Buster Olney
The NYY are not interested in signing Matt Holliday. They’ll talk to Boras to keep other bidders honest, but corner outfield not a priority for them.
This may come as a shock to most, as he is the top free agent on the market and the Yankees are in need of an outfielder.
Is this the right move to avoid Holliday? Can you say with absolute certainty that the Yankees will not have Holliday in 2010?
FV- I know I made my predictions about the Yankees landing Holliday, but after reading this I have to say that the NYY will past on him. I guess you guys will get what you want, another thing I have to give the Yankees credit for, (if in fact this is what they decide to do), is for letting the rest of the baseball world know that they are not interested in Matt Holliday. Boras now needs to back off & stop comparing Holliday to players he's not to be compared with, now other lesser market teams will not be as priced out & have a better chance in the market, and teams like the Mets won't have to feel like they are getting jerked for having to overpay just because of the market their in. I'm all for players making their money, but I'm not for overpaying them. Players today make a lot of money anyways, sometimes to the point where it is sickening to the real fans of the game.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
Why would it be a shoc to most? The Yankees have said that they would probably not pursue Holliday and especailly after what Boras said what he's going to want. I know this might sound like a shocker to you and most but yes, even the Yankees have a limit as to what they will spend on talent. They went all out last off-season so it looks like they won't be doing that again this off season.
Yes, all these guys make way too much. Its silly when you think about it but think about this, if the players are making so much can you imagine what the owners are making that they can afford to dole out that type of scratch? Another point, people complain when athlethes make a lot of money but no one says a peep when Tom Cruise or Brad Pitt make 20 million to make 1 movie. Why is that? Discuss.
It was a surprise to most because this is what the Yankees do, since like 2001, I told you that they might not do it this year just because they won this season & that’s what they might do, & about the owners making a lot more money then the players, hey that's the way it always been, in anything, If I owned a pizzeria I will make a lot more then the workers who will make chump change compare to me the owner, they are the owners of their business and that’s the way I expect it to be, never do I expect the players to be making more then the owners, sounds like when Danny tried to say that I thought this way.
Yea Tom Cruise and Brad Pitt making all that money for 1 movie is also ludicrous but that’s another story, but the same thing, the only difference is that a movie will not lose it’s integrity where as the game of baseball does with players caring more about the money then the game, it becomes me me me.
That’s just the way I see it.
Fair enough.
Anyways, Joe Mauer won the MVP today, well deserved. That guy had a hell of a season.
Not a surprise, Mauer in the AL and Pujols in the NL.
starting from the beginning. at what point is it too much? One million is a lot of money.
Baseball has lost integrity? Tell me when that was.
Before the steroid era or after?
I think Selig would lose integrity if he doesn't get on this replay thing.
Danny I thought I lost you there, long holiday vacation?
So when did baseball begin to lose its integrity, before or after steroids?
It don’t matter, but it was right about when we 1st started to here about the drug, players began to cheat the game and themselves, & with the players performing better as far as the long ball goes, it meant more fans which also meant more money for the players so it became more about the individual then about the team. Still a great game but not like it use to be, just look at the stolen base, before steroids guys like Henderson and Vince Coleman were stealing 100 bases but then with the power game intact to the point where middle infielders were going deep on a regular basis the art of the steal then took a back seat, and so did part of the game. Before steroid we didn’t here about guys like Scott Boras, and then came smaller ballparks to follow. It’s a combination of things, but steroids is the main culprit IMO for the decline as far as baseball going negative.
I think you're wrong. Like it or not, Steroids corresponds directly with baseball's resurgence. You are for not. I like it. We may not have got the fans there "cleanly" but they are here to stay. So I am grateful. Certain things are blessings in disguise.
Well I'm not going to disagree with you on that, steroids did boost baseball, but baseball was fine before the strike, sure more fans jumped on the baseball bandwagon once it resumed play fueled by the HR which of course was helped by steroids, but these are the same bandwagon fans we see a lot today in Yankee stadium, you know the ones who came after 1996. These fans we can do without because it is these kind of fans with the money who pushed out the real fans. Yes baseball is more popular today & steroids played a big part on that, but to me it cheapened the game too. Oh well let's move on.
Post a Comment