Add new comment

Just some quick calculations, though I might be missing something.
Total AL payroll for 2009: $1.36B or $97.1M per team
Total NL payroll for 2009: $1.39B or $86.9M per team
Except that when you exclude the Yankees (49% higher than highest NL team), the AL avg. drops to $88.6M
So for the non-NYY teams, the difference is $1.7M per team, which I don't think is all that significant.
But the NL has the four lowest-payroll teams, and one of those (Florida) is 43% below the lowest-payroll AL team (Oakland).
Also, as it happens, the NL has two high-payroll teams that have failed to show the ability to get consistent results for their bucks (Mets and Cubs)
And, as it happens, the AL has two/three low-payroll teams that generally do show the ability to get good results for their bucks (Twins, A's historically, Rays in 08)
So I think a fuller picture is that, right now, the NL has lower bottom-feeders (Pitt for all time apparently and Fla, Wash, SD at the moment); the AL has the one team that can dig deep for the stars at the top of the market (and, as Doc points out in his S&S pardigm, the mega-stars are the ones most likely to deliver); the NL has a few teams with more money than smarts and the AL has a few teams with more smarts than money.
But, if the data are as compelling as Matt says, I wonder why (1) don't free agent fringe pitchers insist on signing with the NL to boost their stats and (2) NL teams don't raid AL rosters for "hidden Ryan Franklins" who will be NL stars?