This is dan's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following dan's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
dan
Recent Activity
"Given the history of the sport -- even its recent history -- this statement makes no sense." If your post was suppose to be a response to mine, I'm guessing I wasn't clear, since it had nothing to do with my comment. The author pointed at other sports with salary caps that had dynasties and then at baseball with a lack of a salary cap and no dynasties. The lack of dynasties in baseball has nothing to do with having no salary cap. It's simply more difficult to guarantee victory in baseball, where 2 pitchers getting hot in a 5 game series is trouble for anyone. But it does give a team a much better chance to reach the playoffs and have a chance, which the yankees (and red sox) do every year. "the payroll floor for 2009 would almost certainly be in the $100 million range. 58% of league revenue, as the players in NFL get, would be, in baseball, an average team payroll of a hair under $120 million." So the yankeees would only outspend the average mlb team by 80 million? Am I reading that correctly?
Toggle Commented Dec 27, 2008 on Memo to Corporate America: Be Like the Yanks at YFSF
1 reply
"He also notes, for those advocating such a system, that leagues with salary caps are more prone to dynasties than those without." And he's only the 4.3 millionth person to point this out. Surely you see the mistake in your logic. This has nothing to do with salary caps. Baseball has fewer dynasties because it's baseball, not because there's no salary cap. Being baseball, the yankees can only guarantee they'll be competitive almost every single year, and they do that. Fortunately in the playoffs a hot pitcher or two can give any team a chance.
Toggle Commented Dec 27, 2008 on Memo to Corporate America: Be Like the Yanks at YFSF
1 reply