Along with the "20 teams have won in the last 30 years" stat (it's 19--how Peter Gammons wouldn't double-check this before quoting it, I have no idea), the other bullshit fact is to say that payroll doesn't matter because only two teams have won with a 100 million dollar payroll. First, the 2000 Yankees had a payroll of over 100 million (their opening day payroll was below, but they paid out something like 113 million that season), adding them to the 2004 and 2007 Red Sox for a total of three teams. But regardless if you count it as two or three, this is like saying, "the top 20 grossing movies of all-time worldwide include no movies from before the 1990s, so movies weren't popular back then." It's so stupid--you have to compare payrolls within one season. You can't compare 2008 to, say, 1978, when the entire league didn't pay out $100 million combined. $100 million teams didn't exist before ten years ago. How do these paid journalists not know this?

And what about the fact that only one team can win each year? If 20 teams each year had a 100 million dollar payroll for five years, you can still only have five champions. So you could look at it as "only 5 out of a 100 teams won with their huge, 100 million dollar payrolls! Five percent!" Or you could see the reality which is that every champion (100%) had a 100 million dollar payroll.

Wanna see some funny candid shots of PawSox past? Baseball Heavy has a bunch up. Go there and just start scrolling. Roberto Petagine's face has been plastered on many of them....