« no boobies for you! | Main | frustration »

The value of one link (and why I'm really not liking the A-Rod deal as much as you think)

File under what the hell?
The Yankees had to add value to the contract for the union to approve it, and they did so in two ways: They guaranteed Rodriguez a suite on the road, a perk the Yankees almost never allow, and gave Rodriguez permission to link his Web site to the Yankees' team site.
Found here [via DJ] where one commenter said: ...[O]n a related note- part of the reason the Red Sox weren't able to sign Rodriguez was due to the fact that they refused to allow him to use their brand (jersey) in his endorsements deals... See my previous post about A-Rod. Things like this is what I was talking about. While the deal made me all smiles for about 24 hours, it's starting to sink in now and, minus the gloating factor, I'm not liking it. I'm all about a happy clubhouse and megalomaniac divas who view baseball as a way to market themselves so they can retire at an early age surrounded by thousand dollar bills do not make for happy clubhouses. Yea, I live in a fantasy world where athletes play sports because they love the sport they play.


Maybe George can deal for Barry Bonds next.

I like the part where they consider 'permission' to link a perk.

I love that fantasy world.

You know that is just the times we live in. Micky Mantle or Babe Ruth probably got perks other players didn't as well, it just wasn't a stupid web link, since, well, there wasn't an internet yet (except for the one in Al Gore's dome).

You're right, of course, that salaries are out of control, but it's America, and I think I want it to be a nation where you get whatever someone is willing to pay or what the market will be. We don't seem to mind our politicians doing this.

Besides, as the first link you pointed to (The Times, I believe) points out, incredibly, the Yanks save money by getting Arod. It was yet another shrewd business move on their part that proves that success is mostly about spending money wisely. The Yanks get accused of buying championships, but I challenge anyone to come up with a franchise that spends money more wisely than the Yankees.

You want to talk selfish? What about Aaron Boone? Here's a guy who decides to play hoop and wreck his knee when he has agreed not to do so under contract terms (but thank goodness he did).

Fact is that all these guys make a living out of looking out for themselves and doing what they want or what they can get away with. They are all, by our definition, selfish. In all sports.

So if you are looking for a team without megalomaniac divas, you can for sure cross the Yankees of your list. With Arod, I think they now have something like 5 of the top 15 paid players in the league (and 2 of the top 3 in Arod and Jeter). In fact, I think you might have to go to the minor leagues to find guys that play the sport for the love of the game and even there they are all shooting for the big bucks and stardom.

Here in my small podunk town of Lincoln NE we have a college team that is pretty decent in the Huskers and a Northern League team in the Salt Dogs that are very low level pros trying to get to the next level which isn't even single A ball I don't believe. It's fun to watch them play, they have a lot of heart, but any one of those guys (as any of us would probably do) would become egomaniacs overnight given stardom status and a big league contract.

I hope the Yanks can succeed with all the egos. Seems to me that Arod wanted pretty badly to try and make it work, so maybe it will all work out. How many players would there be these days to give up the kind of money that he gave up (whether in interest or whatever) just to play on a winner. I think that is pretty unselfish by today's standards. But we'll see.

Besides, there is so much hidden mumbo jumbo in these contracts these days, whether it be a personal dressing room (Jordan had this option I believe as does Kobe) or a weblink or a luxury suite (which Arod had in Texas as well I believe). This is what it takes to get the best players to sign on the dotted line and Arod certainly isn't the first or the last to cash in on it.

If you want a guy who really just loves the game, look no further than Baltimore (and formerly of my Oakland A's):


Miguel Tejada. There is no act classier in sports. This is a guy who sends a good chunk of his pay back to the DR to rebuild the ballpark he grew up playing in, fixing the roads in his town and talking with the Presidente to fix his country.

Few men finer in all the game.

I did a search and I don't even see where A-Rod has a website. So I'm not sure what that's all about.

As for the comment:

O]n a related note- part of the reason the Red Sox weren't able to sign Rodriguez was due to the fact that they refused to allow him to use their brand (jersey) in his endorsements deals...

That was in exchange for A-Rod willing to drop his salary like $12-$15 million.

You're never going to have a happy clubhouse with two potential HOF shortstops on the same team. I have a strong feeling one of them will eventually be going elsewhere, and that person will probably be Jeter.

IMO, Jeter is a proven winner and A-Rod is a proven stat champ. I don't care if A-Rod had hit .500 with the Rangers, that's not the same thing as performing when everything is on the line in the World Series.

This could just be the year the Yankees implode - it won't take many losses to set George off after he shells out this kind of payroll.

I always sort of respected A-Rod, and gave him the benefit of the doubt on the outrageous contract. But I haven't been in Texas during his tenure there, so I wasn't aware of how he basically shafted the Rangers on promoting the team:

http://www.thefatguy.com/archives/003850.html#003850 see the comments.

Good riddance, and may he bless the Yanks with the same sense of selflessness as that darling Roger Clemens.

This is why people hate Yankee fans. The Yankees get the best player in the game and all they can do is whine about it. Arod wasn't the one who insisted on the extra perks, it was the union who insists on getting equal value for reducing monetary compensation.

You have the greatest shortstop since Honus Wagner on your team. Enjoy it.

P.S. And anyone who thinks that Jeter will be playing SS this season is fooling themselves. The Yankees are well aware of how poor a fielder he is and will be moving him. Look for Jeter to agree to it "to be a good team player for my buddy Arod".

Bryan wrote:
I always sort of respected A-Rod, and gave him the benefit of the doubt on the outrageous contract.

We Mariner fans have known his dark side for years. You ought to have heard the things he said in 2000. Very weaseley. To be fair, I think most of the machinations are the product of one Uriah Heep Scott Boras.

To his credit, Rodriguez is an extemely professional, smooth, PR-oriented guy, and will never give the Yankees any Sheffield or Bonds type problems.

I can't wait to see the girls of the "Marry Me AROD!!" and "Marry Me Derek!!" signs duking it out in Yankee stadium.

just listen to the music...

(cue the Darth Vader entrance in the first one)

"I find your lack of faith disturbing".

muh ha ha ha haa haah haaa

Speaking as a Mariners fan, here's what you get with ARod: One of the best shortstops, and one of the best hitters as well. The downside, as was mentioned above, is that you get the lovely, charming, Scott Boras as his agent, and there isn't a bigger ass of an agent in baseball.

But ARod always, always plays hard, and very, very well. The reason (unlike what an earlier comment suggested) that you move him to 3rd instead of Jeter is that 3rd base is about reflexes, not side to side speed. This is why Ripken was really a 3rd baseman. He did it with knowledge and reflexes, so he was already in the right spot. Plus, I think ARod has a stronger arm than Jeter, which is an issue moving a guy to 3rd, when he makes a dive across the bag to get a bouncer down the line and has to make the throw from foul territory. It just seems to me that if you have 2 shortstops, the one who is a better fielder will probably drop off less when you move him out of his natural position.

And really, for all the slagging Jeter takes for his fielding, if this weren't the age of the supershortstop, he'd be fine. It's just that the standard of comparison has shot up in the last 8 or 10 years. Jeter, because he's a good hitter, would compare fine to most shortstops of the 80's. But now he's got to contend with the legend of Ripken (not to mention Barry Larkin, who was none too shabby in his prime), and the now of A-Rod, Tejada, Garciaparra, and quite a few others who would have been perennial all-stars 15 years ago but are nothing special compared to their peers these days. I wonder if Ozzie Smith and Cal Ripken maybe made a whole generation of kids grow up wanting to play shortstop, because it has never been like this before.