Thursday, December 17, 2009
Now that the Yankees are working with a budget, I have to wonder whether or not this really makes sense. I'm not advocating the Yankees attempt to build a team purely based on signing expensive free agents, we've seen where that leads. However, if the right piece is out there, I'd hate to pass on it because we've already hit $185M or $195M on payroll. For any other team, I understand the need for a budget. But you are the biggest team in probably the biggest baseball market in the country, you have a license to print money, what's with the stinginess all of a sudden? I'm not writing this b/c I feel the Yanks should have gone after any particular player, I'm just wondering whether it makes sense to keep the budget under $200M just for the sake of keeping it under $200M. I'd like to know the reason why suddenly a team with almost infinite financial resources needs a self-imposed budget cap. I'm fine with trying to maximize value, and I don't want to see more Giambies and Sheffields, but I would like to know that we're imposing a budget for a reason, and not just because Hal likes the smaller numbers. The great thing about George Steinbrenner is that he always invested in the team. The team itself regularly showed losses (more than made up for by other parts of the Yankees organization) b/c of the willingness to spend. It made the Yankees the most competitive team of the decade (we didn't always win, but no team matches us in play-off appearances). So, I just want to know why all of a sudden it's important that the Yanks payroll come in below some arbitrary figure.