It was predictable because, by all rights, a team that can afford to buy and keep all the best players available, and an owner who will spend more than anyone to do just that, should win it all. Perhaps the only surprise should be that they don't win it all every year, given these advantages. The fact remains that during this past decade (2000-2009) they were in the postseason all but one year (last year, 2008) and so every one of those years they were one of eight teams that were in position to claim the ultimate prize. The run of success of course extends much farther back, but I want to focus on this decade.
There is much hue and cry, but the simple fact remains that MLB is the only one of the four major professional leagues (the NFL, NBA, and NHL being the others) that does not employ some form of a salary cap to force at least a semblance of payroll balance. The MLBPA, only the most powerful trade union in the United States, is diametrically opposed to anything that even smells like a salary cap.
In the face of this, though, is baseball so competitively unbalanced compared to the other three sports? Judging by participants in the championship game or series during this decade, the answer would be no. Here are the results of the championship game or series for each of the four during this past decade (the number in parentheses refers to the number of unique teams competing):
| MLB (14) |
NFL (14) | NBA (11) | NHL (11) |
| 2000 Yankees def. Mets 2001 Diamondbacks def. Yankees 2002 Angels def. Giants 2003 Marlins def. Yankees 2004 Red Sox def. Cardinals 2005 White Sox def. Astros 2006 Cardinals def. Tigers 2007 Red Sox def. Rockies 2008 Phillies def. Rays 2009 Yankees def. Phillies |
99-00 Rams def. Titans 00-01 Ravens def. Giants 01-02 Patriots def. Rams 02-03 Buccaneers def. Raiders 03-04 Patriots def. Panthers 04-05 Patriots def. Eagles 05-06 Steelers def. Seahawks 06-07 Colts def. Bears 07-08 Giants def. Patriots 08-09 Steelers def. Cardinals |
99-00 Lakers def. Pacers 00-01 Lakers def. 76ers 01-02 Lakers def. Nets 02-03 Spurs def. Nets 03-04 Pistons def. Lakers 04-05 Spurs def. Pistons 05-06 Heat def. Mavericks 06-07 Spurs def. Cavaliers 07-08 Celtics def. Lakers 08-09 Lakers def. Magic |
99-00 Devils def. Stars 00-01 Avalanche def. Devils 01-02 Wings def. Hurricanes 02-03 Devils def. Ducks 03-04 Lightning def. Flames 04-05 (No season played) 05-06 Hurricanes def. Oilers 06-07 Ducks def. Senators 07-08 Wings def. Penguins 08-09 Penguins def. Wings |
Baseball actually ties for first with the NFL in terms of unique teams which have competed in the championship game or series. In the span of ten years, eight different teams won the World Series; only the Yankees and Red Sox won more than once. By comparison, seven different teams won the Super Bowl and the Stanley Cup, and only five different teams won the NBA championship.
It's also worth noting that although it is an apples and oranges comparison between these leagues when discussing how many unique teams have simply qualified for postseason play, since baseball qualifies significantly fewer teams for its playoffs-- only eight each year, as compared to 12 in the NFL and 16 (twice as many) in the NBA and NHL-- 23 of the 30 teams did play in the postseason this decade.
Does all this mean anything? Maybe, maybe not. Looking at the eight teams qualifying for the postseason in 2009, six of them-- Yankees, Red Sox, Phillies, Dodgers, Cardinals, and Angels-- were among the top 10 highest payrolls; the remaining two, the Twins and Rockies, are in the bottom half of in terms of payroll. You see a team like the Twins get in this year and the Rays get in last year-- even going all the way to the World Series-- and you think there's a chance for teams on all levels to compete. But just making it one year doesn't prove much. The Colorado Rockies reaching the postseason in two of the last three seasons is a more promising sign. But will a mid-market team like Colorado ever be able to keep enough of their best players to sustain a long run of success? They already traded Matt Holliday before this past season rather than watching him walk as a free agent. Meanwhile, on the bottom, teams like the Royals, Nationals, and Pirates have no chance of competing in the current economic climate, and their fan bases will continue to erode until their ownership shows the willingness to truly turn their situation around.
Many people say the Yankees are bad for baseball. They believe any situation in which one franchise can handily outspend its competition is inherently unfair, imbalanced, and noncompetitive. They believe that Major League Baseball has been reduced to, as another writer on this site termed it, a "feudal system" in which the 30 teams are split, roughly equally, into three basic tiers: at the top, the teams which can spend almost as much as they want, sign elite free agents, and sign their own homegrown players to long-term contracts; the middle tier, whose treasure chests are not quite so deep; they cannot spend as freely, but they are blessed with dedicated owners and intelligent upper management, who run superior minor-league systems, scout well, and seem to be able to keep replenishing their rosters with a mix of promising young players and veteran talent that serve to fill in missing pieces but aren't the elite "name" players; and the bottom tier, plagued by small payrolls, unfavorable television contracts, and perhaps worst of all, inept or simply uncaring ownership and management. These teams, perennial cellar dwellers, become, essentially, farm teams for the top tier.
In the end, it's not pointless to be a team of any team besides the Yankees. At least half the teams in both league can be considered real playoff contenders, at least at the beginning of the season. But there's a considerable difference between merely being able to reach the postseason, and having a realistic shot of winning it all, and it's an even smaller group of teams that can win the World Series more than once over the course of several years. And until drastic change occurs in baseball's basic economic structure, that group will remain quite small indeed.


















more


