Yankees interested in Zambrano?

[Ace]

<!--quoteo(post=72933:date=Dec 24 2009, 10:46 AM:name=Scarey)-->QUOTE (Scarey @ Dec 24 2009, 10:46 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=72931:date=Dec 24 2009, 11:35 AM:name=Ace)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Ace @ Dec 24 2009, 11:35 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I've never pointed to ANY ONE FACTOR.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Yes you have.

<!--quoteo-->QUOTE <!--quotec-->if two teams spend the same amount of money, and one team consistently wins more than the other over a stretch of SEVERAL years ... what's the differing factor? <b>It's the guy making the decisions on HOW to spend that money.</b><!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Then, to try to understand my argument, you pointed out luck as alternatively being the one factor:

<!--quoteo-->QUOTE <!--quotec-->It can't all be luck.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Then you even followed up that comment by saying:

<!--quoteo-->QUOTE <!--quotec-->There is a single common factor.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I don't know what to tell you here Ace.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

That last "single common factor" didn't mean a single common factor making a team shitty - I meant a common factor on the team through the years. I'm trying to STRIP AWAY all the other possible factors by making the initial proposition as broad as possible. There isn't a "single factor" that makes a team underperform. I'm saying, if you equalize everything else, there comes a point where all you're left with is the front office.

JUST READ THE LAST POST, WHICH IS IN THE ABSTRACT. That's all I need, Scarey. Tell me how it is possible to disagree with it.