Skip to content

Did the Yankees buy their title?

Nov 5, 2009, 10:25 AM EDT

Leave a comment

Here are the first two I’ve seen of what I am sure will be many sour grapes reactions to the Yankees’ title today:

Kevin Cowherd of the Baltimore Sun:

I hate the Yankees. I feel like crying whenever they win. Still, it was inevitable that the season finish this way. The Yankees were the best team in baseball — the best team money could buy AGAIN.

Scott Miller of CBS Sports.com:

The World Series takes personal checks. Credit and debit cards, too. Score one for the Yankees, and their bankers. Hideki Matsui as World Series MVP? Maybe. The three home runs were clutch, and the World Series record-tying six RBI in Game 6 were smashing. But the chief bean counter who sat behind the desk last winter and approved the expenditure of nearly $425 million to hoist CC Sabathia, Mark Teixeira and A.J. Burnett aboard the U.S.S. Yankee? Now there’s a true Yankee.

Personally I find this line of reasoning to be tired and lazy.  Everyone has their own ideas of what ails baseball from a business perspective, and certainly the Yankees are playing a different game than everyone else these days.  But counting the Yankees’ titles and chalking them up to dollars alone is nonsense.

The Yankees payroll is obviously gigantic, but it did not come out of general lockstep with all of the other teams until around 2002. Before then they didn’t always lead the league — they were behind the Orioles in 1998, for example, – and when they did lead the league, only a couple of million bucks separated them from a pack of the next highest payrolls.  In fact, 2002 was the first time they were as much as $10 million higher than anyone else. Before then: four titles in the Jeter era.

The Bombers’ payroll exploded in 2002 and continued to escalate through 2008.  They somehow managed to buy no titles during that time.  Much is made about signing Sabathia and Teixeira this year, but their 2009 payroll is actually lower than 2008′s.

I’m not going to drink the Yankee-fan Kool-Aid and say that there’s some level playing field out there. But if the past fifteen years have shown anything, it’s that even if you can buy general competitiveness, you can’t simply buy a World Title. To get that, you have to be smart, you have to execute and you have to be a bit lucky too.

The Yankees were all of those things this year, and to leave any part of that out is to fail to tell the whole story.

Skip to Comments
More HardballTalk
Back to Homepage
  1. BT - Nov 5, 2009 at 12:11 PM

    I have an idea. Let’s put a spending cap on what each country can spend on their military each year. That way it is fair, and no one country will be more powerfull than the other. The idea that it is unfair that the Yankees spend as much as they do every year on their team is INSANE! It is their team! The Yankee Team and Office work Hard and EARN thier position in the MLB much like the USA earns it’s status as a world power. It is run as a FREE market the way it should be. The team that works the hardest, invests, plans for the future, and has respect for the sport and the other teams, will most likely win more championships than the other organizations. Much like the USA holds it’s position in the world. All of the Yankee haters who criticize the size of their payroll are not unlike the other countries of the world calling America the Evil Empire and Hate us because we are successful. I don’t know about you, but I work hard for what I have and feel I am entitled to live a little bit more comfortable after accomplishing my goals. Yankee Haters… Go live in a Marxist Country where all is even and fair.. Where the people who work hard have the same status in life as those who sit on their ass! good Luck with that.

  2. dfb1 - Nov 5, 2009 at 12:12 PM

    the yankee organization is the reason baseball is not americas game anymore. Small clubs just can’t compete. They should take a lesson from the new americas game – Football. Football has huge audience numbers because in any given year, just about any team can win. They all have the same amount of money to spend and they need to spend it wisely.

  3. dfb1 - Nov 5, 2009 at 12:12 PM

    the yankee organization is the reason baseball is not americas game anymore. Small clubs just can’t compete. They should take a lesson from the new americas game – Football. Football has huge audience numbers because in any given year, just about any team can win. They all have the same amount of money to spend and they need to spend it wisely.

  4. twinsfan - Nov 5, 2009 at 12:14 PM

    I fear exactly what MM pointed out. There is something seriously wrong with MLB if Mauer ends up in NY. He grew up in MN and is the face of the franchise, but there is no way the Twins will be able to offer him what NY will offer. I only hope he looks at more than money. And while the Yankees have not won a title in a few years, they clearly bought this title. Where would they be without the free agents they bought over the last few years. I don’t blame the Yankees for this, but I do blame baseball. Every year, the playoff teams are tilted heavily in favor of large market, deep pocket teams, and the small market teams represent only one or two of the playoff teams. And, if a small market team makes it to the World Series, while I love to see that happen, I also cringe because I realize that such success will only further undercut the ability of small market teams to succeed in the future because baseball will use such “parity” to argue that no fix is needed to the system. Parity doesn’t exist and won’t until baseball fixes the revenue disparity. What is needed is revenue sharing and a salary cap, both high end and low end. You can’t expect KC and Tampa to be able to consistently spend $80 million when the markets in which they consist cannot generate that kind of revenue on a consistent basis.

  5. BobPhxville - Nov 5, 2009 at 12:18 PM

    I am a big Phillies fan, but I don’t begrudge the Yankees getting the best players they can afford. I would however, much rather have a baseball salary cap similar to the football cap. That levels the playing field, and sets up a system in which bad personnel decisions can not be corrected with the cutting of a check, but hurts for years to come. It would permit teams like the Indians to compete with the Yankees, Dodgers, etc.

  6. JAB - Nov 5, 2009 at 12:20 PM

    The Yankees are really the Bankees because they TRY to buy
    The BEST players. When the Yankees LOSE thy are the CRANKEES !
    Because they were SUPPOSE to win ! Get it.
    JAB4

  7. Omega - Nov 5, 2009 at 12:20 PM

    If payroll buys championships, why wasn’t this WS the Yankees vs the Mets? They were the top 2 spenders in 2009.
    and what about the 4 top 8 payrolls? where were the Cubs, Tigers and Astros in the ’09 playoffs? watching the playoffs? playing golf? catching up with the family? the only positive answer was not in the playoffs.
    Saint Louis won the NL Central (ahead of the #4 payroll Cubs) with the 13th highest payroll.
    Philly won the NL East with the #7 payroll well ahead of the Mets. As a side note, the Marlins with the lowest payroll finished 17 games ahead of the Mets playing in a non-baseball stadium.
    LA Dodgers came in with the 9th highest payroll and won the NL West 3 games ahead of the Rockies (#18 payroll).
    In the AL the Yankees of course were #1 by about 66 million over the Mets and 79 million over the next closest AL team, the Red Sox at #4.
    The Los Angeles Angels of California in Anaheim California Angels, or whatever they are calling themselves these days came in at #6.
    And the lowest ranking team, payroll wise, to make the playoffs were the Twins came in at a staggering 24th place. Now, I have heard and read, but haven’t confirmed that the Twins owners are billionaires like the Steinbrenner family, they just chose not to invest in their team.
    http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/salaries is the link I got my info from.
    Congrats to the Yankess for putting together a heck of a season and for a great post season and WS.

  8. Melissa - Nov 5, 2009 at 12:21 PM

    The problem is not with the Yankees or the Steinbrenners. The problem is with all of the other owners who just keep all of the profits of a team instead of re-investing them. Maybe if, say… Cleveland spent a little money to keep it’s great players who came up through the organization, that money might come back to them when the fans have a sense of pride and something to believe in again.
    Baseball is a BUSINESS. You have to spend money to make money. It’s just like a restaurant – do you go to the place that gives you delicious, heaping portions for your money, or the one that puts it on a smaller plate so it “looks like more”? As a fan… what would you rather pay for?

  9. comeonman - Nov 5, 2009 at 12:24 PM

    They also have that other classic Bronx type, players who’ve dreamed of wearing pinstripes ever since they were boys, their heads filled with romance, fantasizing about Babe Ruth, Joe D and enough money to embarrass Goldman Sachs.
    What no one who loves baseball really wants is a wobbled Yankee franchise that has lost its confidence or, as has seemed possible recently, even become comic.
    The sport’s stage seems empty without the Yankees standing prominent upon it. Now they are back in the very center of that theater, pinstriped muscles flexed. Relish it. Or deal with!!!
    Tex had 4 offers, he said he always wanted to be a Yankee, Donnie baseball was his hero………..
    Cashman went to California to speak to Mrs. Sabathia because CC
    said Cash had to convince her because he was sold.
    Burnette called CC and told him, ” I’m in, ” let’s do this”
    Swish said he was happy about the trade, he was coming to play first bas, but Tex signed so he moved.

  10. Omega - Nov 5, 2009 at 12:24 PM

    addendum to my first post:
    the Twins beat out the Tigers who came in at #5 on the list.

  11. NYYFanInBama - Nov 5, 2009 at 12:25 PM

    This morning alone I have read comments on several blogs – this one, the NY Daily News, the NY Post, mlb.com, among others – where people are whining about lack of player loyalty. And Teixeira and Sabathia are getting the most hits for their lack of loyalty. Which in itself is ridiculous – they were both traded at the trade deadline last season and spent what, 2 or 3 months with the team they were traded to?
    Also, I stand by my use of the word “willing.” Having it and being willing to part with it are two entirely different things. When George Steinbrenner bought the Yankees in 1973 they were one of the worst teams in baseball because CBS, from whom Steinbrenner and Co. bought the team, were not willing to spend money on the team. As the old tried and true adage states, “You’ve got to spend money to make money.”

  12. Dan - Nov 5, 2009 at 12:26 PM

    Every team that wins bought their title. Every team that lost bought their loss. It’s a business. The Yankees bring in more money, and instead of the owners keeping it for themselves, they provide a great team for the fans that pay for it. I would be pissed if I was a fan of a team that chooses not to keep their stars.

  13. shute - Nov 5, 2009 at 12:26 PM

    Sure, the Yankees spend money, but it is not their fault. A-Rod makes almost as much as the entire Florida Roster, but he is not worth more than the whole team.
    If there was a cap on it, what would everyone dislike about the Yankees? There will not be a cap because the players will not play under one (see 1994 players strike), or was it just they Yankees that wouldn’t play back in ’94?

  14. Felix - Nov 5, 2009 at 12:30 PM

    No offense taken. You make some good points Tom. But to hate them becasue “they bought” the series, no way. they still could have lost to philly. Buying these free agents does not guarantee a world series ring or even a pennant. Take a look at the spending spree during the past 4/5 years, no pennant or series title. Now take a look at last year, Tampa Bay Rays and Phillies. Very little money was spent on them and they did it with raw talent from the farm system with a few free agents. Next year we may see the royals in it or not but if they try to go dollar for dollar they will lose but if they went farm talent against big money athletes, i’ll take the farm talent, they dont get paid as much and want it more then the big dollar guys aka TB Rays, 2008.

  15. Jim - Nov 5, 2009 at 12:30 PM

    Absolutely right you are “The Doc”. The Yankees keep winning hollow victories.
    How appropriate to use Pittsburgh as an example of a baseball team reduced to being a farm club for the large market contenders while the NFL envies (or hates) the Steelers for excellence on a level playing field. Art Rooney Sr. stood up to the large market teams many decades ago and that made football what it is TODAY.
    I used to follow the Bucs regularly when they had a chance at something/anything. Now, the pride-less owners happily make money with a perennial loser, the players are not kept long enough to get to know them, while the taxpayers payed for much of the world-class PNC Park – a spectacular park fit for a winner!
    I’ll say it again. If MLB doesn’t institute revenue sharing and salary caps – the small market teams will die and the Yankees will be playing with themselves.

  16. John Flebus - Nov 5, 2009 at 12:31 PM

    I like your point however when the take players from other teams (CC Sabaith from the Brewers) they lessened the strength of other teams.

  17. Bill@TDS - Nov 5, 2009 at 12:33 PM

    And the lowest ranking team, payroll wise, to make the playoffs were the Twins came in at a staggering 24th place. Now, I have heard and read, but haven’t confirmed that the Twins owners are billionaires like the Steinbrenner family, they just chose not to invest in their team.
    This is the most ridiculous argument people like to make. Yes, the Pohlads are billionaires. No, they do not invest more money in their team than they can make back plus a tidy profit. Neither does any other owner. You don’t get to be a billionaire by making investments you know you’re going to lose on. The owner’s personal wealth does not, and should not, have anything at all to do with the amount of money he/she/they spend(s) on the team. It’s all about the revenue the team itself brings in. And that’s the huge, huge advantage the Yankees have over everyone else.
    Steinbrenner deserves a lot of credit for creating that bottomless revenue (not that playing in New York wasn’t a nice little assist there), but not for being “willing” to spend it.

  18. jrl - Nov 5, 2009 at 12:33 PM

    The Mets management gave hundreds of millions of dollars to Bernie Madoff to invest. The Yanks management put hundreds of millions of dollars into players as an investment. The difference is obvious. Plus, all of MLB benefits from the Yankees in terms of increased attendance when the Yanks play out of town and in terms of TV/ad revenues because viewership increases substantially when the Yanks are playing.

  19. Church of the Perpetually Outraged - Nov 5, 2009 at 12:34 PM

    The Yankees are really the Bankees because they TRY to buy The BEST players. When the Yankees LOSE thy are the CRANKEES !
    Because they were SUPPOSE to win ! Get it.
    JAB4

    And you are a moron
    @ twinsfan:

    I fear exactly what MM pointed out. There is something seriously wrong with MLB if Mauer ends up in NY. He grew up in MN and is the face of the franchise, but there is no way the Twins will be able to offer him what NY will offer…I don’t blame the Yankees for this, but I do blame baseball.

    Blame ownership as it’s their fault if they let a marquee free agent hit the market. For a perfect example of what to do, see Longoria, Evan and Ramirez, Hanley. Two players, locked up young, that kept them under team control far beyond their initial contract. The same should have been done to Mauer a year or two ago. Once he gets to the last year of his deal, why wouldn’t a guy like Mauer test the FA market?

  20. Church of the Perpetually Outraged - Nov 5, 2009 at 12:38 PM

    Absolutely right you are “The Doc”. The Yankees keep winning hollow victories…

    You’ve placed your anger in two different spots, let’s see which is more based in reality over the “sad state of baseball”, the

    Yankees

    or

    Now, the pride-less owners [Bucs]

    .
    But yes, it’s always someone else’s fault.

  21. Bob - Nov 5, 2009 at 12:39 PM

    Money talks, B.S. walks. The Yankees organization has the money, so they buy the best players and put them out there. They still have to play up to what they get paid, but this year, they did.
    Still the best team money can buy.

  22. twinsfan - Nov 5, 2009 at 12:41 PM

    Omega – while the family that owns the Twins (the Pohlads) are billionaires, or at least Carl Pohlad was before his death, your argument still misses the point. Your argument assumes that the small market teams would be profitable if their owners spent like the Yankees. Comparing the Yankees and the Twins, the New York metropolitan area consists of roughly 22 million people and the Minneapolis-St.Paul metropolitan are consists of roughly 3.5 million people. Even if the Pohlads spent like the Steinbrenners, the Steinbrenners can do so profitable because the cable television revenues, ballpark revenues, sales of merchandise, etc. from their larger market will always guarantee that they are a profitable team, even when they make bad investments (Sheffield, Pavano, Johnson, Brown, etc.). If the Twins were to spend the same amount of money that they Yankees spend, even if they won the World Series every year, I doubt their market could pay back the Pohlads for such investment. There is no way a small market can afford a $200+ payroll. No owner, large market or small market, will continue to fund a team if the market cannot possibly pay it back. I don’t discount the WS wins of the Yankees prior to the advent of free agency, but after free agency, their ability to outspend the other teams will always give them greater odds of winning the WS. This year, the Yankees brought in some quality individuals to supplement their solid cast of players and it made all the difference in the world. However, ask yourself, how good would some of the small market teams (i.e., Twins, Rockies, Rays) be if they were able to add to front of the rotation starters and a triple crown threat to their existing rosters? If they could afford to do the same, the Yankees would not have been WS champs this year. So don’t gloat too much or hate on the small market fans for venting their frustrations at the system.

  23. Jim - Nov 5, 2009 at 12:42 PM

    Frankly, if you don’t think money buys talent (and championships) you are beyond hope – just like the powers that be in MLB.
    Keep rooting for your paper Yankees. MLB is dying and will be dead in a few decades without change. Atta boy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  24. Indians Fan - Nov 5, 2009 at 12:43 PM

    So the Yankees won, big deal.
    When you have “the best team money can buy”, what would you expect.
    I hope it rains on the parade in NYC today.

  25. ZK - Nov 5, 2009 at 12:47 PM

    The Yanks have always had a high payroll, dating back to when they aquired Babe Ruth (and the media was shocked by his high pay). I just find it sad when they can’t win with a team of all stars.

1 2 3 4 5 … 28
Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

More HardballTalk
Back to Homepage
Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. R. Oswalt (6632)
  2. A. Pujols (5631)
  3. R. Howard (4731)
  4. R. Halladay (4599)
  5. C. Utley (4161)
  1. E. Frieri (3801)
  2. M. Adams (3554)
  3. C. Quentin (3522)
  4. A. Craig (3362)
  5. M. Kemp (3297)
Search player news