Pitcher who took $7 million for nothing decries “welfare leeches”

277 Comments

UPDATE: Braden has contacted me on Twitter, taking issue. He says that he does not believe all welfare recipients are “leeches.” Rather, only those who use drugs and receive public assistance are “leeches.”  He has not explained to me how that squares with his desire to “test the welfare leeches” for drugs. Because, if they’re only leeches once they use, why are we testing them? We already know they use!

Braden is a pitcher, not a writer, so it’s possible that he merely mistyped and demanded that something else be done with “leeches” besides testing them. And that the testing not be for “leeches” but for the good people who have fallen on hard time. So that we can determine if, in fact, they are leeches.

9:14 AM: One can believe that the welfare state as currently constructed is not the best way to help those in need and/or is not the best use of resources. That’s just a matter of philosophy and politics and values and stuff and reasonable people can disagree without being rude and insensitive.

Unemployed pitcher Dallas Braden, however, is not interested in philosophical debates:

Pretty big talk for a guy who took nearly $7 million from the Athletics for a grand total of three starts between 2011 and 2012.

Oh, wait: you mean there were extenuating circumstances there? His inability to pitch those years was because of injury and not because he was some lazy leech sucking off the teet of some rich benefactor without doing anything in return? That he actually would have preferred to work for his money but simply was unable to due to the hand he was dealt? But that’s impossible! I am told by people like Braden himself that everyone who is paid without having to work is an awful bum.

In other news: there are some people from the 209 who live on government assistance. I wonder what they think of their crusading superhero and lord protector.

Rays lose, clinching postseason berth for Athletics

Thearon W. Henderson/Getty Images
Leave a comment

The Rays lost 4-1 to the Yankees on Monday night, which clinched a postseason berth for the Athletics just as they began their own game against the Mariners. For the 94-62 A’s, it’s their first postseason appearance since 2014 when they lost the AL Wild Card game to the Royals.

Major League Baseball celebrated the Athletics’ achievement by tweeting this fact: The A’s are the first team since 1988 to make the postseason with baseball’s lowest Opening Day payroll ($66 million).

Yay?

John J. Fisher, who has owned the A’s since 2005, has a net worth approaching $3 billion. The Athletics franchise is valued at over $1 billion. Yet the A’s have never had an Opening Day payroll at $90 million or above and have consistently been among the teams with the lowest payrolls. The cultural shift towards embracing analytics has allowed the A’s to get away with investing as little money as possible into the team. Moneyball helped change baseball’s zeitgeist such that many began to fetishize doing things on the cheap and now the league itself is embracing it.

What the fact MLB tweeted says is actually this: John J. Fisher was able to save a few bucks this year and the A’s still somehow made it to the postseason.

The Athletics’ success is due to a whole host of players, but particularly youngsters Matt Olson, Matt Chapman, Sean Manaea, Daniel Mengden, Lou Trivino, among others. All are pre-arbitration aside from Manaea. When it comes time to pay them something approaching what they’re actually worth, will the A’s reward them for their contributions or will they do what they’ve always done and cut bait? After reaching the postseason in 2014, the A’s traded away Josh Donaldson, Brandon Moss, Jeff Samardzija, and John Jaso. Each was a big influence on the club’s success. Athletics fans should be happy their favorite team has reached the postseason, but if the team’s history is any precedent, they shouldn’t get attached to any of the players. Is that really something Major League Baseball should be advocating?