A-Rod Tangent

All this A-Rod talk has made me remember something else that's bugged me. Back in 2001 A-Rod signed the biggest contract in sports history, a 10 year, $252 million deal with the Texas Rangers. During his tenure in Texas he was very, very productive (and apparently could afford some steroids as well). However, despite his big numbers the Rangers never amounted to much, and he was eventually traded to the Yankees.

One of the memes that developed during his time with the Rangers and since is, while A-Rod was very good, his contract was a "crushing weight" on the Rangers which prevented them from signing other quality players in order to compete, especially some good pitching. Getting rid of A-Rod was supposed to give them the payroll flexibility to be competitive.

This, to me, is a bogus theory. Didn't the Rangers think this through before signing A-Rod? Didn't they consider that signing A-Rod was only one part in building a winning team? Did they not think they were going to have to actually pay him? Did they think he was going to throw 200 innings a year in addition to hitting and playing shortstop?

This whole meme is nothing but a cop out for the Rangers being stupid. They made a shortsighted decision of their own free will, and when it didn't work out (as it probably wasn't going to) they managed to successfully shift the blame to A-Rod and his contract, not their stupidity.

By the way, since being freed from A-Rod's "crushing" contract, the Rangers have won precisely... nothing. In fact, their payroll was cut in half (way more than getting rid of A-Rod alone would account for) and has only trickled upward gradually. Their win total, on the other hand, has remained mostly flat.