Jan 17, 2012, 1:55 PM EDT
Yesterday and today the site has been overrun with posts about arbitration-eligible players and teams avoiding hearings with one-year contracts, which has led to an incredible number of comments basically complaining about the money players are paid.
That’s not an uncommon sentiment expressed in the comments section here year-round, but it’s particularly prevalent today as the usual complaining about overpaid athletes combines with some confusing aspects of the arbitration process.
I’m certainly not going to disagree with the notion that, say, Juan Carlos Oviedo getting $6 million seems like an awful lot for a non-elite reliever, but it’s also important to remember how the economics of baseball tend to work. There are some exceptions, of course, but in general team payrolls are directly related to team revenues, so if you think players are paid too much you’re basically saying that owners should pocket more.
And does anyone really want to make that argument?
- Hank Aaron is getting vile racist hate mail in retaliation for pointing out that racism still exists (244)
- “They Don’t Know Henry” (154)
- The Red Sox are still steamed that a PED guy played against them in the playoffs last year (130)
- Doug Glanville’s story about being racially profiled at his own home (125)
- There is still a racial divide in baseball (112)