but that's what I'm saying

"buying" a team doesn't mean a thing anymore...and it doesn't really win you a World Series.

The only guys they "bought" that I'm jealous of are Puig (anyone could have had him for that reasonable contract) and Greinke.

I mean, I guess Josh Beckett has had a bounce back year to an extent but the other guys they bought (Gonzalez, Hanley, Crawford) have all regressed considerably and the in house talent they extended (Ethier and Kemp) have regressed to the point of Ethier (below replacement level; can't hit lefties) and Kemp (-1.2 WAR).

Spending money to spend money doesn't anger me, and it certainly doesn't win WS.

Franchises that develop talent in house, draft well, and spend well win WS. The Cardinals, for instance.

The age of buying rings died with the steroid era.

Didn't the last 10 WS champs all have payrolls over 100m.

Baseball is such an exhausting, long season that you've taken away these players HGH and amphetamines and the only ones who can keep up are the young guys.

Young teams are winning. Old teams are losing. Everyone wonders why pitching is so dominant now...well, hello...these players aren't all hopped up on biogenesis gummies while throwing back 5 "greenies" before the games...

The formula for winning in today's baseball is simple:

Be young. Have energy. Have good starting pitching. Have relievers who can throw 100 with a plus secondary pitch.

and don't have Billy Butler hitting fourth.

The Royals have a 92M payroll. What does 100M mean exactly?

The Red Sox figured it out two years ago when they salary dumped on the Dodgers and then won a World Series the next year.

It used to make me mad 10 years ago when the Yankees had a $250M payroll. Now? I just laugh.

Is anyone jealous of that Yankees roster? At all?

Like I said, the Dodgers (the new Yankees) have 5 or 6 DISASTER contracts and were simply saved by Yaisel Puig being the steal of the decade and Clayton Kershaw being God.

Even with Kershaw, though...Puig saved that team.

Carl Crawford, Adrian Gonzalez, and Josh Beckett certainly didn't. Neither did Hanley Ramirez.

Boston won it with 150m payroll.

The Dodgers and Yankees will never be hurt with bad contracts with those T.V Deals.

Yeah, I get it. Maybe they weren't a great point but again...

as a Royals fan, I can no longer be mad at teams with high payrolls. The Cardinals are consistently the best team in the NL and they never have a payroll higher than $120M (if it's even that high).

If you don't sign Albert Pujols and Josh Hamilton to $425M worth of contracts, develop your draft picks, give the ones with high ceilings early deals to buy out a couple of extra years, spend wisely in FA, hit a few international guys, etc...

you're just as well off as the Sox, the Yankees and the Dodgers.

Throwing $200M at Jacoby Ellsbury isn't going to buy you a WS.

Having $800M locked up in Hanley, Kemp, Ethier, Crawford, Beckett, Gonzalez, Chris Perez and Brian Wilson doesn't make me hate the Dodgers and envy their team.

You're right. It's an advantage. I just don't think it's nearly the advantage as it was during the steroid/amphetamine era because guys are starting to regress during their second contracts because they aren't cheating anymore.

We just saw the Milwaukee Bucks sell for $600M freaking dollars.

No team, with an honest owner, will be hurt by any bad contract anymore. MLB and NBA teams are more valuable than anyone thought. The TV contracts are going to continue to skyrocket and revenue sharing will still make even the smallest markets profitable no matter what they are doing.

I don't give a **** if the Yankees buy every A free agent on the market. Look around at the rosters in baseball...the best players are 28 and younger. And it's not even close.

The Yankees, sans Tanaka, are literally one of the worst teams in the AL.

I see Hootie is back.

I figured it out by the 4th post. I was waiting to see if anyone else picked up on it. It's like playing Name that Tune.

Top 6 payrolls:

Dodgers
Yankees
Phillies
Red Sox
Tigers
Angels

I guess I'm sort of glad the Royals aren't handing out $300M contracts to Albert Pujols. Or $125M contracts to Ryan Howard. Or Josh Hamilton. Or signing Miguel Cabrera to $30M a year through his age 42 season.

I just don't see the competitive advantage in handing out outrageous contracts to 2nd contract players who are all going to be 30+ in a young man's game.

I mean, the A's have only been doing this now for 10+ years. The Astros and Cubs are figuring it out...Dayton has been trying but for some reason the Royals can't develop hitters...

Bottom 6 payrolls:

Oakland
Cleveland
Pittsburgh
Tampa Bay
Miami
Houston

I think I could put together a better 25 man roster from the bottom 6 than I can from the top 6.

So I think I should try.

Well the only thing I can't get past is SP. Which, unfortunately, kind of crushes my entire premise. So, in short, I still think winning as a small market team is easier now, tenfold, than it was 10 years ago. You need to have a Clayton Kershaw before his $250M contract, though. Kind of like a David Price for Tampa Bay (before he gets a $250M contract from LAD, of course).

But the bottom 6 is LOADED with offensive talent that I would take over the top 6 any day of the week. They just don't have Kershaw, Tanaka, Greinke, Lester, Lee, Hamels, and Scherzer.

They have Jose Fernandez, David Price and a bunch of young guys with Kershaw like talent that haven't reached Kershaw like levels (see Gerrit Cole).

So yes. The only advantage I see in bottomless pockets is the ability to A) sign your developed pitchers to MEGA deals or B) sign developed pitchers like Greinke to MEGA deals.

Of course, teams like the Royals can't sign a Tanaka because if he tears his UCL they are literally ****ed.

So yes, I get it. I'm just not as jaded anymore about teams like the Yankees and Dodgers buying success. It makes me kind of laugh because I don't know how that's even fun to cheer for. Almost like when LeBron went to Miami.

I think it would be a lot more fun to cheer for Alex Gordon winning a WS with Kansas City and a lot more gratifying for Alex Gordon to win a WS in Kansas City than signing in NY and winning a WS.

But again, I'm sure the A's will flail out in round 1 like they always do but they are a team in the bottom 6 that is a perennial contender and a team I could see winning the WS this year. In baseball, all you have to do is make the playoffs, get hot, and then you win. It's not like the NBA where you have to be the best team. Just the hottest team.

As much as people talk about payrolls, baseball has shown the most remarkable parity of any major sport. Better parity than what you see in basketball or football.

The Yankees spend a shitload of money. But the real reason for their dynasty was homegrown talent. Once they ignored their farm system and started buying replacements, that was the end of it. Their farm system produced guys like Rivera, Jeter, Posada, Bernie Williams, Cano. Their farm system hasn't been worth a shit in years.

if your team had the money to hand out insane contracts you wouldnt mind one bit, because in the end it doesnt hurt the team! Dodgers could cut Either and Crawford and it wouldnt hurt them one bit, it would actually help them as they suck now. lol

Well, they knew Puig was going to be pretty good. Its why they went to Mexico and signed him within 30 min. They are talking about calling up Joc fairly soon. Ethier and Crawfords days are numbered. Its about ****ing time.

Dee worked his ass off, after last season, they told him, if your going to stick with this team, your going to have to play 2nd and you need to put on more weight. he did it and his whole game improved. He earned his spot. There was no scrap heap, going around 5 major league teams. Talent has always been there.