Originally posted by Brent Grenier:
Wow. I wish I could make $126,000 for approximately 3 hours of work.
Earn your employer more than that for three hours and I bet you might. And if you did draw in more revenue than the expenses your salary incurred ... itíd be worth it, wouldnít it?
But, seriously, that's just one player. None of your figures count the other eight of the field.
Yes, they do. Or more accurately, they don't need to because we're only dealing with the unusual nature of ARod's salary. It is not, as we well know, the norm.
Alex Rodriguez and his salary is an anomaly
, and if you're not the Montreal Expos, 5,000 fans per game is absurdly
low (I live near a low-A ball team that draws more by some 1,500 a game). He will invariably be the highest paid player on any
team, Yankees included, which means my numbers instantly plummet for all other players. Do the math. If you bring him to a market where he can create a 5,000-per-game boost in fans Ė which I have displayed is not unreasonable Ė he pays for himself. The trick is to ensure you retain the fans and that you don't spend too much elsewhere. Considering that in the case of a trade, which is exactly the case here, those numbers are lower
since his big salary is somewhat offset by the salary he replaces, the boost needed is even smaller. (Texas absorbed it all
signed they signed him outright. ARod's salary replaces Alfonso Soriano's on the Yankees' payroll, which offsets it some).
We talked 5,000 per game. If the other eight players on the field made Arodís salary, know what the math is? 40,000 fans per game. Hardly unreasonable. 'Course, a team is more than 9 players, so the rest of the staff would have to make next to nothing. But once again, Arodís salary is an anomaly
, which is how we're dealing with it. How much must a team's draw increase about its norm to deal with his salary? That was the question I dealt with. The out-of-this-world figure his salary is, it very well may be worth every penny based on dollar numbers alone.
Believe me, I don't support the notion that the guy gets paid that much. I think it's absurd, and wrote a column about it when the contract was first signed. I don't think it established a good standard. By by the numbers, I can see how a team could justify it for the (second) best player in the game.