2007 MLB HOF Ballot: Third Base
| 11
|
by user Timothy Moreland(Bball3345)
In seven days, the Halls of Cooperstown may include additional plaques, as writers will vote on the 2007 Class. I will evaluate each eligible player in the days leading up to the results. There are three candidates at third base: Bobby Bonilla, Ken Caminiti, and Scott Brosius.
| 2007 MLB HOF Ballot |
| 2007 MLB HOF Ballot: First Base |
| 2007 MLB HOF Ballot: Third Base |
| 2007 MLB HOF Ballot: Shortstop |
| 2007 MLB HOF Ballot: Outfield/DH |
| 2007 MLB HOF Ballot: Pitchers (and Wrap-up) |
This article will evaluate players similar to this previous article. Also, check out Handicapping the 2007 Baseball Hall of Fame Ballot for another perspective of this year's ballot.
As a sidenote, there was not an article on second baseman, because there are no second baseman on the ballot this year.
JAWS
First, each player will be evaluated by their JAWS score, which was created by Jay Jaffe at BaseballProspectus.com. The JAWS score uses the WARP(wins above replacement player) stat by adding the player's seven best seasons and their career WARP total, then dividing by two([PEAK + Career]/2).
Bobby Bonilla
Career: 85.2 Peak: 60.2 JAWS: 72.7
1989 and 1991 were absolutely great seasons for Bonilla and worthy of a Hall-of-Fame player. Outside of these two seasons, Bonilla was a borderline all-star or a slightly above-average bat with a mediocore glove. Defensively, he was above average at first base, but slightly below average at third and in the outfield. By the age of 35 Bonilla was useless to have on a major league roster; yet, he stuck around for four more years.
Ken Caminiti
Career: 83.2 Peak: 62.2 JAWS: 72.7
Caminiti had a three-year peak surrounding his best season by far, 1996, in which he admitted to using steroids. After a tremendous season in 1997, Caminiti immediately became irrelevant at the age of 35. His glove at third base was strong until the end of his career and his batting was nothing more than average at best outside of his three year bubble of excellence.
Scott Brosius
Career: 44.4 Peak: 39.7 JAWS: 42.1
Brosius' career value of 44.4 falls way short of Bonilla's and Caminiti's Peak values. He had a late start to his career, not having a full season until he was 28 years old. By the age of 34, Brosius was already out of the game. 1998 is Brosius' only season with an argument at Hall-of-Fame status and that is largely due to his fantastic defense at third. Brosius sports a .323 OBP and a .422 SLG.
Hall of Fame Scores
Black Ink measures the number of times a player led the league in a category. Gray Ink measures a player's frequency in the top ten. HOF Standards provides a value to a player's career. HOF Monitor measures how likely it is that player will be voted in.
Further explanations can be found here: Baseball Reference explanation
Bobby Bonilla
Black Ink: 3
Gray Ink: 96
HOF Standards: 32.0
HOF Monitor: 64.5
Bonilla led the league in games and doubles once each. He never won the MVP but finished second once and third once. Also, Bonilla was the highest paid player from 1992-94 with a salary of just over six million dollars.
Ken Caminiti
Black Ink: 0
Gray Ink: 28
HOF Standards: 24.8
HOF Monitor: 38.0
Caminiti never led the league in any category; however, he did win the 1996 MVP, which, again, he admitted to using steroids that season. In no season outside of 1996 did Caminit get a single vote for MVP. Also, he was a three-time All-Star.
Scott Brosius
Black Ink: 0
Gray Ink: 0
HOF Standards: 12.6
HOF Monitor: 19.0
Brosius stayed off of the leaderboards entirely. Brosius was an All-Star (once), a Gold-Glover (once) and an MVP (of the World Series). He never received a vote for MVP of the league.
Verdict
Bonilla: Out: He was a solid starting player who occasionally played like a Hall-of-Famer.
Caminiti: Out: See Bonilla, but add "likely due to steroids" at the end.
Brosius: Out: He was nothing but an average bat with a good glove.
All three are O-U-T. Too bad, Bobby Bonilla coulda/shoulda... I still remember when he was in Pittsburgh with Barry and Bobby Bo was THE MAN. The money and fame got to him. Caminiti has a CANNON of an arm and pretty good glove, but you woulda never heard of him without the 96 roid season... another "too bad" story...
Why why why in the Hell is Brosius even ON the ballot??? Whoever votes for him should be kicked out of the BBWAA...
I'm not saying that he should be voted in. Just sayin that he's not garbage. Was a perf. fit for the yankees, many yanks fans would rather have him and his production as opposed to A-Rod.
And how dare you deface Jeter without supporting arguments.better than A-Rod - You are a complete Effing Moron. Smash your keyboard on your head and you'll make MORE sense.
Deface Jeter? That's what I do... (with a little help from Avon) he just makes it easier each year for me. Captain November CHOKED that series away... and I enjoyed it thoroughly.
Want supporting argument? Name the ONLY Captain to lead his team to a Game 7 loss after being up 3-0 in the playoffs...
Name another player who got his nickname from a series he LOST? (hint hint, November 2001)
Name another WSMVP to strikeout more times than hit safely AND only drive in 2 rbis (on solo HRs)... Yanks haven't won since their bogus leader won that award... Year 2000, the Curse of Jeets; Clap Clap Clap clapclap!
nice TEAM captain you have there... Can you say "Living in Fantasy/Denying Reality"??
Yankees fans measure things in terms of "intangibles", "mystique" and "aura"... that's why they can't face the truth about ANYTHING.
Year 2000 clap clap clapclapclap!A-Rod Year Round Tm Opp G AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI BB SO SB CS Outs TB RC RC27 2004 ALDS NYY MIN 4 19 3 8 3 0 1 3 2 1 2 1 12 14 6.5 14.56 ALCS NYY BOS 7 31 8 8 2 0 2 5 4 6 0 0 23 16 5.5 6.44 2005 ALDS NYY LAA 5 15 2 2 1 0 0 0 6 5 1 1 14 3 1.2 2.28 2006 ALDS NYY DET 4 14 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 13 1 0.1 0.15 Total 20 79 13 19 6 0 3 8 12 16 3 2 62 34 11.4 4.95 Brosius Year Round Tm Opp G AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI BB SO SB CS Outs TB RC RC27 1998 ALDS NYY TEX 3 10 1 4 0 0 1 3 0 3 0 1 7 7 2.1 8.10 ALCS NYY CLE 6 20 2 6 1 0 1 6 2 4 0 0 14 10 3.6 7.01 WS NYY SDP 4 17 3 8 0 0 2 6 0 4 0 0 9 14 6.6 19.76 1999 ALDS NYY TEX 3 10 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 9 2 0.2 0.60 ALCS NYY BOS 5 18 3 4 0 1 2 3 1 4 0 0 14 12 3.2 6.09 WS NYY ATL 4 16 2 6 1 0 0 1 0 5 0 0 10 7 2.6 7.09 2000 ALDS NYY OAK 5 17 0 3 1 0 0 1 1 4 0 0 14 4 0.9 1.71 ALCS NYY SEA 6 18 2 4 0 0 0 0 2 3 0 1 15 4 1.0 1.80 WS NYY NYM 5 13 2 4 0 0 1 3 2 2 0 0 9 7 2.8 8.40 2001 ALDS NYY OAK 5 17 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 16 1 0.1 0.10 ALCS NYY SEA 5 16 3 3 2 0 0 2 0 6 0 0 13 5 0.9 1.95 WS NYY ARI 7 24 1 4 2 0 1 3 0 8 0 0 20 9 1.5 2.03 Total 58 196 19 48 8 1 8 30 8 46 0 2 150 82 21.7 3.91
BBall: agreed on Brosius performance. But that doesn't matter as far as yankee fans are concerned. 98 does and the HR in 2001. Again, I'm not even a stark defender of this, but just sayin that that's how most yankee fans see it.
Lastly, nowhere above was intangiles, mystic, or aura mentioned as a desired characteristic. Just comparing performances in the postseason and arguing that perhaps the bronx isn't the best environment for A-Rod to succeed.Funny how A-rod does good in one game in the playoffs this year (and they win) - it gets thrown out...
Brosius has one good game in a series (that they lose) and it gets remembered forever... Maybe I should become a Yankee fan, sounds like a fun time, not needing a brain and all...
Your comment on the bronx being bad for A-Rod. Name the ONLY Yankee MVP in the last 20 seasons...PLEASE? maybe it's not the Bronx, but Yankee fans that are the problem. You certainly make a great pile of evidence to back it up...One game does not a series make...
4 games or 7, with me at third (and YES, it is very possible I could go yard twice in one game), Yanks still get rings in '98.
How about you attempt logic and realize you're stuck at 23 Championships if not for Mo Rivera.Mo shut the door on the A's, not Jeter. Mo closed the "best record ever" Mariners DOWN. Mo kept the D Backs from getting up 3-0.
JETER misplayed the relay on
JETER overplayed the bag on Rivera's "throwing Error" on Damian Miller's sac bunt. If JETER was so great (or as great as everyone says he is), INNING OVER!
THEN when Blomack improbably gets a double, JETER misplays the relay and overtries to get the runner at home (where he had NO chance) and instead allows BOTH runners to advance further into scoring position.
Mo beaned Counsell (same as the intentional walk to load the bases and create a force)
JETER wasn't playing in the right spot when Gonzo hit his bloop series-ender (Kinda hard to blame Mo for giving up such a monster bloop). If Jeter is playing at double play depth with one out and a power (57 regular season HRs) lefty up, it's RIGHT AT HIM and probably a double play, inning over!@
Then Brosius could have been a hero in the 10th... Bwaaa ha ha ha haaaaa!!!!
But Jeter was still drifting/trying to create magic and NOT playing his position, yet it's Mo's fault>?
You are delusional/on drugs, or not on ENOUGH drugs!And only if woody had gone to the police, this never would've happened.
Mo's contribution has been consistent over the last 10 yrs whether the yanks won/lost the WS. You claim that Jeter did not contribute early while they were winning and further imply that he has negatively contributed towards them not advancing recently. So be it.
Yet, again, you choose to ignore that he actually contributed positively (see this yrs postseason stats). Besides that, you choose to ignore that A-Rod has laid goose eggs in a manner of speaking in his last two postseasons. Now, of course the lack of contribution from other yanks is equally, if not more, significant that A-Rod's and Jeter's for that matter.
But Yankee fans hold A-Rod to a higher level than the rest of the yank contributors, if not Jeter. That is a result of his contract, his apparent success in reg. season and prev. seasons, his apparant lack of media-savviness (cannot deflect a hard question)/ negative image and his perceived feud w/ Jeter. These could be real or flawed perceptions, but they are real perceptions that Brosius never had attributed to him, despite his being an obviously inferior overall player.And by your logic, if Jesus Jeter would have hit 2 or 3 more November Home Runs (meaning a second or third), Mo wouldn't have even needed to pitch.
And while we're at it... WHO did Brosius and Jeter hit their "Famous" HRs off of??? Yum-Yum Kim! Big whoop... (like shooting fish in a barrel)ALDS Regular Season Player G AB BA OBP SLG OPS AB BA OPS OPS+/- *Bobby Abreu 4 15 0.333 0.412 0.400 0.812 548 0.297 0.886 -0.074 #Melky Cabrera 2 3 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 460 0.280 0.751 -0.751 *Robinson Cano 4 15 0.133 0.133 0.133 0.266 482 0.342 0.890 -0.624 *Johnny Damon 4 17 0.235 0.278 0.412 0.690 593 0.285 0.841 -0.151 *Jason Giambi 3 8 0.125 0.300 0.500 0.800 446 0.253 0.971 -0.171 Derek Jeter 4 16 0.500 0.529 0.938 1.467 623 0.343 0.900 +0.567 *Hideki Matsui 4 16 0.250 0.250 0.312 0.562 172 0.302 0.887 -0.325 Andy Phillips 1 1 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 246 0.240 0.675 -0.675 #Jorge Posada 4 14 0.500 0.562 0.786 1.348 465 0.277 0.866 +0.482 Alex Rodriguez 4 14 0.071 0.071 0.071 0.142 572 0.290 0.915 -0.773 Gary Sheffield 3 12 0.083 0.083 0.083 0.166 151 0.298 0.805 -0.639 #B. Williams 1 3 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 420 0.281 0.768 -0.768 Total 4 134 0.246 0.289 0.388 0.677 0.285 0.824 -0.147 ALDS Regular Season Player G ERA W L SV IP W L SV IP ERA ERA+/- Mike Mussina 1 5.14 0 1 0 7 15 7 197 3.51 +1.63 Chien-Ming Wang 1 4.05 1 0 0 6.7 19 6 1 218 3.63 +0.42 *Randy Johnson 1 7.94 0 1 0 5.7 17 11 205 5.00 +2.94 Scott Proctor 3 2.25 0 0 0 4 6 4 1 102 3.52 -1.27 Jaret Wright 1 10.12 0 1 0 2.7 11 7 140 4.49 +5.63 Brian Bruney 3 3.38 0 0 0 2.7 1 1 21 0.87 +2.51 Kyle Farnsworth 2 0.00 0 0 0 2 3 6 6 66 4.36 -4.36 Cory Lidle 1 20.25 0 0 0 1.3 12 10 171 4.85 +15.40 Mariano Rivera 1 0.00 0 0 0 1 5 5 34 75 1.80 -1.80 *Ron Villone 1 0.00 0 0 0 1 3 3 80 5.04 -5.04 *Mike Myers 1 ERR 0 0 0 0 1 2 31 3.23 ERR Total 5.56 1 3 0 34 4.41 +1.15I guess I don't get why A-Rod is singled out by Yankee fans and the media for the Yankees' recent postseason trevails. Every Yankee batter but Jeter and Posada declined (some, like Sheffield, as significantly as Rodriguez), and so did more than half of the pitching staff (and the whole rotation, for that matter). The entire team should be held accountable for the loss, not just A-Rod.
why don't some of you kids that are stat geeks, come up with a-rods avg. in "CLUTCH" situations? i would be interested in seeing that.
maybe something like how does he hit in innings 7 - 9 in one or two run ballgames? how does he hit in the playoffs under similiar circumstances.
once you kids put down your copy of Moneyball, you can see the light. haha.I'm a Yankee fan. Just like several others over time (Leyritz, Brian Doyle, Dent, etc) Brosius was a below average player who hit the career lottery when he went to New York. And as far as the WS MVP goes, you know the old saying, even a blind dog finds a bone once in awhile.
A-Rod is not a New York guy, whether or not he likes the area or is pissed because he isnt the center of attention every freakin' minute I don't know. And he is a poor postseason performer, but so is Bonds.
And Jeter was in the correct position on Gonzo's hit, infield in, bases loaded, tie game bottom 9, where the hell else should he have been?
Hit two balls out Manny? Of the infield, right?With one out and bases loaded, tie game, WHY not play for the double play with Mo on the mound? Torre admitted afterwards he blew that. I know some people play to prevent the run, but JAY BELL was at third, JAY "Frozen Molasses" Bell... why would Jeter and his magnificent skill set need to play up?
Yes, I can go yard.
And I respectfully disagree. With Mo on the mound and JAY BELL at third, why does the SS and 2B need to play up? (Oh yeah, Jeter has a pusbag for an arm, that's why) But at the VERY worst, play at normal depth. Playing up is old school (conventional wisdom is why the world IS this way), but it limits your infielder's reaction time and range. Do you want to get lucky (hit right at someone) or make a play?
Even with just one out, make SURE you keep the ball in the infield and you'll still have plenty of time to nail Bell at home...
Let the record show, IF they would have played the way I say, the inning is over we go extras... and Randy Johnson is out of the game (ph for in the 9th)... fortunately for the world, they didn't and the D-Backs won, HURRAY!!!!maybe getting a hit, driving in some runs when it matters rather than padding your stats when it doesn't. of course a-rods is good, but he is not great and he is not clutch no matter how many times you read moneyball in your bunkbed.
ask mommy and daddy if you can stay up late and do a little homework. what you are to do is compile some stats on a-holes batting stats in the 7th through 9th innings when the game is close (within one or two runs). then compile the same stats when he is in the postseason. just to warn you stat geeks, it's not pretty.
of course we won't do this cursory exercise because YOU ARE AFRAID WHAT YOU WILL FIND OUT> You will make fun and point to his padded stats against bad pitching, non-pressure situations. BUT YOU WILL NOT ACTUALLY DO THE HOMEWORK AND SEE THAT A-RODS IS BELOW AVG WHEN IT MATTERS.Clutch Stats, career A-Rod G GS PA AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI BB IBB SO HBP SH SF ROE GDP SB CS BA OBP SLG OPS +-+------------+----+----+-----+-----+----+----+---+---+---+----+----+---+----+---+----+----+----+---+----+---+-----+-----+-----+-----+ 2 outs, RISP 714 894 742 200 31 2 35 282 136 28 170 16 0 0 11 0 .270 .394 .458 .852 Late & Close 667 867 736 196 39 3 45 163 110 17 175 11 4 6 9 23 .266 .367 .511 .878 Tie Game 1427 2201 1872 565 111 5 133 357 280 15 403 30 7 12 26 46 .302 .399 .580 .979 Within 1 R 1646 3878 3317 1010 190 11 236 640 465 32 692 58 14 24 45 94 .304 .397 .582 .979 Within 2 R 1702 5096 4403 1315 236 14 293 824 581 40 926 66 15 31 59 119 .299 .386 .558 .944 Within 3 R 1721 5981 5184 1572 282 18 357 1003 661 47 1078 81 16 39 70 137 .303 .388 .571 .959 Within 4 R 1730 6581 5712 1737 316 22 396 1124 713 49 1203 89 16 51 77 152 .304 .387 .575 .962 Margin > 4R 660 1193 1055 330 48 4 68 223 107 10 201 17 0 14 15 35 .313 .381 .559 .940 Jeter G GS PA AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI BB IBB SO HBP SH SF ROE GDP SB CS BA OBP SLG OPS +-+------------+----+----+-----+-----+----+----+---+---+---+----+----+---+----+---+----+----+----+---+----+---+-----+-----+-----+-----+ 2 outs, RISP 686 869 737 226 35 7 16 292 123 16 172 9 0 0 10 0 .307 .412 .438 .850 Late & Close 655 894 741 215 30 3 21 121 108 15 161 22 17 6 10 23 .290 .393 .424 .817 Tie Game 1452 2408 2130 681 94 14 68 209 201 9 358 35 34 8 39 58 .320 .386 .473 .859 Within 1 R 1607 3991 3532 1155 168 24 113 402 340 18 589 58 46 15 54 100 .327 .394 .484 .878 Within 2 R 1646 5210 4599 1485 232 33 138 556 459 20 778 73 56 23 77 128 .323 .391 .478 .869 Within 3 R 1665 6028 5312 1706 267 36 153 653 540 24 911 87 61 28 97 141 .321 .391 .471 .862 Within 4 R 1674 6583 5803 1866 300 42 166 729 594 25 1006 93 63 30 103 154 .322 .392 .474 .866 Margin > 4 R 615 1128 987 284 47 8 17 131 111 1 185 22 1 7 21 24 .288 .370 .403 .773Fuck.
"compile some stats on a-holes batting stats in the 7th through 9th innings when the game is close (within one or two runs). then compile the same stats when he is in the postseason. just to warn you stat geeks, it's not pretty."
Yeah, that's why A-Rod has, like, 40 more RBI than your beloved, Godlike Derek Jeter in late and close situations, 150 more with a tie game, and he's OPS-ing 60 points higher. That's why A-Rod, as Tim points out, has a higher career OPS in every situation listed above. That's why I felt like swearing. Because you guys are dipshits.As a Yankee: OBP SLG OPS 2 outs, RISP 0.421 0.483 0.904 Late & Close 0.379 0.431 0.810 Tie Game 0.404 0.537 0.941 Within 1 R 0.409 0.558 0.967 Within 2 R 0.397 0.518 0.915 Within 3 R 0.395 0.532 0.927 Within 4 R 0.394 0.541 0.935 Margin > 4 R 0.411 0.589 1.000Gee, looks like production I'd like to have. But I guess there are not stats I can provide that will change the way 85% of Yankee fans think. Stats just can't capture what a choker A-Rod is. He just is. We know he's a choker because we read about it every day in the Post. His total lack of clutchness isn't something that could ever be adequately summed up by, you know, "numbers" or "evidence". He's a choker because Yankee fans want him to be a choker, and that's -- wait, why would you want your best player to be a choker? That makes no -- oh, well... such is the way of True Yankees. Joe DiMaggio would never let silly things like "logic" get in the way of his MVPs. It's that same that stats can't capture Derek Jeter's essence. He's more than a ballplayer. If you wanted to describe the most beautiful songbird in the world singing a Mozart sonata to an innocent child, would you use numbers to do so? You probably didn't hear about this because he hates publicity, but Derek Jeter saved Christmas this year. Unlike that grinch A-Rod, who once beat up a department-store Santa at Manhattan Mall. True story.
I feel bad for true Yankee fans. The loudmouthed IDIOT fans talk too much and say too little. great players have had bad playoffs... Mays, Ruth, even Jeter (several times).
ANYONE who says they'd rather have Brosius instead of A-Rod should no longer be allowed to claim themselves as a fan of sports and must be sterilized (or worse)Explain this to me: ALL of the Yanks are "great in the clutch" and A-Rod's not. A-Rod "kills bad pitching" and "produces in non-clutch" situations.
Using YOUR theory AF, ALL of the Yankees MUST suck unless it's "clutch" time. Because A-Rod produced better than ANY other Yankee over the course of 2006.
If the "other" Yankees are so clutch, WHY WOULD THE YANKEES EVER lose? ESPECIALLY SIX STRAIGHT YEARS in the playoffs (including several WITHOUT A-Rod)I don't judge people. You can root for whoever you want. I have friends that are Yankee fans, but they are baseball fans first and understand A-Rod's value and actually ROOT for the players on their team.
So when you desecrate and besmirch simple logic, I will feel compelled to defend my companion, "rational thought".
Anyway, it's not like some of you "AF"s are exactly a "man of mystery"... I might have to become a Yankees fan so I can show you pussies how to be a REAL fan!You guys (non- Yankee fans) are the first to chastise the organization, and as such us for defending them, when we bring on such a contract like A-Rod's. Claiming we are nothing more that bottomless wallets, on and on and on.
So then, as fans, we decide (whether it be sound-proof logic or semi-sound) to judge our players based on their performance in certain circumstances, isn't that hypocritical as well? You can't have it both ways (bash yank fans for supporting club when spending $ on players, bash yank fans for being critical of their player's performance). It's conveniant, easy for you (funny for us) when you criticize us regardless of what we say.
Could it be that Yankee fans are the A-Rods of the MLB fan world? Held to impossible standards, criticized when we tie our shoes?I criticize you for denying plain, cold hard facts and clear obvious baseball knowledge. A-Rod is your BEST player, the FRANCHISE'S BEST 3B ever, hell, the BEST Shortstop ever! and you continually rip him! That is Bass-Ackwards. WHAT kind of fan does that?
You admit, there is NO playoff team without the 'ONLY YANKEE MVP in 20 YEARS, A-Rod, then complain you didn't win in the playoffs because A-Rod sucks. WHAT did ANY of the other Yankees (cough, cough JETER) do that was SO much better than A-Rod IF YOU STILL LOST???What I dislike, and the reason is devolved into such standards is the ignorance with which many Yankee fans conduct themselves. I don't hate the Yankees, they're great, wonderful history, etc, etc. However, their fans take every word said as gospel, without realizing that these people have to make stuff up to sell magazines/newspapers and to get people to watch television. Their ignorant and spoiled fandom is what is most bothersome to me. Scott Brosius was just one player on a Yankee team that won a World Series. He wasn't very good. Alex Rodriguez is just one player one a Yankee team that hasn't won a World Series, and suddenly he stinks, and he needs traded. When a fan can even mention Brosius and Rodriguez in the same sentence, he should be banned from Yankee stadium. They are completely different players, one very very good, one blah.
The equating A'Rod to losing is ridiculous, just the same equating Brosius to winning is equally ridiculous. Yankee fans need to step back and look at it through normal (not jaded) eyes and realize that without A'Rod, these Yankee teams are significantly worse off, no matter the player you replace him with, they won't be as good, and that will affect the offensive and defensive numbers of everyone else on the team. Arguing to get rid of him is the most ridiculous thing in sports, and it makes me almost puke in my mouth when I hear about it.
And no, I don't hold Yankee fans to impossible standards. I know most of them are just bandwagoners because they live in the city or surround tri-state area. You stop the average person wearing a Yankee hat, and they have no idea the starting lineup. I don't critcize you when you tie your shoes. I critcize you when you blast/bemoan a player that every team that has ever stepped foot on a diamond would kill to have on their roster. That is when I criticize you.
Be critical of a player's performance, but understand a broader idea. If a guy goes 0-4, crappy day. If a guy is a Hall of Fame lock by age 28, understand what you have here. I would be willing to wager quite a sum that if more Yankees fans realized this, A'Rod would perform even better, if that's possible.Looked at baseball reference, Jeter's playoff performance... huh, he helped his team with a big fat L in the first column, supposedly, "The only one that matters"
That's 4 big fat L's in his last 5 playoff series.But when he sh*ts the bed night after night (apparently, perhaps:) and we see D. Ortiz hitting walkoffs every day, and we see the Marlins, Diamondbacks, Detroit beat us in postseasons with significantly less quality, then how can we not look within and question that maybe there's another way to win than the way we had approached it previously? Shouldn't we be obligated to do so? Why can't we question his makeup in those situations? Past performance is not necessarily indicative of future performance - how do they phrase that when referring to stocks, Manny?
Notice that Cashman has done well this offseason with offloading Sheff, Unit (officially en-route to Zona now), other players who haven't contributed in recent postseasons. A-Rod, if he continues his (perceived) downward spiral, will be offloaded as well.Those teams didn't beat you with "significantly less talent" (Don't forget Sport's Greatest Collapse Ever to the BoSox), they beat you with WHAT YOU DON'T have and should be BITCHING about not having - PITCHING!
Like most Yankee fans, you fail to recognize the onvious and instead go scapegoat hunting. WHERE WAS YOUR PITCHING AT? Signing Pettitte? That warmed my soul. Trading RJ? PLEASE get rid of the greatest lefty ever. Hey, sign Clemens... PLEASE DO- he's due for a comeback (to reality)
The problem with the Yankees isn't/won't be/never was A-Rod. You have an OLD team and no direction... When Steinbrenner goes to the Stadium in the sky (by that I mean straight to hell) the wheels will fall off and it'll be the late 80's all over again - of course you'll probably be rooting for the Mets by theni would trade a-hole in a second for starting pitching and YES we would do BETTER in the playoffs.
as for da units, don't make me laugh. he was a great pitcher and hof but has done CRAP for the Yankees. just like a-rot. neither of them will contribute to a WS. i could care less what they did for their prior teams....what have they done for the Yankees? what have they done for the Yankees in the playoffs? nothing? then who cares? welcome to New York kids. WELCOME. you wouldn't be able to handle the pressure here by the sound of your comments. haha.we expect a lot from our team because we do pay a lot. and YES i do care how much they are paying a-hole, jeter, posada, etc. it is ME who is paying high prices for tickets, it is ME who is paying high prices for beer (my own doing, haha), it is ME who pays high prices for merchandise, it is ME who pays a lot for cable tv to see the games.
and lastly, nobody is comparing a-rot to brosius except you. what we are saying is that brosius on the yankees had some great and memorable and CLUTCH games- MVP WS
a-hole has NEVER as a Yankee carried us through the playoffs- he has done quite the opposite and SHUT DOWN. he is not CLUTCH during the season and even WORSE during the PLAYOFFS.
I noticed that you still haven't shown us a-hole stats in CLUTCH situations in the PLAYOFFS as a YANKEE!!! maybe because they are not worth talking about and shows what all fans except you already know....
The Yankees aren't paying all of A-Rod's salary, the Rangers are footing over $10 mil of it. So much for Yankee fans that "Know" baseball so well...
By the way, A-Rod made less than $1 million more than Jeter this year... so the Yankees actually paid TWICE as much for Jeter than A-Rod this year.Opinions are like birthdays. Everyone has one of those, not everyone has an asshole (or uses theirs correctly - for instance, you use your asshole to speak from)
Thanks for playing...
if what you were saying were true, the Yankees would charge different prices for different games. games against boston would be much higher than games against tampa bay. i don't think you are appreciating the fact that there are other factors that determine the price of the tickets. think about it without being so sarcastic. yankee playoff tickets that were sold out in minutes for $100 were instantly resold by brokers for 2, 3, 4 times that amount. the secondary market is all about supply/demand.
to set the initial yankee ticket prices, supply/demand is only one factor. cost plus pricing NEEDS to be considered."Q1: How are ticket prices determined?
Baseball owners, like most business owners, are interested in maximizing profits or minimizing losses. Thus they set ticket prices with that goal in mind, not the specific goal of breaking even or covering expenses.
Normally, this means maximizing total revenue, since having an additional fan attend a game does not have much effect on the cost of holding the game. Higher ticket prices mean lower attendance but more revenue per fan, and the team tries to set the price at the point where these effects balance out.
If the team's payroll or TV money changes, this does not affect the number of fans who will buy tickets at a given ticket price, so it should not affect the ticket price, only the team's profit. Owners may talk about the need to raise ticket prices to cover increased salaries, but they do not actually raise them to cover the salaries, nor lower them when salaries go down.
If the team opens a better stadium, on the other hand, this improves the quality of the team's product, and thus is likely to result in fans who are willing to pay more. If the team becomes so popular that it sells out its existing stadium frequently, it will raise ticket prices because it cannot collect the revenue it would get by meeting demand at a low price. (And if such a team didn't raise ticket prices, fans would still pay the higher prices, as ticket agencies and scalpers would buy the tickets and then re-sell them at the demanded rate.)
You can see the same effects with other forms of entertainment such as movies. The same first-run theater may sell tickets to _Titanic_ and to a movie which cost 1/10 as much to make for the same price. However, it will sell tickets to an afternoon showing for less than the evening showing of the same movie on the same day, because the demand for evening tickets is much greater.
Q2: How much have ticket prices gone up?
Only at the rate of inflation. In real value, the cost of an average ticket has been essentially constant since 1950. According to _Baseball and Billions_, by Andrew Zimbalist, the average ticket price of $1.60 in 1950 was $8.74 in 1990 dollars, while the average in 1990 was $7.95. This is consistent with the assumption that ticket prices have been set to maximize profits.
Since prices tend to change in whole-dollar units, and since they are affected by local conditions such as the city's economy and the quality of the team, they may not increase at the rate of inflation for a single team in a single year. But a team which raises grandstand seats from $10 to $12 following a good season isn't likely to raise them again for several more years.
In the last few years, ticket prices have gone up faster than inflation when new parks opened, while staying close to inflation in cities which have kept the same parks.
Q3: If they haven't gone up much, why do sportswriters talk as if they have?
The quote you will often hear is something like, "Thirty years ago, you could buy a bleacher seat for $1.50. Now it costs a family of four $120 to attend a game."
The ratio looks impressive, but there are several differences in the comparison. The comparison is based on the a fan's perception of the price rather than the actual price, as the fan probably bought single bleacher tickets as a kid, then moved up to box seats, and now buys box seats and everything else for his family of four.
In addition, the $120 is the "Fan Cost Index", for a family to buy a full set of souvenirs and food, four average tickets, and parking. It may be possible for a family to spend that much on a once-a-year trip, but it is more than regular fans would spend. A fair comparison would be between the ticket prices alone, and even then, you may be comparing a bleacher seat thirty years ago to an average seat today. If you compare an average seat at $3 then to $12 now, you are left with the rate of inflation.
Complaints about high prices are common in many areas, even when the prices are keeping pace with inflation in the long run. Every time the Postal Service raises postage rates or New York City raises subway fares, there are editorials opposing the move.
Q4: What is the relation of ticket prices to salaries?
High salaries do not cause high ticket prices, since salaries do not affect the ticket price which maximizes revenue. That's why the beginning of the free-agent era, which was the period in which salaries increased by the greatest factor, was also a period in which ticket prices declined in real dollars.
However, high ticket prices are an important part of the reason for high salaries. If one million more fans will watch a contending team than a fourth-place team, and they pay an average of $12 for their tickets, then it is worth $12 million in extra ticket revenue for the team to become a contender. The team should thus be willing to pay $12 million build a contender by signing players. Since many teams could gain about the same amount from the improvement, the players will earn about that much money as free agents. (Actually, they will earn more, because tickets are not the only source of revenue; a good team will also earn more from TV and the playoffs.)
Q5: Why do concessions at baseball games cost so much?
It is a captive audience, and concessions thus cost whatever the market will bear. This is the same reason that popcorn at movies and meals at airports are extremely expensive.
You can avoid this part of the cost of attending a baseball game by not using the concessions. Most ballparks allow fans to bring their own food, with restrictions on such things as metal containers. It is also possible to eat at home or at a local restaurant just before the game rather than paying the high prices at the game.
Q6: Why are baseball ticket prices lower than prices in other sports?
This is also a result of supply and demand; prices will be high when demand is high and supply is low.
Basketball and hockey arenas are smaller than baseball stadiums. If basketball teams charged the same prices that baseball teams charge, they would have 50,000 fans wanting to attend every game, and that many fans won't fit in an arena. Instead, they charge $70 for good seats and still fill most or all of them.
Football tickets are limited in supply because of the very short season; with eight games rather than 41 in basketball or 81 in baseball, there are far fewer tickets available even with large stadiums. Also, since football games are so infrequent, there are many fans who make major trips to attend the games, and the ticket price is only a small part of the cost of these trips. The result is that many teams can sell out
their stadiums with high-priced season tickets."One baseball-reference has a SECTION called CLUTCH (wylie pointed it out to me earlier). i checked it out and it's there.
two, baseball is not a free market business. you and i are not allowed to create another professional baseball league in the USA. they are protected by law and therefore have a monopoly on the sport and all of the economics. the players assoc. controls the salaries by negotiating with the owners on rules of the business including free agent status, luxury tax, etc.Baseball has anti-trust exemption, meaning they can make their OWN rules that don't comply to governmental regulation, not protection as a monopoly
PLEASE, stop already! I'm gonna get a hernia from laughing AT you!Let's just say that the "admitted Yankee fans" on this site all seem to disappear when yankee debates rage on... Hmmm. They have logins or they wouldn't be here to begin with. Anon all you want, it still tags an IP address.
It's too bad, because the good ones and the boneheads all blur together instead of standing out...I'm a Yankee fan and don't give a crap who likes it or not, I'm a fan for me and not anyone else. A-Rod's postseason with the Yankees have been lousy, or at least less than one would expect. Most superstars performance INCREASES under pressure, not decreases. In fairness to him, its not like he had opportunities before so its a new experience to him and for some guys it just takes longer. If he finishes his contract with the Yankees I would be surprised if he didn't get at least one ring, and if the Yankees trade him tomorrow I wouldn't be surprised either.
The Yankees in reality aren't a very good TEAM, if they were they would have won everything the last three years. Having an all-star at most every position doesnt constitute a great team. Look at Detroit, the only certifiable stars on the team are Pudge and Guillen, everyone else just does their job within the context of the team. But they still won, because they played within the concept of a team.
And I'll tell you something else about ARod..I live near the Mariners spring training facility in Arizona and have gone to games there since it opened in '93. In all the time I was at the park, I never saw Griffey or Johnson sign ONE autograph. I went to a golf outing once and Johnson was one of the celebrity players and the loser wouldnt even sign stuff for the guys who paid to play with him. A-Rod signs ALL THE TIME. Ten, fifteen minutes before the game and at least that long after. He's never been one of my favorite players and his going to New York didnt change that fact but he's a good guy in my book.not sure what city or state you live in but, any post season Yankee game could be completely sold through brokers at much higher prices than the Yankees sell them for. they would use true supply/demand and maximize the ticket prices. the Yankees purposely limit the number of tickets per person/account holder to eliminate scalping and unfair ticket gouging. the Yankees themselves choose to provide this service so that real fans can actually attend these games. they could obviously make much more money if they released even half the seats through brokers.
and not sure what the person's argument on salaries not affecting ticket prices?! if you are paying high salaries it's because you are getting big-time talent, therefore putting a better product on the field and therefore can DEMAND more money for the tickets. just as he stated that a new stadium puts a better experience there for the fans. putting better players and their BIG SALARIES on the field gives the fan a better (WINNING) experience. so yes, ticket prices are definitely going up because of high salaries. the yankees stop paying for free agents, they're team will go down in quality, they will lose more games. the fans will not be selling out or close to selling out 81 home games. everything is related and cost plus pricing is always a factor in any decision. the market bears more for a yankee ticket because of the talent these high paid players provide.
as far as ticket prices going up, that is totally dependent on the city in which you live. i would be the ny yankee ticket prices have gone up much higher than inflation and other areas of the country ticket prices haven't gone up much at all relative to inflation. i think ticket prices is like real estate; location!!From your most recent post, you're starting to get it... but not quite. Your third paragraph plays right into what the owners want you to believe: namely, that high salaries drive high ticket prices. However, just the opposite is true -- the cause and effect relationship starts with ticket prices and ends with salaries. High ticket prices (based on demand for tickets) give owners the wherewithal to sign players to expensive contracts. If the Yankees could suddenly pay Jeter/A-Rod/etc. the MLB minimum salary next year, ticket prices would stay exactly as high as they are now, because people are willing to pay that much to see those stars play. Unless you're the A's (or last year's Marlins), though, it takes lots of payroll to generate that demand, so it gives the appearance that ticket prices rise with salaries. In fact, you're exactly right when you say "putting better players and their BIG SALARIES on the field gives the fan a better (WINNING) experience," and "the market bears more for a yankee ticket because of the talent these high paid players provide"... But the talent/star power -- the demand -- has to come first for ticket prices to go up. In other words, you're not paying because the team needs to cover A-Rod's salary -- they can cover his salary because you're paying.
Here's what Barra had to say about it in his article:
"If Americans are really the most economically uneducated people in the Western world, our sports journalists must be on an even lower level. Simply put, and contrary to what you read and hear virtually every day on the radio call-in shows, there is no necessary connection at all between an athlete's salary and the prices you pay at the ballpark, arena or stadium. Let me repeat that: none, as in no, zero, zip, nada. One is not dependent on the other at all, to the slightest degree. This is a simple fact that all economists and all baseball executives know, but that the latter take great pains to obscure when they talk to the fans through the press.
I know this might be difficult to grasp if you've never studied economics, but start out thinking about it this way: The price of tickets, hot dogs, beer, etc. at games is dictated by what the market will bear. It's that simple. If you, the fan, buy that ticket and pay for that beer, then the team assumes, reasonably enough, that you are willing (if not altogether happy) to pay it. What you pay, then, becomes the price. After a certain time, they might try, say, a 50-cent hike; if you pay it, that's the new market level. If you don't, they bring it back down. That's the way it works. It has nothing to do with what the team pays the athlete.
Or, stated a different way, if they're hitting you up for $6 a pop on beer, and suddenly they were to drop the average ballplayer's salary from, say, $2 million a year to, say, $100,000, the price of tickets, beer and dogs wouldn't drop by so much as a nickel.
Another way of understanding the concept is this: NHL hockey games, by some estimate, yield about 13 percent of the revenue of Major League Baseball games, yet NHL teams pay their players about 40 percent of what baseball players get. As you can see, the salaries aren't at all proportionate to the revenue differential, and neither are ticket prices, which are, in most cities, higher than the average baseball ticket.
And here's another way of thinking about it. "M:i-2" cost, what, maybe $150 million, with Tom Cruise getting, what, maybe $25 mil? But your average multiplex charges you $8.50 per ticket, the same price it charges for a ticket to see "Being John Malkovich," which cost about 9,000 bucks and for which John Cusack was paid in food stamps. (The price of popcorn at both movies is the same.)
And here's still another: The cost of tickets, beer and hot dogs at college games is through the roof, and the players don't get paid at all.
Yes, the Los Angeles Lakers are going to raise prices when they sign Shaquille O'Neal, because they feel they have a more attractive product to sell. Yes, the Reds might raise ticket prices now that fans have given their public approval for signing Larkin. But the only connection between the salary and the price increase is that the Reds assume you, the fan, will pay for it. If enough don't, they'll bring the price down. They'll have to. They don't dictate the price to you, you dictate it to them. The price isn't determined by factors you can't control; on the contrary, it's determined by the only factor you do control. As Satchel Paige might have phrased it, you pays your money and takes your choice. Or you don'ts."
Sports economist Don Coffin said the following on David Berri's (one of the foremost sports economists in the world) blog:
"I think the explanation is fairly simple. Economists are comfortable with the argument that increased demand for tickets leads to increased ticket prices, and that with player salaries being essentially unrelated in the short run (and in the long run) to the marginal cost of seating additional fans, demand, not costs, drive ticket prices. Most people are not, and for a fairly good reason. In most cases, increases in wages/salaries DO lead to increases in the marginal costs of producing a product, and therefore to increased prices. What people are doing is generalizing from the usual situation, to a situation in which that generalization does not work properly. What I think might be interesting is to survey people who have taken a course in sports economics to see how they respond to this issue. It’d be depressing to discover that they haven’t learned the correct analysis."
To which Berri noted: "This response highlights a common feature of research in sports economics. Much of what we say in sports economics contradicts what people already believe. Although sports economists have explained for years that consumer demand leads to higher ticket prices, and higher ticket prices lead to higher player salaries, many people have either not heard the message, or are not convinced."
You've heard the message now; here's hoping you're convinced.MLB teams make more than the salaries they pay in TV and cable deal, logo licensing and merchandising alone!
Ticket prices are more in Boston than New York for one very basic, simple reason THERE ARE LESS SEATS in Fenway than Yankee Stadium. Supply vs. Demand. And within S vs. D, the marketplace will find a tolerance. Apparently, Boston fans are willing to pay more...
The Red Sox and Yankees could give away their tickets for the WHOLE SEASON, ADD payroll and STILL make money. Know why? MLB ownership comes with taxable benefits, municipal kickbacks and revenue sharing. Let's not even bring up in-stadium advertising rights and Oh yeah, WHO makes money when a company becaomes "The official blah-blah-blah of MLB"?
Don't be naive!Sometimes you have to simplify to make a point,which you did very well with your movie reference. Unfortunately, however, its not entirely accurate, because when someone decides to go to a movie, they have a choice. They choose to see the blockbuster or the bomb, but at a sporting event you have no choice. So the concessions are providing a general service, not a specific one. Sports are now compensating for that difference by charging premium ticket prices for better competition. My Diamondback seats are $17 bucks a game for Cincinnati and Colorado, etc, but when the Red Sox come in they are close to $30. THATS a rip-off. But the team is giving me the choice, and its to go or not go.
In sports, pre-season or spring training, revenues are 100% profit for the teams as players and staff are not paid. So, the coffers are full when the season starts. And each team benefits equally, or close to it. The imbalances begin when the season starts. And if what you guys have been talking about is in fact true, then the Yankees or Lakers or Cowboys tickets would be the cheapest in the league, not the most expensive. (Supply and demand) The New York metro area is roughly 15 million, about 3 million for metro Kansas City. If each stadium holds 50,000, then the Yankees have 12 million more potential customers for each of their 81 home games (I'll let you do the math on that one). Plus their revenue from their own TV network, which I'm sure Kansas City doesnt have. Which is why there is revenue sharing, to balance the books. And if you have excess revenue from other sources, such as the TV rights, than your payroll shortcomings will come from ticket sales. It goes without saying the percentage of ticket or concession or parking revenue for a team like Kansas City going towards payroll is higher than it is for the Red Sox or Dallas Mavericks because of their market. It has to come from somewhere.How about screaming at your team that they're screwing the home fan more, while trying to profit on the away fan?
More people in NYC than Boston doesn't mean greater demand... there's more alternatives in NYC. Gee, like the Mets? Don't want to pay for a Yanks ticket? See a Broadway show, etc.
Yankee stadium's capacity is 57,000+, Fenway is 38,000+... do the math, who has more supply? And let's admit it, it's more fashionable to be a Red Sox fan in Boston than a Yankees fan in NYC
WHY do you think the Dodgers never sell out? There's too much to do in L.A.
(side note: The D-Back organization still has their heads up their asses on thier fanbase which is why they try to profit on the fans. Have you ever seen a sea of teal st a D-Backs game?)i do agree on much of what you say about the ticket prices, the problem though is that it is not that simple as baseball is not a commodity. if we were talking about a stick of butter, or gasoline, or gum it would make sense.
When you sell any product/service yes, it is true that supply and demand take over unless there are other factors. not all products/services sold are free to do so. many factors that don't allow this free market to work are regulations or monopolies. Baseball is a monopoly, people have allegiances to particular teams/cities. if they raise the prices to a yankee game, i have no other choice i have to go see them. true if the price became so high eventually i couldn't afford it, but this is NOT the same as butter, gas, or gum. here i have a choice of other products that keeps prices of all brands in line. baseball doesn't have this in the same sense. true i could choose not to go or go to a show or a movie or another sporting event. BUT THIS IS NOT BASEBALL AND NOT A SUBSTITUTE.
I do agree with you that if the owners were allowed to pay the players less (get rid of the players association) they would just keep the profits. therefore, it would seem like it is all supply/demand. but that simply doesn't hold water without considering other factors.
all products/services sold charge more money for their prd/svc if they are differentiated and it is perceived by the consumer as superior. i think we can agree on that. a jeep wrangler is a cheap truck to make, a hummer is an expensive truck to make. therefore, i would be willing to pay more for the hummer because i perceive it to be of higher quality, functionality, prestige, etc. i think when you look at the yankees for instance, the fan perceives the quality of the whole experience, stadium, prestige of going to the game, quality of the talent, superstar players, etc. if the yankees were not spending money on these superstars, i would perceive the quality to be less and therefore not as willing to spend more money.
again, i do agree with supply/demand, i also took quite a few economics classes in college. i also took sports mgmt and economics and it wasn't an easy class. sports is just not that simple because there are so many outside factors. professional sports is essentially a monopoly and the salaries paid to these superstars contributes to both the actual quality and perceived quality of the team. once you raise this perceived quality - i believe you are then able to charge a higher price for this now premium product.
maybe it is a chicken and the egg scenario. either way, high salaries which means better and superstar talent has the effect of raising quality and the basis for ticket prices. but i do agree that at the end of the day it is what the consumer will play or is willing to pay that will determine the prices. not sure if we might be saying the same thing a different way? i just think the consumer is more willing to pay a higher price knowing the quality of the experience is higher.
anyway, i really enjoyed the debate, one of the better and more educational ones on this site!! take care.
Retrieved from "http://armchairgm.wikia.com/2007_MLB_HOF_Ballot:_Third_Base"
This page was last modified 15:51, 3 January 2007. Content is available under the GFDL.
