Saving Money > Winning Titles?

Come again?

I don’t know what it is about Sundays, but it seems that Sheldon Ocker’s pieces just keep getting stranger and stranger. This week he points out something that I didn’t realize anyone thought: saving money is more impressive than winning a World Series.

…

Alright, I have given Larry Dolan some slack and I am a huge supporter of the youth movement, but this reasoning just smells to high heaven. I am really hoping this article is sarcasm and that he rips me up for taking it too seriously.

“So what if the club wins 75-80 games? The Indians are striking a blow for fiscal responsibility at a time when salaries are threatening to spiral out of control again.” Yeah, that’s a great attitude. Who cares if the team is in the toilet year after year? They are really showing these over-spending juggernauts who’s boss! If they’re saving so much damn money, could they at least knock down concession prices? A hot dog and a beer costs $12 if I remember correctly. I’m glad that Larry Dolan is saving money, because it costs me nearly two hours work to to eat at his stadium.

I don’t even want to acknowledge the scenario he uses to defend it (but I will), which is one in which the Tribe signs Albert Pujols for $30 million per season. I realize that is nearly two-thirds of the current payroll. However, if the Indians were contenders year after year then they would have more attendance (455 consecutive sellouts, if memory serves me), and in turn could shell out the cash to bring in players to fill holes (second and third base? Starting rotation?). Most importantly, they would stand a far better chance of, at the very least, retaining the talent that they currently have. Can I get an amen? What the hell good is the youth movement if you’re trying to make a point by saving money? In turn, you’re just going to let everyone walk, go right back in the crapper, and continue to have a bottom-10 payroll and very little revenue. Essentially, by not investing money into winning, which would earn much more money, you’re cutting off the nose to spite the face.

Next he throws out a completely erroneous statistic: the Yankees have won less than 25% of all World Series. Wrong. They have won just OVER 25% (27/106) while winning the pennant over 37% of the time (40/106). More than once every three years, on average, Yankee fans are watching their team play for a title and once ever four years, they’re winning one. Furthermore, in the post-strike era (1994-present), where salaries have really ballooned, the Yankees have won five out of 16 world series, as well as seven American League pennants overall. According to Ocker, though, winning and having more money just makes things more complex than they need to be. Yes, that may be true for those of us who aren’t accountants, but I don’t think that having more money has ever been a PROBLEM for any business. Ever. In history.

I’ve said earlier, I really hope that this is a sarcastic article from Mr. Ocker. I am not trying to make enemies by any means, but I feel someone is blatantly wrong I am going to call them out on it, and when I read this article there were sirens going off in my head. I certainly feel that when signing free agents it should always be quality over quantity, but (some exceptions not withstanding) you have to spend in this league to win. I know low-budget teams do win in this league, but not nearly as often. Besides, answer me this: when is the last time the “low-budget” (now over $100 million) Twins beat the Yankees in the postseason?