It’s a bit convoluted and I’m not sure it does enough to punish “small market” teams that try to ride the coattails of the luxury tax so they don’t have to spend any money out of their own pockets (Yes, this is you, Jeffrey Loria).

But it’s an interesting starting point. Tony and I may revisit this after the holidays and shoot some ideas of our own. In the meantime, do any of you have ideas on how to fix the game?

Or do you think we’re all wet? If you think things are perfect you’re entitled to your opinion as well, I suppose. But please explain why you think it’s okay that the highest spending team can outspend the lowest spending team by 10 times?

I’d like to know your reasoning.

$423 million is the amount of measurable media coverage TDG Communications says it has generated for the Black Hills of South Dakota since 2005.

$423 million is what oil firms are paying to settle a groundwater contamination lawsuit.

$423 million is the estimated amount a group of hackers planned to steal from a Japanese bank using a planted keylogger.

And $423 million is the amount the New York Yankees will have shelled out to sign CC Sabathia, A.J. Burnett and Mark Teixeira as soon as the former Ranger, Brave and Angel first baseman officially signs his deal.

Yeah. Revenue sharing and the luxury tax have done a lot to level the playing field in Major League Baseball.

Francisco “K-Rod” Rodriguez, he of 62 saves for Anaheim last season, inked a 3-year, $37 million contract that will become official pending a physical, according to the New York Daily News.

Not satisfied, the Mets then acquired former Seattle Mariners closer J.J. Putz in a 212 player trade involving 26 teams in 9 countries.

Okay, it wasn’t quite that big, but something approaching a dozen players did change hands in the deal, including Aaron Heilman, who wanted to be a starter.

While it’s early, if I were in Las Vegas right now - or if I get there before Spring Training starts, this deal would in my opinion make the Mets the odds-on favorite to win the National League. The Phillies and the Mets have dueled for the NL East the last couple years and Philadelphia has won, almost solely based on the Mets bullpen patheticness.

While Rodriguez’ WHIP numbers have increased ever so slightly the last two seasons he’ll just turn 27 a month before Spring Training. And he keeps racking up the saves.

Putz had an off year in 2008, falling in line with most Seattle Mariners, posting a respectable ERA of 3.88 but a terrible WHIP of 1.60. Still, the two seasons prior, he’d sported WHIPs under 1.00 and ERAs respectively of 2.30 and 1.38 during a 2007 season in which he garnered some MVP votes.

Given that the Yankees finally bagged CC Sabathia Wednesday, the Mets were going to need a couple blockbuster moves to keep themselves in the front of the New York sports sections. They’ve definitely accomplished that. A Subway Series this year? That would be a dream come true for the networks.

Speaking on Dan Patrick’s morning radio show, Heyman told the world that CC still hopes one of the West coast teams will pop up with a competitive offer. He also thinks the Milwaukee Brewers might up their $100 million contract proposal as well.

But with the San Francisco Giants already opening their wallets to the tune of $18 million for a declining Edgar Renteria and also bogged down by the $126 million Barry Zito deal, Heyman thinks they are a long shot. And the California-Anaheim-Los Angeles Angels are first keeping Mark Teixeira in their sites.

CC’s reticence toward actually signing a deal, Heyman says, might have the Yankees on eggshells a bit, frustrated because they can’t lash out but don’t want to yet sweeten their own $140 million deal. But in the end, he says, the Bronx Bombers will likely get their man.

As an outside observer, it’s kind of fun to see them having to run in place for awhile though, isn’t it?

“We’ve made him an offer. It’s not going to be there forever,” said Hal, after he was voted the team’s new controlling owner on Thursday, Nov. 20.

This statement, given last year’s lines re-drawn in the sand over the A-Rod negotiations, were the typical laughable bravado to come from the Bronx. Now, however, as if that wasn’t enough, it has come out that the Yankees might increase their already obnoxiously high offer to $150 million - but only if other teams expected to get in on the process make offers to Sabathia.

NBCSports.com, publishing a Sporting News column citing a New York Newsday report that sourced the information to a “person familiar with the situation” said if the Los Angeles Angels get in on the bidding they’ll make the increase in their offer.

That’s good solid negotiating - let the increase get public BEFORE ANY WEST COAST COMPETITORS EVEN ACTUALLY OFFICIALLY MAKE AN OFFER!!!!!

The rumor mill says that Sabathia would prefer to pitch closer to home on the West coast and in the National League so he can hit. He reportedly is waiting on the Los Angeles Dodgers and the Milwaukee Brewers have made a shockingly large offer in an attempt to keep the guy who nearly single-handedly carried them to the playoffs for the first time since 1982.

So maybe the Yankees will have some competition for Sabathia’s services. But guess what. It’s not likely any of those offers are going to match the $140 million the Bronx Bombers already have on the table. If CC doesn’t sign in NY it’s likely got more to do with him finding the situation less than desirable, not the lack of another $10 million or so.

So, there’s always the possibility that the Major League Baseball Players Association steps in and tries to force Sabathia to sign the precedent-setting contract. I personally hope he thumbs his nose at those folks. I live in the Midwest but prefer the East coast to the West coast - but if Sabathia wants to go closer to home and is willing to take less money to do so more power to him.

But in the end, if I’m the Angels, at this point I’d get in the race just to make the Yankees pony up as much money as humanly possible. Someone on the Yankees staff blinked. This latest report makes it clear both that Hal’s deadline was a joke and that they’re willing to dig even deeper to acquire his services.

And how great is it that no matter how many bidders get in on the process the Yankees biggest competition for the largest salary package comes from themselves.

Nice job, sons of Steinbrenner. How does the old saying go? Hal, Hank - you’re no George Steinbrenner.

In researching that post I came across a question-and-answer session conducted with Hank Steinbrenner, who will herefore be known on this site as the Idiot Son of George Steinbrenner.

George Steinbrenner is an interesting character. He was sometimes crass, even occasionally criminal (yes, search “pleaded guilty” at the linked bio page) in his business dealings. But he represented the Yankees proudly and even occasionally made sense.

He’s handed the reins largely over to sons Hank and Hal. If this interview was transcribed correctly, George should muzzle Hank and make sure the supposedly more reserved Hal becomes the team’s more frequent spokesperson.

Hank rants in this interview on revenue sharing, the divisional playoff system and the lack of logic displayed by sports media.

He’ll get little argument from me on the lack of logic in sports media - there is often a lack of competence and intelligence in today’s sports reporting. It mirrors that of general news reporting in being reactive and unanalytical, to perhaps create a new word.

But his rants against revenue sharing (Socialist and possibly unAmerican) and the divisional playoff system (the Dodgers made the playoffs while we had a better record - unfair) are little more than self-serving whining from someone who runs a team that has all the advantages in the world.

Were these systems not in place the Yankees could simply make the rest of the league its farm system - not that it already doesn’t do that to a large degree. But look at the payrolls over the years - revenue sharing isn’t perfect. The small market Florida Marlins exploit it in almost a reverse-criminal way, as illustrated previously on this blog.

But if revenue sharing weren’t in place, there would be little point in even having a regular season. Sure, every once in awhile you’d get a small market contender in there, but you could pretty well assure that the Red Sox, the Yankees and a couple others would be in the playoffs 90 percent of the time. … Hell, they already are in the playoffs about that often.

Which brings me to his rant on the divisional playoff system. Hank, your team made the playoffs for a dozen years in a row. Were you complaining about the divisional playoff system then?

Sure, the Cardinals were a fluke in 2006. So what? Quit whining. Your team was in the playoffs that year. Win the AL and beat them in the World Series if it’s so ridiculous.

Hank Steinbrenner has come off as a bumbling idiot pretty much since the time he became the face of the team last season. The backtracking on deadlines to make trades made him look foolish and many of his public statements, such as this one, were eye-rolling in their stupidity and obvious pandering for even more advantages for the already more-than-blessed Yankees.

I do not begrudge New York its advantages at garnering revenues. The city remains one of, if not my favorite places to visit and it was truly fantastic making my one and only foray into the old Yankee Stadium in 2008. I anticipate making several visits to the new building in the years to come as well.

But Hank Steinbrenner illustrates to a T why many, many people around the world are turned off by the Yankees and Major League Baseball in general.

The founders of the National Football League had it right. They realized that sacrificing some geographic revenue advantages was for the betterment of the league’s competitive balance. Major League Baseball has been an abysmal failure at realizing these benefits.

Revenue sharing helps equalize the playing field, but it just tips the iceburg. If the systems Steinbrenner ragged on in this story were not in place, Major League Baseball would be the worst for it - in fact as a fan living in the Midwest, there would be little reason to even bother.

Well, perhaps they weren’t revelations. But they offered further proof that the agent couldn’t give a rip about anything more than making as much money for his clients as possible.

One questioner, from Westlake Village, Calif., asked if Boras had any concern for the fan bases of teams affected by the constant shuffling of players chasing big bucks.

Boras didn’t really answer the question, but told Westlake Village that his staff of 20 works year-round to prepare players for free agency and salary arbitration.

“When Teams call we determine if our client is interested then a information exchange occurs to define the agreed value of the player. If both parties agree we have an agreement,” he says.

Another Californian from Aliso Viejo asked about player greed and salaries during a time when “real hardworking people who get up and work 8-5 to make ends meet but are losing everything they have.”

While the question was a bit melodramatic, Boras’ response started out as a discussion of player revenues, which he says have increased from $3 billion in 2000 to $6.5 billion in 2008.

“Please keep in mind many of our clients donate millions of dollars to funds that provide tickets to children and families who would other wise not be able to attend games,” Boras wrote.

I about yacked when I read the last part. To quote the late, great Chris Farley, “Well, La De Frickin’ Da.” A big thank you to players making anywhere from what, a quarter million to $26 million a year for buying a couple tickets to each game? Is he looking for a slap on the back? I will grant him that many, many players are fantastic people and very generous. But forgive me if I don’t bow in their general direction when they share their money with the less fortunate. They should do that - just like any halfway decent person with an abundance of resources should. Charitable organizations rely on such generosity - and guess what, some people don’t want or need recognition for it. Spare me the pretend virtuosity.

My favorite answer, however, came when he was asked by New York, NY what his response would be to a salary cap. Boras, in true, self-serving fashion, responded that “salary caps prevent the true intellect of the sport from operating.”

Part one: As we have seen in the past 8 years there are many ways to win a world. Fans need to know an owner or a team can take what ever steps needed to improve their team. The power of choice without limitation makes the game exciting.

BBP respose: Ahh, where to start. Yes, small-market teams can win World Series. Even teams like the Florida Marlins, who load up for runs, then sell off all their talent and suck from the teat of large-market teams through revenue sharing for years on end. But come on. The Yankees just had a string of more than a dozen years in the playoffs end. The Boston Red Sox have won two of the last four. Philadelphia is hardly small market. You get the picture. Let’s not be in denial here. While small-market teams can contend, they can’t do so on an annual basis because big market teams have the revenue and can afford to spend it to the tune of five to 10 times what the small market teams can.

And as for knowing an owner or a team can take whatever steps needed, sure. They can - but often only if they are willing to leverage themselves to no end. There simply isn’t a comparison between the revenues generated by the New Yorks and Chicagos of the world compared with the Pittsburghs, Tampa Bays and Kansas Citys of the world - and I don’t think those latter three cities would say their chances from year to year are “exciting”.

Part two: The NFL (with a salary cap) has to mandate a schedule where losing teams play losing teams and this allows poor teams to have a better records and hides the defects of many teams which leads to mediocrity.

BBP response: This answer is, at best, a stretch and at worst, complete crap. First of all, his statement completely ignores the fact that the NFL has easily eclipsed Major League Baseball as “America’s Pastime” both in terms of television revenue, advertising and fan interest.

Hell, look no further than franchise valuations. Twenty four of the 25 most highly valued franchises are from the NFL. This isn’t me making up facts. I emailed Ryan Spoon to see where he had gotten the data for the  impressive charts he posted and he indicated that it came primarily from several years of Forbes magazine data. Forbes magazine’s research isn’t perfect - it’s flawed in that I know many of the teams don’t communicate any of their worth directly. But the publication is credible - more credible, I would guess, than either me or Scott Boras would be just sitting around arguing which league has a better system. And I don’t think it’s a stretch to guess that this fact has something to do with knowing there is some competitive balance from year to year.

Secondarily, his argument about the NFL schedules are simply incorrect. The NFL schedule mandates that each team play the other three teams in its division twice. The schedule also sets all four members of one division in a round-robin of sorts against every team in one other division from each conference. For example, every team in the NFC East plays six games against its own division mates. And all four of those teams play all four teams in two other divisions - those games are based on a rotating schedule, not record.

In fact, you can look online and find out right now who 14 of your favorite team’s opponents will be in 2009, 2010, etc. right now. Then, yes, teams play two games against teams from other divisions based on where they finished in the standings the previous season. So, unlike what Boras says, less than 15 percent of a team’s schedule is based on “losing teams play losing teams” and thus allowing “poor teams to have a better records.”

Is there mediocrity in the NFL? Sure. Is the salary cap system perfect? No. But can teams in any market compete in any given year? Look no further than the success of the Green Bay Packers or the run made last year by the Jacksonville Jaguars that fell just short against New England. Would that have happened in Major League Baseball? I don’t think so - certainly not on a regular basis, anyway.

And that scheduling format sure beats the hell out of the current formula used by Major League Baseball, where teams play “natural rivalry” series every year and some teams play 15 interleague games while others play 18 - the number differing even within teams’ own divisions. That’s fair-and-balanced scheduling? Please. And those games aren’t randomly or evenly spread for the sake of equal competition. Not even close.

Part three: Dynasties and David beating Goliath create great fan interest. A system that has owner and salary flexibility allows the most opportunity for varied results.

BBP response: Yes, David beating Goliath is exciting, but only if David can actually get to the matchup that matters from time to time. Too often in Major League Baseball, the Davids of the world have no margin for error. If a Yankee or a Red Sock player underachieves or gets hurt, Theo Epstein or Brian Cashman simply get on the phone and buy the next superstar acquisition.

Many owners could probably afford to do that. Carl Pohlad in Minnesota is, if memory serves, the country’s richest sports owner. But he didn’t become successful in business being an idiot. He still bases his baseball budget on baseball revenues. So, he could definitely afford to spend more on the team. But he’d be doing so at the risk of losing money on the team whereas George Steinbrenner just sells another corporate sponsorship or raises ad rates at the YES Network and figures out who to buy next.

“The only cap in sports that is beneficial,” he concludes, “is the one worn by baseball players.”

BBP response: Think his opinion on the salary cap might be driven more by the desire to line his pocket with millions upon millions for negotiating A-Rod and Man-Ram contracts? I think Boras wears his cap too tight. Look at the numbers. Look at the popularity of football versus baseball. I rest my case. He’s not interested in the well-being of the game. He’s interested in maximizing his clients’ paychecks regardless of what it does to the competition. Because that’s what maximizes his own pocketbook - and to Scott Boras, that’s the bottom line that matters.

And looking at it, this move makes complete sense for the Yankees–with Carl Pavano coming off the books, they have a real lack of starting pitchers with a track record of injury proneness mixed with mediocrity.

Burnett, who is already 31-years old, has had only three seasons of 200+ innings pitched in his career (although he did reach a career high of 221-1/3 in 2008), one season of more than 12 wins (18 in 2008, and two seasons of 12), and two seasons with 30+ starts (a career high 34 in 2008).

Looking at those 2008 numbers (18 wins, 34 starts, 221 innings) you might think the Yankees are getting a pitcher at his peak.  However, it should also be noted that his 2008 ERA was 4.07 (worst since 2003, when he had a 4.70 ERA in four starts), and his WHIP was 1.34 (also the highest it’s been since 2003, when it was 1.57).  Both are higher than his career averages of 3.75 and 1.28, respectively.

Combined, this tells me that the Yankees are going to pay an average of $16-million per season, for a pitcher who is far more likely to break down and be on the downside of his career than he is to be reaching the pinnacle.

Then again, in a league where Gil Meche gets $11-million per season, and Carlos Silva gets $12-million, the Yankees may have to be given credit for showing restraint.  But it still shows more the horrible state of contract situations in baseball more than anything else (more on that, and the true scourge of the game later on).

Less than two weeks later, the New York Yankees are preparing to brush off the warning, and offer free agent pitcher CC Sabathia a deal that will make him the most expensive pitcher in MLB history. The same Sabathia that weighs as much as many defensive linemen, has a history that leans on the inconsistent side, and was merely average last season with the Indians, before moving to the National League, where he pitched well in his first half season facing many hitters who hadn’t seen him before, but was possibly overused.

Note that the offer has not yet been made–but team co-chairman Hank Steinbrenner, in his never ending quest to prove himself to daddy, saw fit to announce his team’s plans to the media.  In a further act of arrogance, he went so far as to say he expected to also make offers to AJ Burnett and Derek Lowe.

It’s a good thing the Yankees have such a proven track record with big money free agent deals.

By then the Expos were a lame-duck team destined for Washington and owned by the league.

The highlight of that opening night, according to an account in Time magazine, came when a fan holding a “LORIA SUCKS” sign jumped up on the Florida Marlins dugout to dance and temporarily evade security personnel.

By then, as part of the agreement to sell the Expos, Jeffrey Loria had acquired those Marlins. In 2003, the team won its second World Series. Then, two years later, with no public financing for a new ballpark, Loria dismantled the team, creating one of the lowest-paid franchises in baseball.

Sure, the team was competitive last season. But as has been mentioned on this blog before, think what this team could have done had Loria even pretended to budget enough for payroll to compete with teams willing to pay Major League salaries for Major League players.

Loria hasn’t even had to dig into his own pockets for payroll - for the last couple years he’s accepted more in revenue sharing than the cost of his players.

This is not to curse revenue sharing. It’s one of the few moves predicated under the Bud Selig era that I think has actually helped the game. But it’s not my understanding that revenue sharing was ever meant to result in Major League owners lining their pockets with cash.

While the owner reportedly committed to a $40 million budget for the 2009 season he’s continued his cheapskate ways this offseason. Free agency hasn’t even started and he’s made three trades that amount to nothing - nothing - more than a salary dump.

Loria and his front office staff moved 30-homer, but arbitration-eligible first baseman Mike Jacobs to Kansas City for a middle reliever who threw 45 solid-but-unspectacular innings last year for the Royals.

He followed up by moving pitcher-on-the-rise Scott Olsen and solid veteran outfielder Josh Willingham to Washington for Emilio Bonifactio and two minor leaguers.

Now, on Thursday, his Marlins dealt closer Kevin Gregg to the Chicago Cubs and in return received another minor leaguer, right-handed pitcher Jose Ceda.

Now, Gregg is no future hall of famer by any stretch. He converted 29 saves but blew nine. But his batting average against was .203 and his ERA was a solid 3.41 - who knows how many more of those games he might have saved with a surrounding cast of guys deserving of being paid at the Major League level?

Jeffrey Loria certainly isn’t the only owner who gets villified for pinching pennies. The Oakland Athletics are sellers more frequently than they are buyers. But they often get in return Major League ready and stud prospects in return and are generally perennial playoff contenders. And the Minnesota Twins have been criticized for chasing down second-rate free agents and not going after the “one bat” or “one arm” that would put them over the top.

But last offseason they also opened their wallets to re-sign Joe Mauer, Justin Morneau and Michael Cuddyer. And even with a $20 million-or so decrease in salary after losing Torii Hunter to Anaheim and trading Johan Santana, the team came within a one-game playoff with the Chicago White Sox of winning the American League Central.

AND with the $20 million decrease, the Twins’ payroll was still $30 million larger than Florida’s and nowhere near a point where Carl Pohlad could start pocketing his revenue sharing dollars.

And sure, is it possible the Marlins could go on a free agent frenzy, signing a couple of big-name guys and getting their payroll up to the $40 million Loria reportedly promised? Sure it is. But what’s the point. I can see it now - when those vets team with a bunch of should-be-Triple A players to be 20 games under .500 at the All-Star Break, Loria will say he made an effort. He’ll trade off his free agent signees for yet another collection of mid-level minor leaguers and go back to sucking off of the teat of the league’s large market teams.

Loria’s shenanigans have gotten ridiculous. Short of banning Loria from the game - a move I think Marlins’ fans would find defensible if not desirable at this point - Major League Baseball needs to take action to prevent revenue sharing from becoming just another bad league joke (joining decisions like having the All-Star game determine who gets homefield advantage in the World Series). Whether it’s setting a salary floor or mandating that revenue sharing funds be doled out only in the amount of 50 percent or 75 percent of total salaries and that remaining amounts will be forfeited if not spent, the league MUST act.

The Marlins and their $22 million salary, in this day and age, are a bigger hindrance to the competitiveness of the league than the $200 million-plus salaries spent by the “large-market” teams on the east coast. And it’s not close.

By allowing this to go on Major League Baseball is complicit with Loria in perpetrating one of the great professional sports frauds of our day. It’s almost as though Major League Baseball is looking to shut down the Marlins much like it did the Expos a few years ago. When that happens, I wonder which team the league will hand Loria to dismantle next.