As Team’s embarrassing, lazy, chiseling and fruitless off-season continues, and as we fans await help for solid core of hitters, pitcher(s) and defensive standouts, Blog undertakes to help others understand value of talent in Major League Baseball.
As pretext to said discourses, Blog takes notice of many and varied false notes sung by some (though by no means all) Baltimore faithful. These apologists sound on and on about a “crazy” or “overpriced” or “distorted” market price for free-agent talent.
[Subtext being that said players are best not added to Team because they are too expensive and that their demands presumably outpace said "market."
If a player demands too many years, he is too expensive. If a player demands to much money per year, our friends insist, he also is too expensive. Any combination thereof, in addition, counts in this over-posh category, in which Team cannot possibly partake.
All of this silly reasoning, of course, accepts as true the spurious suggestions advanced by Majority Owner of Team of Blog, who argues, again and again, that Team cannot possibly afford to bring on such risk (despite basic truth that Team must, necessarily, operate in world of risk.)]
As owner declaims Day to be Night, and Night Day, some non-negligible cross-section of apologist-fan accepts this as true. And Blog watches with occasional sickness, this off-season especially, as Team cedes on-field answers for on-field questions, even as direct competitors do opposite: replacing uncertainty with certainty.
Anyway, on to larger point: Blog wonders what advocates of Team’s chiseling ways understand the term “market” to be — beyond obvious notion that some things are cheap and others are expensive. So, a few basic facts about MLB’s “market” for ballplayers. In this market:
- the number of bidders is static
- the amount of free-agent talent is fairly static
- revenue throughout baseball is on rise
- revenue is projected to keep rising
- U.S. dollars are shrinking in value due to inflation
- owners are wealthy, and
- players, rightfully buoyed by a strong union, are commanding their share
That’s a “market” in which not buying anything seems a strange market strategy, especially in universe of 30 market participants all vying for the same goal, year after year, amid a limited number of legitimate commodities.
Just by contrast, here’s what this market is not:
- what Peter G. Angelos and / or Dan Duquette assert it to be
- what their apologists declare that it somehow should be
Blog has said it before, and will repeat it. Team has strong core. But it seems like a curiously poor market bet not to bullishly buy, or trade for, proven talent, thereby augmenting core’s chances.
One legitimate market choice for an owner beset by high costs, of course, is to cash out. Are you listening, Pete?