FanNation - The Republic of Sport

Brian Cashman shouldn???t return to the Yankees in 2009. It???s nothing personal. It???s all about results. The Yankees are significantly worse now than when Cashman took over, in more ways than one. Here???s how the Yankees have performed during Cashman???s tenure using three bottom line evaluation criteria ??? wins, AL East finish and playoff result. * 2008 wins estimate based on current winning percentage As we can see, the Yankees have experienced declining productivity during Cashman???s tenure. Of course, after winning the World Series in his first three years, we should expect a decline; that pace can???t be maintained. Still, if we exclude the championship years of 1998-2000, we still see a decline from the 2001-2004 period, in which the Yankees won five playoff series, to the 2005-2008 period, in which they won zero playoff series. That???s right ??? despite having the Majors??? largest payroll for the past four years, the Yankees have not won one playoff series. Speaking of salaries, we all know that the Yankees have topped the payroll charts in each of Cashman???s seasons. (Actually ??? that???s not true: the Orioles had the top team salary in 1998). But the extent to which the Yankees have exceeded the league average payroll warrants a little more investigation, as it highlights Cashman???s core economic failure. Here is the yearly payroll spend (for opening day rosters) for the Yankees and the league average, allowing us to calculate the percentage the Yankees have spent over the league average: With the yearly figures for ???% regular season wins above the league average??? and ???% payroll above league average???, we can then compute a rude ???Bang for the Buck ratio??? for the Yankees under Cashman. In other words, what percentage increase in wins did the Yankees get for a percentage increase in spending relative to the rest of the league? Here is the answer for the Yankees since 1998: * Bang for the buck = (percentage Yankee regular season wins over league average) divided by (percentage Yankee payroll spend over league avereage payroll spend) What we would expect to see is a variant of a U-curve, where initially, as a young and more inexpensive championship team matures and demands greater pay, the bang for the buck trend would decrease. We would then expect the curve eventually to bottom out as veterans pass their peak and overall performance decreases while costs remain high. Finally, we would expect the ratio to increase with an influx of new, cheaper players and better results. Instead, what we???ve seen is an overall downward trend since 1998. In 2008 the Yankees got the lowest bang for the buck in Cashman???s tenure ??? at just seven percent. Seven percent means that if the Yankees were to spend double the league payroll average, they would win seven percent above the league average, or just under 87 games. That???s not a sufficient return on investment. Unfortunately, adding to the problem is that the Yankees don???t appear situated to improve much in 2009. Their competition has gotten better with the ascension of the Tampa Rays to go along with the Red Sox and the steady Blue Jays. And it???s very possible the Yankees could be worse in 2009, as there are serious questions marks about each spot in the starting rotation. Chien-Ming Wang will be returning from a serious injury, Andy Pettitte and Mike Mussina may not return, Joba Chamberlain???s role is undefined and Ian Kennedy and Phil Hughes remain unproven talents. The bottom line is that Cashman took over an organization on top and fought for control ??? fought to do things his way. And since he got that control, the Yankees have seen a steady decrease in production coinciding with an increase in expenditure. Ownership is not seeing the results of its investment, and that???s why it???s time for someone else to be making the decisions.