Liz ( Big Apple): Please tell me the Idea of Tony Larussa Managing the Yankees next year or in my lifetime is a joke? (I'm 29)
Steve Phillips: I would be surprised if LaRussa would want to come to New York to manage. He is a tremendous manager, and he may be having his best year ever with all the adveristy he has faced in St. Louis this year. But I do not think Tony, at this stage in his career, would want to deal with the NY media and all that comes with it. There has been speculation that he will go to the Reds, but I find that hard to believe, since it will be difficult to put a winning team together in that ball park. Joe Torre should be the Yankees manager for as long as we wants, in my opinion. Nobody could have done a better job in the last 12 years.
Why will it be difficult to put a winning team together in that ball park? Why would OPPOSING TEAMS have a better chance of winning in Cincinnati than the Reds, if they can field a quality team? He must mean that Riverfront Stadium is old and out dated (not enough luxury boxes) and therefore is not “economically viable” to generate the required revenues to field a competitive team. Oh…their ballpark… is new?
Being serious for a second, is the thought behind this that it's easier to hit homeruns, and therefore it increases the variability of results (lesser players can hit homeruns easier). If that is the case, you can focus the pitching staff on pitchers who give up fewer homeruns and load the team with power hitters. As opposed to, say, flyball pitchers and guys who steal bases. I'm being overly simplistic, but you get the point - no team should be doomed to losing because of their ballpark.
Adam (Flushing, NY): What are the chances that A-Rod signs with the red Sox next season? What would they have to give up in order to get him.
Steve Phillips: Well if he is a FA they would not have to give up anything, and the Yanks would never trade him to the Red Sox. But it will cost somewhere inthe range for 30 million dollars per year for 8 or more seaons to sign him. remmeber this, he is a great player, but he has yet to win a title, and baseball is not just an individual game. You need to have a balanced and deep roster to win, and no matter what your payroll, giving one guy 30 mil. limits what you can do with your roster.
That’s true, since there’s a salary cap in baseball and you can’t just spend a ton of money on other players…we wouldn’t want teams like New York and Boston doing that! His point is moot if you can afford to spend $150 million plus on the rest of the team. Really, are we looking at baseball players this way in 2007? Measuring them in championships? You can not treat MLB players like NBA players. Ted Williams and Barry Bonds never won championships…so fucking what? They are arguably the two best offensive players ever.
MATT (MINN): Where is Tory Hunter going to end up?
Steve Phillips: I think there are many places he could end up, from Boston to Atlanta to Philadelphia, Baltimore, Texas, and so on. I think he will be the most highly pursued FA this offseason, including if A-Rod is a free agent. Teams will look at the price tag on Rodriguez and think that they can sign Hunter and two other players for the same amount of money. He is still in his prime and would be a great addition to any team.
A summary of that Q & A:
MATT (MINN): Where is Tory Hunter going to end up?
Steve Phillips: Anywhere!
Also, Steve Phillips has the biggest hard-on for talking bad about A-Rod and/or the Yankees. I vividly remember Steve Phillips talking about A-Rod during his crazy-bad summer last year when he hit like 2 homeruns OPS’d .179. I remember him saying last July that A-Rod was intimidated by New York and would never get back to where he was if he stayed there. He and Harold Reynolds were saying this, and John Kruk was just saying that he was in a little bit of a slump and would be fine. You don’t forget moments when John Kruk is the only guy who is right.
Nick (Philly): Any chance Cole Hamels can pull out the Cy Young award this year? If it weren't for the bullpen, he'd be close to 20 wins already.
Steve Phillips: I think it will be very difficult for him, unless he rattles off seven or eight high quality performances that lower his ERA under 3. Chris Young (2.02) and Jake Peavy (2.23) have better ERAs. Hamels is a good young pitcher who will win a Cy Young award, but it just wont happen this year.
Side note: Young and Peavy pitch in a pitcher’s park. But check this out, Jake Peavy has a 1.06 ERA on the road.
Yeah… me neither…let’s look at some chat answers. These aren’t Joe Morgan level bad but I’ve already started typing.
Greg (Gig Harbor, WA): Morning Steve. I'm curious about your thoughts on the Mariners. Do you think they have the starting pitching to reach the playoffs? They seem to just be steady and I think that's a great asset in this league.
Steve Phillips: Here is something you should know, there have been only two teams to ever make the playoffs with a starting rotation with a record below .500. The Mariners starting pitchers are currently just under the .500 mark. But with the improvement in the offense and one of the best bullpens aound, I think the Mariners have a great chance to win a Wild Card and even the West if they get hot.
Summary – Mariners’ starting pitching is not that good, but offense is “improved” and they have one of the best bullpens. They have a great chance to make the playoffs.
I’m going to reorder a couple of questions here to get this one next:
Mike (Fresno): True or false - the Yankees will make the playoffs.
Steve Phillips: False. The easy thing to say right now is that they will make it because of how they have played out of the All-Star break. But the reason they are winning now is because of their offense, which is very, very good. But to be a playoff team you have to pitch. And I have my doubts that the offense will continue to go as it is going, and I do not think they have the pitching to bail them out when the offense is not there. But they deserve a lot of credit for fighting their way back into this race, because myself, along with many others, counted them out a long time ago.
Summary – Very, very good offense (an understatement), but pitching not good enough.
Let’s take a crude look at some quick stats:
Post All-Star Break:
Runs Scored:
Mariners – 157 – 7th in AL
Yankees – 246 – 1st in AL
Team ERA:
Mariners – 4.98
Yankees – 4.48
To me, this is an odd train of thought. The Yankees have better hitting and better starters, but the Mariners will get in because their hitting is “improved” and their bullpen is very good. The Yankees score substantially more runs and give up less runs, but their pitching is not good enough, in comparison to the Mariners, whose starters have a sub .500 W/L record, which to you (Steve Phillips) is meaningful in a historical sense. Oh okay.
The Mariners run differential so far this year is 6. The Yankees’ is 149.
Liz ( Big Apple): Please tell me the Idea of Tony Larussa Managing the Yankees next year or in my lifetime is a joke? (I'm 29)
Steve Phillips: I would be surprised if LaRussa would want to come to New York to manage. He is a tremendous manager, and he may be having his best year ever with all the adveristy he has faced in St. Louis this year. But I do not think Tony, at this stage in his career, would want to deal with the NY media and all that comes with it. There has been speculation that he will go to the Reds, but I find that hard to believe, since it will be difficult to put a winning team together in that ball park. Joe Torre should be the Yankees manager for as long as we wants, in my opinion. Nobody could have done a better job in the last 12 years.
Why will it be difficult to put a winning team together in that ball park? Why would OPPOSING TEAMS have a better chance of winning in Cincinnati than the Reds, if they can field a quality team? He must mean that Riverfront Stadium is old and out dated (not enough luxury boxes) and therefore is not “economically viable” to generate the required revenues to field a competitive team. Oh…their ballpark… is new?
Being serious for a second, is the thought behind this that it's easier to hit homeruns, and therefore it increases the variability of results (lesser players can hit homeruns easier). If that is the case, you can focus the pitching staff on pitchers who give up fewer homeruns and load the team with power hitters. As opposed to, say, flyball pitchers and guys who steal bases. I'm being overly simplistic, but you get the point - no team should be doomed to losing because of their ballpark.
Adam (Flushing, NY): What are the chances that A-Rod signs with the red Sox next season? What would they have to give up in order to get him.
Steve Phillips: Well if he is a FA they would not have to give up anything, and the Yanks would never trade him to the Red Sox. But it will cost somewhere inthe range for 30 million dollars per year for 8 or more seaons to sign him. remmeber this, he is a great player, but he has yet to win a title, and baseball is not just an individual game. You need to have a balanced and deep roster to win, and no matter what your payroll, giving one guy 30 mil. limits what you can do with your roster.
That’s true, since there’s a salary cap in baseball and you can’t just spend a ton of money on other players…we wouldn’t want teams like New York and Boston doing that! His point is moot if you can afford to spend $150 million plus on the rest of the team. Really, are we looking at baseball players this way in 2007? Measuring them in championships? You can not treat MLB players like NBA players. Ted Williams and Barry Bonds never won championships…so fucking what? They are arguably the two best offensive players ever.
MATT (MINN): Where is Tory Hunter going to end up?
Steve Phillips: I think there are many places he could end up, from Boston to Atlanta to Philadelphia, Baltimore, Texas, and so on. I think he will be the most highly pursued FA this offseason, including if A-Rod is a free agent. Teams will look at the price tag on Rodriguez and think that they can sign Hunter and two other players for the same amount of money. He is still in his prime and would be a great addition to any team.
A summary of that Q & A:
MATT (MINN): Where is Tory Hunter going to end up?
Steve Phillips: Anywhere!
Also, Steve Phillips has the biggest hard-on for talking bad about A-Rod and/or the Yankees. I vividly remember Steve Phillips talking about A-Rod during his crazy-bad summer last year when he hit like 2 homeruns OPS’d .179. I remember him saying last July that A-Rod was intimidated by New York and would never get back to where he was if he stayed there. He and Harold Reynolds were saying this, and John Kruk was just saying that he was in a little bit of a slump and would be fine. You don’t forget moments when John Kruk is the only guy who is right.
Nick (Philly): Any chance Cole Hamels can pull out the Cy Young award this year? If it weren't for the bullpen, he'd be close to 20 wins already.
Steve Phillips: I think it will be very difficult for him, unless he rattles off seven or eight high quality performances that lower his ERA under 3. Chris Young (2.02) and Jake Peavy (2.23) have better ERAs. Hamels is a good young pitcher who will win a Cy Young award, but it just wont happen this year.
Side note: Young and Peavy pitch in a pitcher’s park. But check this out, Jake Peavy has a 1.06 ERA on the road.
Monday, July 16, 2007
It’s Alex Rodriguez’s Fault Teams Want To Pay Him A Lot
Gregg “I want to tinkle on Barry Bonds” Doyel has written an anti-A-Rod / anti-big salary column for his latest work. It’s here, and is titled, “Big deals mean raw deals for Joe fan.”
The number to kill all numbers is coming soon, and I wish to God I was talking about Barry Bonds and the number 756. Instead I'm talking about Alex Rodriguez and the number $35 million, which is the annual salary he and ruthless agent Scott Boras will pry from some team this offseason after A-Rod opts out of the final three years of his contract with the Yankees and becomes a free agent.
How exactly, will they “pry” $35 million a year from some team? Don’t you think the team will make a conscious decision here, with a lot of thought towards risks/rewards and ROI, both on the field and on their P&L? No? You think A-Rod and Boras will go into negotiations wearing ski masks and carrying semi-automatics?
A-Rod learned nothing from his last contract, that 10-year, $252 million monstrosity he stole from the Texas Rangers in 2001, when he doubled the previous record contract in U.S. sports history and -- congratulations! -- became universally despised for his shocking greed.
Again, stole? He stole the money? Texas willingly overpaid him and he was unbelievably good in Texas. It’s not his fault they also overpaid for sucky players too. Why did that make him greedy?
Oh wait, I forgot, a Scott Boras thug was holding Tom Hicks over a balcony by his ankles. That's why they signed him. Why did he give Hicks the Suge Knight / Vanilla Ice (alleged) treatment? Because they only wanted to pay A-Rod $249 million over 10 years. That greedy motherfucker Rodriguez wasn't having it. He said "I want my $250m bitch, and now you better give me another 2 cuz you insulted me, motherfucker." A-Rod is hard f'ing core.
A $35 million or even $40 million annual contract is coming. You can feel it in the air, like a bad storm. You can smell it, like a bad bowel movement. The perfect confluence of events is here: the great player having the career season ... the desperate team with too much money and not enough recent World Series titles ... and the brilliantly unscrupulous agent.
Okay, and whatever a team decides to pay A-Rod, that is their choice. They don’t have to sign him. Scott Boras and Rodriguez are doing nothing wrong here. If a team has too much money, why do you care what they do with it?
Like a bad bowel movement? First you want to “tinkle” on Barry Bonds, now you smell impending contracts like bowel movements. You are one weird fuck.
It's unavoidable. The Yankees already have given $28 million this season (pro-rated) to Roger Clemens, an old pitcher past his prime. A-Rod is on pace to hit .320 with 58 home runs, 160 runs and 165 RBI, which would merely be the best (clean) offensive season since the 1930s -- and he's just 31 years old.
Wow, that IS a hell of a year. It sure sounds like he should be worth a lot of money. JD Drew is $14 million/year, and you have a problem with double that for A-Rod? He’s literally double the production of a lot of $10-15 million/year players.
He could play at this level for another four or five seasons at least, and could play at an All-Star level until he is 40. If he stays healthy he will pass Ruth and Aaron and Bonds and not only become the all-time home run king, but put that record out of reach. He will sell tickets wherever he goes, he will raise the value of whatever television deal is in place for his franchise, and he will sell $125 jerseys like Ernie Banks once sold 12-cent baseball cards.
You are making a convincing argument for signing A-Rod for a $30 million/year contract.
Those are just some of the points Boras will hammer into the Yankees and any other team that joins the bidding for Rodriguez after this season, and if no other team joins the bidding, Boras will lie to the Yankees and make them believe otherwise.
Well lying isn’t a good thing, but it’s still the Yankees prerogative to determine if they want to spend the money. It’s not like Boras can say 10 teams are interested in A-Rod at that price tag. In fact, the Yankees are pretty smart guys, so they will probably know the market for A-Rod quite well.
Would I put it past Boras to promise a favor to another franchise down the road, a player delivered at a reasonable (for Boras) price, in exchange for that franchise pretending to get involved in the A-Rod bidding to pump up the price? Hell no I wouldn't put that scenario past Boras. He has a history of getting unwitting teams to bid against themselves.
Sounds like a smart guy. You feel bad for the Yankees? If the Yankees don’t have the money, or if they don’t want to spend it, then they won’t.
This guy is so shady, so good, that he'd pretend to have a terminal disease if he thought some team's sympathy would help him finagle a few extra bucks for a client. If you asked me to pick the more admirable form of life, Scott Boras or WWE president Vince McMahon, I'd ask to check the bottoms of their shoes in case a more palatable choice was squished underneath there.
Scott Boras may be shady, but I would pick him to represent me if I was a player. Do you remember the Barry Zito contract? The Giants did that to themselves. Any fan with half a brain could see that Zito was a middle of the rotation starter on a decline. Boras made him look like Steve Carlton and the Giants were stupid enough to bite. Shame on them, not Boras.
It's not like Rodriguez will need nefariousness to get the contract to end all contracts. In the past week alone, sports owners seem to have lost their collective minds.
Okay, good, now we’re talking. Why don’t you write a column on how dumb it is for teams to sign $100 million+ long-term guaranteed deals. Why is it in the fault of the players or agents?
In the NBA, the idiot in charge of the Magic gave a six-year, $118 million contract to an underachieving role player named Rashard Lewis.
The Lewis contract is terrible, but he’s not a role player. Steve Kerr was a role player.
Deleted: 3 paragraphs on recent contracts in sports that he doesn’t like. Not sure what the point is.
After this season, Alex Rodriguez will break the bank, and my fear -- or my hope -- is that his new contract will break baseball and then perhaps all of professional sports.
Spoiler alert: It won’t.
Fernando Alonso makes $40 million a year to drive an F1 car. Alex Rodriguez making $30 or $35 million really isn’t that big a deal at this point.
Maybe it will take $35 or $40 million per year to an athlete, any athlete, for sports fans to finally have enough with rising salaries and the rising ticket and apparel prices that come as an added bonus. Boycott a game. Embarrass a team by forcing it to play in front of 150 spectators.
I don’t have a problem with ticket prices/apparel prices. First, I don’t wear much “apparel”, because I’m not a dork. I’m mostly content to watch games on TV. The free markets will bear this out. If the ticket prices are *too* high, then people won’t go. I live in the most expensive baseball market in the country (I think). I paid $25 to park my car for a Red Sox game on Saturday, and $31 on 3 beers, a sausage and a hot dog. The place was sold out. Lots were full. There were lines for the concessions every time. The demand is there. The Red Sox are running a business. I don’t see a problem with this. I would only have a problem with ticket prices if no one was going. Because, what's the point? If teams are selling out with high ticket prices, well there's clearly a market.
Send a message to the Yankees or Magic or Colts or Indians or any of the other out-of-touch franchises: The everyday families who fund those franchises are struggling to buy homes and send kids to college and fill up their gas tank on a weekly basis, and we simply will not tolerate any more Monopoly contracts.
Every day families really don’t fund the franchises. It’s the corporate sponsors and businesses who advertise in the park, and who pay for luxury boxes and a lot of club seats/season tickets. Jane and John Smith with 2.3 kids aren’t footing the bill. The advertisers in the ballpark and on the YES network (or NESN), the corporate boxes, and the season ticket holders (generally not your poorer families) are footing the bill, mostly. Since I don’t see the financials this is more guesswork than anything, but I bet I’m closer than you are to the truth. I think working families play a role (if they attend games, of course), but it's not like the working class is paying Manny Ramirez's salary instead of putting food on the table.
You seem incredibly naïve. If Will Ferrell makes $25 million on his next movie, and it’s supposed to be awesome, will you pay to see it? You have the choice here. If you are unhappy with the product, or the salaries, then don’t go to games and don’t watch them on TV. What kind of chip is in your computer? Intel? Last year their CEO had a compensation package of about $10 million. The COO of Apple last year had a total comp package of $13 million. In 2005 Drew Barrymore made $22 million. These are not outliers, just totally random examples. You want an outlier? Keanu Reaves made over $150 million from the Matrix movies. Seriously, this is reality. You want another one? The CEO of Sally Mae had a total compensation package of almost $40 million in 2006. Get over it. Why shouldn’t one of the best baseball players ever, in a sport that makes a ton of money, accept all that a team will pay him?
I don’t even want to think about what Chris Berman makes.
It's not like Rodriguez will deliver a championship, either. He hasn't won a World Series. He hasn't even been to a World Series. This isn't the NBA, where one player can get it done. Give Michael Jordan $35 million a year, as the Chicago Bulls once did, and you have just won yourself an NBA championship. Give A-Rod $35 million and you have just ... given A-Rod $35 million. The championship is optional and maybe even irrelevant.
The championship is optional? Damn it, Chicago Cubs, why haven’t you chosen the “Championship Option” all these years? I don’t understand that last sentence at all.
Any fan base that thinks it’s the responsibility of their favorite team to deliver them a championship is unrealistic and stupid. I hope for a competitive team; a good product on the field.
Give A-Rod $35 million and what you have done, however, is given star-struck fans justification to spend $100 or $200 to come to the ballpark for one night. Why are baseball tickets so expensive in New York? Because A-Rod makes $35 million. Why will he make $35 million? Because tickets are so expensive. It's a vicious cycle.
Baseball tickets are expensive in certain cities because that’s what the market will bear. Why does A-Rod make $25 million/year? Because 1 owner was dumb enough to outbid the next highest bidder by more than $50 million. If the owner of a team with poor ticket sales wants to charge what the Red Sox charge, well then he’s screwed. Again, this is not A-Rod’s fault, or the Yankees fault. The Yankees have the money, so why not spend it on high priced players? The goal is to put a good team on the field, so that your fans will want to pay to watch them. Ask a Yankees fan if they’d rather be rooting for a perpetual .500 team that doesn’t make the postseason, but the tickets would be 75% of the price. I think they’ll take the high priced tickets and high priced talent. Never feel bad for Yankees fans or Red Sox fans because of the ticket prices. They don’t have to go.
True, if the average player made $1 million then teams would not need to charge as much to generate enough revenue to cover the payroll. But what makes you think they wouldn’t charge just as much and pocket the profits? These are businesses, remember. They will charge what the fans will pay.
I won’t really go into his crazy assertion that is A-Rod alone that has driven up ticket prices in New York.
In Seattle, the Mariners gave Ichiro Suzuki $90 million for the next five years, one of the richest contracts in U.S. sports history, for a player who turns 34 in October. At $18 million, Ichiro would make more in a single season than all of the 2006 Florida Marlins combined, which might be why Marlins president David Samson predicted in an interview with Miami radio station 790 AM that Ichiro's new contract "will take down the sport. ... It's the end of the world as we know it."
Now I’m not the biggest Ichiro fan, but can someone walk me through how Hampton, Zito, Soriano, Kevin Brown, Vernon Wells etc. etc. etc. were okay but this is the contract that will sink the ship? Also, the hyperbole of the week awards goes to David Samson.
If only.
I don’t think you like sports.
Thursday, June 28, 2007
Stuff Only I Find Funny, Volume 1
I happened to catch some of Stuart Scott's chat last week on ESPN.com. I went on and submitted a comment, which he posted but didn't address.
First, he said this:
Greg (Long Beach, CA): Do you think Prince Fielder will hit 60 HR's this year? It's good to see that he's doing it the right way (beer and hot dogs). Is he the best young power hitter in the game right now?
Stuart Scott: Yes, Prince and A Rod will
How do you know he's not eating salads, by the way?
He's not eating salads because he's fat. Unless he's eating "hotdog salads". Anyway, I thought this was a bit of a stretch considering they are both on a pace to hit between 56-60 and had some seriously hot stretches that they aren't likely to duplicate, and no one since 1961 who wasn't a roided out monster has hit 60. But anyway, that led me to post this:
Sweet Sassy Molassy!: Prince AND A-Rod are hitting 60? No way.
Now, everyone knows that "Sweet Sassy Molassy" is a reference to an old SNL skit with Ray Romano and Tim Meadows playing sports anchors. No one remembers that? Shit.
Tim Meadows is supposed to be Stuart Scott and is yelling Booyah! after just about every play. Ray is simply the white sidekick with a corny catch phrase - Sweet Sassy Molassy! that he keeps repeating.
Anyway I bet Stuart Scott felt pretty stupid later on that night when he realized how bad I had punk'd him. Right? Right?
Never mind.
First, he said this:
Greg (Long Beach, CA): Do you think Prince Fielder will hit 60 HR's this year? It's good to see that he's doing it the right way (beer and hot dogs). Is he the best young power hitter in the game right now?
Stuart Scott: Yes, Prince and A Rod will
How do you know he's not eating salads, by the way?
He's not eating salads because he's fat. Unless he's eating "hotdog salads". Anyway, I thought this was a bit of a stretch considering they are both on a pace to hit between 56-60 and had some seriously hot stretches that they aren't likely to duplicate, and no one since 1961 who wasn't a roided out monster has hit 60. But anyway, that led me to post this:
Sweet Sassy Molassy!: Prince AND A-Rod are hitting 60? No way.
Now, everyone knows that "Sweet Sassy Molassy" is a reference to an old SNL skit with Ray Romano and Tim Meadows playing sports anchors. No one remembers that? Shit.
Tim Meadows is supposed to be Stuart Scott and is yelling Booyah! after just about every play. Ray is simply the white sidekick with a corny catch phrase - Sweet Sassy Molassy! that he keeps repeating.
Anyway I bet Stuart Scott felt pretty stupid later on that night when he realized how bad I had punk'd him. Right? Right?
Never mind.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)