Well, since you're being anal about this non-point, how about 20% (soon to be 25%) over the #2 team, which is in a group of a few other teams who are themselves way over everybody else.
As for the top payrolls, baseball almanac has the numbers for 2001:
I already posted the 1998 & 2002 team payrolls
Well, they might not get respect from you, but when you listen to what the other players say, the Yankees get a lot of respect. And if you think that losing a Game 7 to the heroic performance of Shilling and Johnson made the Yankees look bad, well, that's your opinion. It seems to me it made the victory so much sweeter for the D-backs because it was the Yankees, because it was Rivera. You dream of beating the best. The D-backs did it. Most teams still have a lot of respect for the Yankees. But I am sure you could beat them all by yourself.
What a silly thing to say. Let me restate this, since you're having such a difficult time grasping this concept...take away a few of the Yankee's better players and replace them with league average players so that the payroll is similar to the next teams below them (who, btw, are also way above the rest of the field)...are the Yankees as good as their competition? Hell no, they wouldn't even make the playoffs this year.
Conversely, I made the point about the Lakers winning titles with room enough to spare in their payroll to add the likes of Tim Duncan, Jason Kidd, and Dirk Nowitzki and there would still be 2 other teams right with them. Why shouldn't I respect a title earned this way much more than vice versa?
LOL. Non-point is right. You made an assertion (that the Yankees "abuse the system" that you cannot back up. All I did was demonstrate that fact.
take away a few of the Yankee's better players and replace them with league average players so that the payroll is similar to the next teams below them (who, btw, are also way above the rest of the field)...are the Yankees as good as their competition? Hell no, they wouldn't even make the playoffs this year.
LOL. OK. Yeah, take away some of the Yankees talented players and replace them with not-as-talented players, and the Yankees won't be as good. LOL. You should be a GM. That's brilliant. But of course, it has nothing to do with business.
First, there is no cap on payroll, so there is no reason for the Yankees not to set their payroll wherever they choose. Second, the question isn't what the Yankees can do with the same amount of money as the next team. The question is what is the return on investment. Are the Yankees making money hand over fist? Yes. Are they a winning ballclub? Yes. End of story. All the rest is applesauce. If the Mariners can operate their business at a profit with an 80 million payroll, good for them. If the D-Backs do it at 90. Fine. The bottom line is return on investment. The Yankees are getting that. End of story. LOL.
But I'll say it again, I would like to see some form of revenue sharing or cap to make the franchises more balanced in their resources. I'd like to see the Royals hang in there.
Conversely, I made the point about the Lakers winning titles with room enough to spare in their payroll to add the likes of Tim Duncan, Jason Kidd, and Dirk Nowitzki and there would still be 2 other teams right with them. Why shouldn't I respect a title earned this way much more than vice versa?
You can respect whatever you like. It's a free country.