I think Steve Kerr is secretly still a Chicago Bull or San Antonio Spur at heart. He shows this in his relentless efforts to destroy the Phoenix Suns. I know he's the Suns' GM, which is a perfect cover. Let's review Kerr's decisions since taking over the Suns. He brought in Shaq, who obviously never fit in with our style of play and who is the only reason that we lost to San Antonio last year in the playoffs. He got rid of Mike D'Antoni, who was a perfect and exciting coach in Phoenix. He realized the strength of the Suns. The "Run and Gun" style of offense, and he made us one of the best at it. Well anyways, he's gone. Now Kerr brings in Terry Porter, who so far has less than wowed anyone. Porter has taken a team whose greatest strength is their speed, and decided to throw in an offensive plan that involves slowing down and waiting. Brilliant. Now in the latest sabotage...I mean dealing...Steve Kerr has traded Boris Diaw and Raja Bell, vital parts of our fast and powerful offense. And he traded them for someone I've never heard of. I'm not sure I need any more proof of my hypothesis. Wait, the Suns are 13-10. And I was told by someone in the organization that this record is better than they expected. Ouch.
$100 million or $160 million?
What a great problem to have. I wish I had to ask myself that question. Do I want $100 million or $160 million? Of course, if I was asking myself that question, I would probably also be asking the question "What country do I want to buy?" CC Sabathia recently had to ask himself that...the money question, not the country question. The Milwaukee Brewers offered him $100 million, but the NY Yankees offered him $160 million. Who really needs that much money? Is it possible to spend that much money without giving a $5 to every person you pass on the street every day? Here's what's more ridiculous, in CC's contract, he got an opt out clause after 3 years because he's so concerned about moving his family to New York. Wait, if you don't want to move your family to New York and you could play somewhere else for $100 million, why would you take the deal to go to New York? Does your ego really cry over $100 million as compared to $160? Seriously? Here's an idea for CC. Take the $100 million contract, put half of it in a ROTH IRA, and in like 10 years it will be like $200 million anyways. Problem solved. You're welcome.
The Big Picture of Baseball's Spending
A baseball analyst made a really good point on Sportscenter this morning. Why is baseball still spending all of this money when the economy is in such bad shape? It's just irresponsible. Why are teams still giving away $160 million dollars to one player when no other industry in the US could afford this? Now let's bring this full circle for everyone. When the economy is down people cut out luxuries that they can do without. Some of the first things to go are eating out and special events. Ridiculously expensive tickets to sporting events are one of those things that are the easiest to cut out of a budget. Many teams are already estimating their attendance to drop by several percentage points. So if sporting events are already too expensive for many to afford, why are they upping their spending, which would inevitably raise ticket prices, forcing more people to watch from the comfort and affordability of their own homes. So if more people refuse to buy tickets, teams go further into debt because such a large part of their money is already promised away. Why isn't baseball instead conserving costs and making tickets affordable? If baseball as a whole decided that they will not spend so much money, then players will have no choice but to accept lower contracts. If they hold out for higher contracts, then the press will paint a picture of them as being selfish, greedy people who want to further the economic turmoil of the country. If all MLB teams hold to this concept, players will have no choice but to sign for lesser amounts. If the MLBPA stands against this, then all players will look bad in the eyes of the whole country. But hey, I'm just thinkin' outloud.
No comments:
Post a Comment