November 12, 2015
Peter Solari Follow @4PeteSakeNY
Joel Sherman has an interesting piece in Wednesday's New York Post, which every Yankee fan should check outlining the team's more conservative approach to doing business since George Steinbrenner passed away several years back.
Essentially, the Yankees are attempting to model themselves after the Oakland Athletics of the early 2000's, but as Sherman points out, they're still in "win now" mode, which I find to be a bit contradictory.
Steinbrenner's sons, Hank and Hal, have been running the team since their father's passing, but don't have much to show for it. And while it's cliche, it's appropriate, so I'll say it: Brian Cashman would be out of a job if George were still alive, and he wouldn't stand for this.
Does the Yankees' new approach make some sense? Of course. Nobody is going to argue that when you sign aging players, like C.C. Sabathia and Mark Teixeira, to long term deals, that there won't be any negative, lingering effects at the end of those contracts. Everybody already knew that when those guys were brought in. They all forgot about it when they helped the team win the World Series in 2009.
In the end, the Yankees, whose resources are pretty much limitless, will have to pay Sabathia and Teixeira for a few more years. They're the Yankees! They're not some small-market team. If a team like Cincinnati or even Kansas City ever took a shot on guys like Teixeira and missed, they could potentially be setting themselves back for years. The Yankees don't have to worry about those things. They can always go out and spend more to cover up their mistakes. Most teams can't. So while this approach may make sense to some clubs, it really doesn't if you're the Yankees.
And remember, two players Sherman uses as examples, Sabathia and Teixeira, were major contributors to a World Series championship. Is that such a bad trade-off? They win you the World Series, and you pay them for a few extra years. It sounds like winning formula. In fact, it's a proven winner. And whenever the Yankees win the World Series, they stand to make even more money.
I'm not an economic illiterate. Obviously my approach isn't for everybody. But this is the Yankees! They've had bloated payrolls for years. Are they suffering? Are they no longer profitable? Of course not! They're consistently one of the most valuable sports franchises in the world. Let's not pretend they're the Oakland A's and need to cut costs in order to field a team. The Yankees have been operating this way for a long time, and there's never been an inkling of financial trouble.
Why is trading away a guy like Brett Gardner such a good idea? What sense does it make to trade a guy who is still in his prime and can help you win now, for a bunch of prospects who can hopefully help you win someday? And how exactly does a move like that, equate to you being in "win now" mode?
Perhaps bloated payrolls will always be George Steinbrenner's legacy, but so will celebrating at the end of October. Since his sons have taken over the reigns, they've struggled to even make the playoffs. And if you've convinced yourself that an appearance in the wild card game is the postseason, you're making my point for me.
This Yankees' product has been trending downward since Hank and Hal showed up on the scene. Now they want to follow the Oakland Athletics into obscurity. Spare me, please!
