From rotoworld.com: “The Royals and Brett Tomko have reportedly agreed to a one-year, $3 million contract. It's so ridiculous to complain about what Alex Rodriguez is making when baseball is swimming in so much cash that Tomko can disappoint organization after organization and still receive $3 million. The soon-to-be 35-year-old had a 5.55 ERA while pitching in two of the National League's bigger ballparks last season. Once in 10 years -- with the Giants in 2004 -- has he actually met the expectations a team had for him. There's simply way too much money being made by baseball if he's worth $3 million.”
Yes, Brett Tomko and countless others are underperforming, overpaid lucky bastards. But remind me – which came first – Tomko et. al making a few mil per year or A-Rod’s 10-year, $252 million deal? The truth is that Rodriguez’s contract is the one that caused Joe (Well Below) Average’s perceived value to increase for no good reason. If A-Rod had signed a contract that made him the highest-paid player in the game but only barely, maybe Tomko would be making closer to the league minimum for a veteran.
A-Rod fans defend his salary because he’s good at his job, but in what other sport – let alone what other field – is one man or woman worth more than $25 million PER YEAR FOR 10 YEARS?!!! Albert Pujols is pretty damn good at his job, but he’s only making $100 million for seven years – a hair under 13 mil/per, or just over HALF of A-Rod’s annual salary.
A team is made up 25 players, and while some players may contribute more to the team’s success, no single player is worth what A-Rod has been making every year of this millennium. The Texas Rangers could have finished last – a combined 54 games under .500 – in 2001, 2002, and 2003, without their star shortstop.
I love baseball, but the contracts that ballplayers – from role players to superstars – hold out for, and eventually agree to, make me sick.
Keywords: A-Rod, Greed, Salary
