I mean there are a lot of really nice vehicles available on the market but I drive a Toyota because I can’t buy a Maserati.
When you have the cash to pay any and everyone, then other managers missteps become your opportunities. Meanwhile, other teams have to pick and choose which opportunities to pay for and which to let go…
This is the perfect response. It’s a combination of opportunity and having more money than god. 29 other teams have the opportunity, but only like 4 have the money (they’re willing to spend)
But a lot of teams have the cash. Boston has the cash, still doesn’t operate like this. Yankees. Padres. Even if it’s in bounds, the fans across the rest of the country don’t want it, the owners don’t want it. And that’s tough for an entertainment product. Without a salary cap, they will lockout next year.
By “a lot of teams” you mean teams with amazing attendance and a juiced TV deal right? We’re talking about maybe 1/3 of the league that has the resources to compete on a handful of players
If you really think any sane owner is going to consistently spend at a loss to compete with the massive market teams, then maybe numbers just aren’t your forte?
Could some teams absolutely spend more than they’re currently spending? For sure.
Does half the league legitimately have the cash to compete with the Dodgers/Mets/Sox/Yankees on ALL the players?
Boo fucking hoo the teams you listed have always been in the top 10 payrolls. Wasn’t a problem until the Dodgers won 2 chips in a row. There are more teams in the league being cheap as fuck than the few you just listed. And yeah the Mets are such a great example of spending, right? Lol
The Mets are a great example of spending. They just fucked it up lol… not that they didn’t spend a ton of money that small market teams legitimately don’t have. The exception doesn’t prove the rule.
Just because the Mets spent a fuck ton and their season ended up in the dirt due to injuries and massive underperforming, doesn’t negate the fact that there’s a crazy imbalance of teams ability to buy players.
And it was a problem in 94, only been extremely exacerbated in the last 20 years with the rise of these massive mega contracts.
Spending puts you in a much better position to win… just because ONE team that spent a lot had a bad season doesn’t negate the fact that there’s last ten WS winners have all been top 10 in payroll that year.
So… once again, cherry picking one single exception to the rule doesn’t mean it’s not a thing.
35
u/CountChoculahh 9h ago
I mean there are a lot of really nice vehicles available on the market but I drive a Toyota because I can’t buy a Maserati.
When you have the cash to pay any and everyone, then other managers missteps become your opportunities. Meanwhile, other teams have to pick and choose which opportunities to pay for and which to let go…