I never said what he posted wasn't accurate. I questioned its relevance.
The Yankees were able to trade Chapman, get a very good haul of prospects in exchange, and then turn around and the very next year sign him in free agency because they're one of the only teams with money to sign him. That is the advantage I'm referring to. But oh no, they didn't win the world series last year so that advantage actually didn't happen! Teams like the Yankees can afford to whiff on a major signing. If a small market team gives out a massive contract and the player flops? It severely impacts the team for years
It's just such a lazy way to look at things. A team can have a massive advantage and still not win a world series. Just because you start further up in the race doesn't mean you're guaranteed to always win it. Hey, my measurement of success will literally be based on solely world series wins and an average payroll. It's just shit tier analysis.
How about looking at playoff appearances? How about looking at the top 3 teams in payroll over that time period instead of the average? The entire problem in baseball is with the top 4 or 5 teams not teams 15-6.
He provides one metric