I've seen in at least a handful of places assertions that A-Rod is what's wrong with baseball today. Somehow, by exploiting the market for his relatively small-scope skills, A-Rod is "destroying" the national pastime's highest competitive level. Really? Really?
For one, the steroid debate--regardless of how I feel about it--seems of much more concern to baseball's health as a sport now, because of so many calling it an "integrity of the game" issue. For another, how about the issue of providing quality umpiring, or ensuring a watchably-competitiv e World Series? Are those issues really trumped by A-Rod net worth?
If anything, A-Rod's situation is indicative of a growing problem in baseball, which is that salaries are growing faster than Jack's beanstalk. I can admit this to be a valid topic of debate but, on the one hand, A-Rod is clearly not the only individual bound to be grossly overpaid. Carlos Zambrano's contract, or Roger Clemens's, or Carlos Silva's future deposits should be just as intimidating as A-Rod's. While $300M is SO big it sounds like the biggest culprit, I'd much rather spend $200M+ on A-Rod's production than $90M on what could be dead weight of Zambrano, in a Mike Hampton sort of way. Is the risk for A-Rod greater? Sure; there's more money. But is the likely return better? Dollar for dollar, I say it probably is.
Tim Duncan recently took $10M less than his maximum value to give the Spurs some flexibility in the future; kudos to Tim Duncan. I like to imagine (dream?) that if I were in his situation, I would do the same, with the adulation of even greater Texans and the respect of fans throughout the country being gained with an undeniably classy move. But do I fault A-Rod for going after every dollar OUTSIDE of New York? No, not the least of which because of the crap he dealt with there, from fans un-swayed by his production. People point out his penchant for being photographed with attractive blondes that aren't his wife as a negative, but, while I hate adulterers, that's him. I'd rather my baseball players do their job on the field and be duplicitous, cheating arrogant people off the field, than have them be steroid-infected or crappy performers.
Baseball is a business, and in this business, production is key. The A's and Twins and Marlins produce without huge financial reserves. Obviously, A-Rod is not on their horizon. But for some time with the financial werewithall to do it, A-Rod will be a big part of whatever 2008 success they achieve. I personally root for St. Louis, where the fans would recognize A-Rod for what his is: the ultimate baseball PLAYER of the 2000s.
So complain all you want about A-Rod being a "disgrace" to the game and baseball's "disgusting underbelly." But just remember, if you were in the business of baseball, wouldn't you want this player, this player capable of carrying a team to the playoffs with his skills, on your team, even at steep cost? I know I would, knowing full well that A-Rod is not a detriment to baseball, but rather just a supremely skilled participant that's about to get a whole lot richer.
If you don't like him, great, I probably wouldn't get along with him either. But I respect his talent, and know that some organization is going to be very happy next year...albeit a lot lighter in the wallet.
