"But things may be a little different. The Yankees have committed to about $155 million in salary next year and aren't likely to go much higher. That's a lot and still No. 1 in the league by a fleet of Brinks trucks. But if that is what they break camp with, it is about $50 million less than a year ago.
...
Steinbrenner spent a billion on rotisserie numbers, completely forgetting he won four of five World Series with great talent but greater heart when it was mostly homegrown talent such as Derek Jeter, Bernie Williams, Jorge Posada and Mariano Rivera."
A baseball team has 25 players. Including Ramiro Mendoza and Andy Pettitte, you've got 6 out of 25 players who were homegrown.
What did the '96-'00 Yankees prove?
They proved that you win the World Series by spending lots of money and spending it on rotisserie numbers. That's how the Yankees did it, that's how the Red Sox did it, and that's how the Mets are trying to do it.
That's Myth #1. Please don't use the '98 Yankees as an example of homegrown talent whose biggest asset was a lot of heart.
But let's say you actually believe that the Big Payroll strategy doesn't work, despite its fabulous track record. Then why are you picking the Mets to finish first in their division? Why are you praising Omar Minaya while you're damning Brian Cashman?
Aren't the 2006 Mets nothing more than a hodgepodge of big name free agents with little playoff experience? What about character? What about identity? What about chemistry? What about competitive balance in the NL East?
What exactly are the Mets trying to do? Buy a World Series title? Heaven forfend!
The Mets are going to spend about $120 million on payroll this year and the Yankees will spend about $155 million. The difference is going to be approximately $35 million (which is $100 million using Lupica Math).
Will the Yankees up it to $200 million? I don't think so. In this regard, I agree with Dan Wetzel.
In any case, it's very difficult to take Mike Lupica's anti-Steinbrenner rantings seriously when they are juxtaposed with endless praise of the gritty Mets.
In 2003, Lupica claimed the Yankees sucked the joy out of the season when they added Aaron Boone to their roster. Not solely because of Aaron Boone, but that was the straw that broke the camel's back as Streinbrenner just kept adding soulless all-stars to the roster.
When the Yankees passed $120 million a few years back, it was the end of the world. When the Mets pass $120 million this year, it's because Minaya is a genius and it's still less than the Yankees, so it doesn't matter.
Am I to believe that when a team is spending tens of millions on their roster, that it's the $121st million that is unethical and distasteful?
How arbitrary:
"You hear this in New York these days: The Mets now spend like the Yankees!
Really? On what planet?
The Mets, according to MLB, currently have around $110 million in committed salaries for next season. Yeah, they spend the way the Yankees did in the 2005 season if between now and Opening Day, Omar Minaya spends another $100 million."
The Mets don't always have to be compared to the Yankees. Why not compare the Mets to the Braves? Or the Philles? Or the Cardinals? Or every other team in the National League in which the Mets play their games and stuff?
While it's true the Yankees are one of the few teams -- two, actually -- who will spend more than the Mets on their roster in the 2006 season, it is also true that the Mets will be the Cheapest Team on the Field in only 6 of their 162 games this season. (Disclaimer: I don't know if the Mets play the Red Sox in 2006.)
On the same day the Mets are pillaging the Marlins for a catcher, Lupica is crying about the dismantling of the Marlins ... and blaming the Yankees.
This kind of flexible thinking is easy for a man without principle. Yankee-Hating does not qualify as a principle.
No comments:
Post a Comment