|
|
#1
10-03-2006, 01:22 PM
|
|||
|
|||
What constitutes buying a championship in baseball?
This is a question I was wondering the other day(as a Yankee fan). Are the Yankees the only team that will ever be accused of buying championships? for instance, if the mets win the world series, did they buy a championship. the only important home grown mets are reyes and wright, and undobutely those two are a major part of the team, but delgado, beltran, lo duca, pedro, glavine, wagner, etc etc were all acquired via salary dump trades or free agency. So is that "buying a title"?
|
|
#4
10-03-2006, 01:30 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: What constitutes buying a championship in baseball?
it's all semantics and it's all relative. 100% of the teams pay their players a healthy salary.
if a team is percieved as having acquired their team through Free Agent signings or were the beneficiary of a 1 sided salary-dump trade (Abreu?), some consider that 'buying' and not as 'legit' b/c the team did not develop these players through the draft or through mutually beneficial trades, non $ influences trades. Most of the big money teams have done a lot of "buying".
|
|
#5
10-03-2006, 01:30 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: What constitutes buying a championship in baseball?
When the Red Sox won the WS, they had 1 home grown player, and the 2nd highest payroll in baseball.
But they were David beating Goliath!
|
|
#6
10-03-2006, 01:31 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: What constitutes buying a championship in baseball?
paying your players
|
|
#7
10-03-2006, 01:34 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: What constitutes buying a championship in baseball?
[ QUOTE ]
When the Red Sox won the WS, they had 1 home grown player, and the 2nd highest payroll in baseball. But they were David beating Goliath! [/ QUOTE ] I love how the Red Sox are trying to fight the power, but are essentially Evil Empire Lite.
|
|
#9
10-03-2006, 01:35 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: What constitutes buying a championship in baseball?
[ QUOTE ]
When the Red Sox won the WS, they had 1 home grown player, and the 2nd highest payroll in baseball. But they were David beating Goliath! [/ QUOTE ] I'm not gonna sit and here say the Red Sox huge salary didn't have anything to do with their win, but your stat is misleading. They traded home grown players for Pedro (only afterwards signing him to a big deal), traded for Cabrera and Meintk in non salary driven deals, and traded for Derek Lowe and Varitek in non salary driven deals. so none of these guys were home grown, but none were bought either. Ortiz was signed for a bucket of balls. Manny, Foulke, Schilling - all these guys were bought.
|
|
#10
10-03-2006, 01:51 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: What constitutes buying a championship in baseball?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] When the Red Sox won the WS, they had 1 home grown player, and the 2nd highest payroll in baseball. But they were David beating Goliath! [/ QUOTE ] I'm not gonna sit and here say the Red Sox huge salary didn't have anything to do with their win, but your stat is misleading. They traded home grown players for Pedro (only afterwards signing him to a big deal), traded for Cabrera and Meintk in non salary driven deals, and traded for Derek Lowe and Varitek in non salary driven deals. so none of these guys were home grown, but none were bought either. Ortiz was signed for a bucket of balls. Manny, Foulke, Schilling - all these guys were bought. [/ QUOTE ] This is true, however, there is no other team in baseball and i think this is especially true when the Sox won the world series, that has that sense of "team" that the sox have. Especially since most of the players on that roster were not "huge name" unlike the yankees where it's basically just an all-star roster.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
