Raissman implies that the Yankees will have trouble selling ads for next season if the team finishes (as they persumably will barring a radical turnaround) third. But he doesn't really give any basis for that besides some snideness. It seems logical on its face, but have ratings declined from last year? Is there precedent for one year of missing the playoff after recent sucess hurting revenue--like the Sox and NESN in 2006?

If true, it points to the folly of branding an identity around being champions. No team, no matter their payroll or smarts, is going to win the WS time and time again or even make the playoffs every year from now until forever. #### happens.

Being champs can be part of a brand identity, but it can't be the only thing - can it?

harvest their share of cream-of-the-crop free agents

"Their share," eh? And what is Kansas City's share? Or Oakland's?

And how long since they were actually champs, anyway?

If they were selling 2009 ad time right now, this would matter. But they're not. They'll sell ad time after they pick up a few free agents and line themselves up to be competitive. By then the ads might sell themselves.

If they were selling 2009 ad time right now, this would matter. But they're not. They'll sell ad time after they pick up a few free agents and line themselves up to be competitive. By then the ads might sell themselves.

If they do sign CC, those Dunkin' Donuts ads will come rolling in.

The Yankees have the same odds of losing advertisers next year as they do of losing season ticket holders because they didn't make the playoffs this year. YES will certainly be hurt by the loss of revenue in October, but suggesting that advertisers won't return is absurd.

YES will certainly be hurt by the loss of revenue in October, but suggesting that advertisers won't return is absurd.

huh? YES wouldn't carry any playoff games. I doubt they make that much revenue in October even if the Yankees are in it, unless their pre- and post-game bits draw a lot of advertising. Besides, are ad deals even month-to-month? Would a company have a deal in September that wouldn't carry over to October?

I am guessing that their pre- and post-game stuff, plus features, would generate more ad revenue than whatever they'll be running in place of that.

I am perfectly willing to admit that I know zero about how advertising is sold on YES (or any other network). I am assuming, from a limited background, that they offer several different packages of varying lengths, and that their expected viewership influences their rates. And I would imagine that advertisers who had an option would want to know what's happening on YES in October before committing to it. Maybe that option doesn't exist. I shouldn't have used the word "certainly."

How can YES sell that championship experience if the Yankees finish a ho-hum third?

With the way the Jays have been playing lately, the Yankees could finish an oh-#### fourth.

IMO, this is one of the reasons why a tearing-apart of the Yankees (like Steve Goldman has been pushing) would never work: the Yankees would lose too much money if they were torn apart. Over at Pete Abe's, there's a poster named SJ44 who keeps on repeating the same shibboleth about needing to stop signing FAs, as if it were a magic bullet (or if the money the Yanks would keep in their pockets would in any way accrue to the fans).

That doesn't mean that they have to keep on signing sucky FAs, but a judicious and prudent 5 element policy of (a) Drafting good young talent; (b) signing good, young Lat Am FAs; (c) Retention of your own talent when it comes to FA; (d) Trading excess young talent (your Karstens, Ohly's and McCluthcheons) for needed players; AND (e) Signing really worthwhile FAs, should do the trick.

By and large, I think the Yankees are exception at (c), and they seem to have become very good at (a) and (b). Now that they have young talent, I suspect they'll do (d) often enough. And in re: (e), their judicious non-signing of anyone after 2007-2008 (well, anyone other than LaTroy Hawkins, which lost them no picks), shows that they understand this.

How can YES sell that championship experience if the Yankees finish a ho-hum third?


With the way the Jays have been playing lately, the Yankees could finish an oh-#### fourth.

I was going to say this too. They only have a 1.5 game lead on third place over the Jays at the moment.

I was going to say this too. They only have a 1.5 game lead on third place over the Jays at the moment.

Well, Raisman does acknowledge the same thing in the paragraph above the one cited.

That doesn't mean that they have to keep on signing sucky FAs, but a judicious and prudent 5 element policy of (a) Drafting good young talent; (b) signing good, young Lat Am FAs; (c) Retention of your own talent when it comes to FA; (d) Trading excess young talent (your Karstens, Ohly's and McCluthcheons) for needed players; AND (e) Signing really worthwhile FAs, should do the trick.

There is at least some tension -- though not an outright conflict -- between (a) and (e). Signing the "really worthwhile FAs" inevitably means giving up draft picks. That at least compromises your ability to draft good young talent. You can ameliorate the impact of this by using later-round picks where possible on guys who slip for signability reasons -- but that tactic is only available sometimes. You can utilize (b) to help keep the farm system working, but then you aren't using (a) AND (b) -- you're using (b) to compensate for falling behind on (a), which is happening because of your commitment to free agents.

And of course, this year the Yankees didn't help themselves with their failed gamble on Gerrit Cole. Drafting good young talent doesn't help much if it goes to UCLA instead.

The Yankees will get a 1st rounder and a 2nd rounder next year from the players they did not sign this year. So yes, it sucks to lose Cole, but it's no biggie.

The Yanks should comp picks by letting Abreu and I-Rod go, while offering them compensation, and those picks cannot be lost by signing FAs (I guess arguably the same thing could happen with Pettitte, Giambi and Mussina, but I would think the Yankees will want to keep Mussina, probably Pettitte and will not risk arb for Giambi).

So (a) and (e) are not necessarily in conflict - it depends on the specifics.

but it's no biggie.

All signs point to next year being a weak draft class, so you can bet there won't be a Gerrit Cole sitting there in the late first.

The Yanks should comp picks by letting Abreu and I-Rod go, while offering them compensation, and those picks cannot be lost by signing FAs

Yes, it's true they can recoup a pick they lose in signing a FA by picking one up via a lost FA of their own. But the risk, of course, is that one of those guys burns you by accepting arbitration, leaving you with an unwanted player. I would think that might be a particular risk in the case of aging players like Abreu and I-Rod, who can't be at all certain that a multi-year contract is out there waiting for them; a single-year arb deal might well be pretty attractive.

Anyway, like I said, I don't think the draft and FA strategies are in conflict; just that there is tension between them. As a general matter, it's certainly true that in a given year, a team can go for the FA approach with little concern if it has FAs it knows it is going to lose to the market to recoup the picks. Over the long haul, though, going to the FA market every year is bound to lead to a net loss of draft picks. The teams that rely on FAs heavily aren't going to lose as many as they sign.

All signs point to next year being a weak draft class, so you can bet there won't be a Gerrit Cole sitting there in the late first.

The way things are going, it won't be that late. Besides, every year is a weak year until a bunch of guys break out in the spring. At least, it seems that way to me.

I would think that might be a particular risk in the case of aging players like Abreu and I-Rod, who can't be at all certain that a multi-year contract is out there waiting for them; a single-year arb deal might well be pretty attractive.

I'm positive someone will sign Abreu to a deal this offseason. .374/.464 is pretty good. It's a lot better than a guy like Jose Guillen will give you.

Pudge, I'm less sure about, but having him on the team isn't nearly as troubling, he or Molina can be flipped if Posada comes back healthy or if they need to try and go get a real catcher because Posada can't catch.

The way things are going, it won't be that late. Besides, every year is a weak year until a bunch of guys break out in the spring. At least, it seems that way to me.

It's not just you who thinks that CP.

Plus re: I-Rod he's apparently a B FA. That means less downside for the signer, who doesn't lose picks.

As to Cole, yes, I would have liked for the Yanks to have signed Cole, but it's no biggie because the kid is coming out of high school. That meant 3-4 years before he would have contributed in the Bronx, assuming he's healthy and is as good as right now. The Yanks should go for high risk/high reward picks, but because high risk/high reward picks are risky, and in this case, was so far away from the bigs, I'm not particularly upset by all this....

The way things are going, it won't be that late. Besides, every year is a weak year until a bunch of guys break out in the spring. At least, it seems that way to me.


It's not just you who thinks that CP.

You never see the Keith Law's and John Sickel's say 5 years later "I said that the (say) 2002 draft was weak, but hey, it actually turned out to be a very productive draft...."

I'm positive someone will sign Abreu to a deal this offseason. .374/.464 is pretty good. It's a lot better than a guy like Jose Guillen will give you.

Yep. Unless Abreu just can't stand the thought of leaving the Bronx, he'll do much better refusing arbitration and signing with somebody else.

Pudge, I'm less sure about, but having him on the team isn't nearly as troubling, he or Molina can be flipped if Posada comes back healthy or if they need to try and go get a real catcher because Posada can't catch.

Exactly. Pudge is still a useful player, won't cost all that much, and could almost certainly be moved if you needed to make room. If he passes on arbitration, yay, draft pick! If he accepts, yay, adequate catching solution!

It's not just you who thinks that CP.

That's good to know! One more thing I can take off the "reasons why I'm crazy" list.

That's good to know! One more thing I can take off the "reasons why I'm crazy" list.

Well, I hate to spoil your good mood, but it could just be one thing I have to add to my list. :)

And how long since they were actually champs, anyway?

Ooh!! Ooh!! Ooh!! I know!! Pick me!!

Put me down as a member of the almost every draft class looks weak initially camp.

I'll go with finishing 4th this year. The Jays are hot!

Mother of Mercy, is this the end of Giuseppe Franco?