The Meaning of a Sellout

I'm stepping away a bit from my usual subjects to talk about something that's been on my mind a bit lately. What is the meaning of a sellout? At what point do you consider someone to be a sellout? In particular, I am looking at this subject from the angle of a baseball fan, because, well, I am a huge, huge, HUGE baseball fan.

As an Oakland A's fan, I'm used to writing someone off as a sellout. My baseball team is a team which doesn't have a lot of money. In fact, our reputation is based on it. Most baseball teams don't have a bestseller written about their ability to put together a contending team with limited finances, but the A's have Moneyball.

Here's how it historically works for the A's. My team places a lot of stock in prospects, more so than the typical baseball teams. Prospects is how the game is played for the A's. They spend a great deal of time scouting for young, hot talent - particularly, young, hot, atypical talent. They look for the kind of players who have a lot of heart and talent, but maybe don't look or act like the typical ballplayer. They look at the fat guys, the ugly guys, maybe not the best pitcher on the team, but the one who has potential for future development. They draft those guys, sign them to long term big league contracts, rush them through the farm system, and then bring them up to the big league level just a bit earlier than other teams to give them a chance to stretch their legs and adjust to the big league level at a younger age. Then, after those long-term contracts wear out when the player is in their late 20's or so, they become free agents and run off to sign glitzy expensive contracts with a team that can afford to pay them millions of dollars. In other words, as an A's fan, I've grown accustomed to watching our players leave to play for another team.

But there seems to be some sort of a line that I draw between the typical departure, and the sellout departure. It's a gray, wiggly line that sometimes blurs when the players feet drag across the line as they're running far from the Bay Area, but that line exists.

Or does it?

I was barely a mild baseball fan in the days that Johnny Damon played for the A's. I remember seeing his name on the screen, but I don't remember anything about the details of his departure from the A's. My brother tells me that he sold out. That the A's tried to lure him into staying with us for a lower contract, but instead he signed a multi-million dollar contract with Boston and went running to the East Coast, where he became famous and created a real name for himself. Moneyball tells me differently. According to Moneyball, the A's knew they didn't stand a chance at resigning him, so they didn't even try. They just looked to the future, and eventually found Mark Kotsay.

Then there's Jason Giambi. Giambi is infamous in the major leagues now, mostly for his BALCO infamy, but at my home, in Oakland, he's still the guy who sold out and left us in the dust. It's been 3-4 years now, and the wound is still fresh in Oakland. Jason Giambi cannot step foot into the Oakland Coliseum without getting booed like mad from the Oakland fans. And why? Because he was a classic case of sellout. I DO remember the Giambi negotiations. The A's did want him back. They talked long and hard with him. They offered him a contract. They wanted him to stay the face of the organization. And we all thought he'd go for it. With bright eyed hopes of loyalty, A's fans across the board thought Giambi would stay. So it was a slap in the face to us when he signed his multimillion dollar contract with the Yankees, and ran off to New York with a new clean-cut look and a closet full of pin stripes.

On the other hand though, there's Miguel Tejada. What happened there is practically legend now. The A's learned from the Giambi scenerio and knew they could only afford a limited salary for a long-term contract, and this time, they had two free agents available: Tejada, and Eric Chavez. They had to pick between Tejada's offense and Chavez's defense as something to stake the orginization's future in. They chose Chavez's defense, and didn't even offer Tejada a contract. He went off and signed a big budget contract with the Orioles and became one of the premiere players in the game, and very few people in Oakland curse him or boo him. In fact, this past season I attended an A's/O's game, and some of the fans even cheer for him still. Oakland hasn't forgotten what Tejada did for this organization.

Between Tejada and this off season, the A's haven't LET anyone run off for a big-budget contract. The next free agents to hit the market would have been two of the Big Three, and instead of waiting for them to leave, the A's traded Hudson and Mulder just before their free agency years.

Now, everyone knows that Barry Zito has become next on the list of A's Players to leave the team for a high profile, high dollar contract. Specifically, $126 million over 7 years. Zito's contract with the Giants has made him the highest paid pitcher in Major League history, and the 6th highest paid player overall (tied, with Vernon Wells). Zito's contract has dwarfed any of the previous sell-out contracts. Zito's higher on the list of overpaid players than Damon, Tejada, AND Giambi. And he HAS been overpaid. Everyone knows it. Zito is a great pitcher, but he's not the greatest pitcher in Major League history. He doesn't deserve the salary he's been given.

That being said, I'm not calling him a sell out. I haven't talked to many A's fans about it, but from what I can see, very few A's fans seem to be labeling him as such. Why is that? What makes Giambi and Damon a sell-out that doesn't make Zito one?

It could perhaps start from the fact that the A's didn't offer him a contract. At least, if they did, it wasn't a serious one. The team knew they had no hopes of retaining him, so they didn't even try. It's a shame, but it's also reality. It could also stem from the fact that though Zito was talking to 4 different teams, he chose to stay in the Bay Area. It may not be with the A's, but it is still local.

Even that seems a bit like a lame excuse though. Zito chose to stay in the Bay Area. Does that make it an act of loyalty? Not necessarily. According to what leaks have been released about the wooing of Zito, the Giants also offered him more money than any of the other teams wooing him. So why did he pick them? Was it for the money? Or was it for the locality?

If it was for the money, then he's a sell-out. Plain and simple. But if it was for the locality, then perhaps not. Will we ever know the answer to that? Probably not.

Here's what we do know. Sell out or not, Zito's a good guy. He left the A's because he was ready for a change. Does that mean he's glad he's leaving? Not necessarily. He does seem genuinely sad to be at this point of transition. The A's, their fans, the Bay Area - we've all been there throughout the entirety of his career. He felt it was time to leave the A's, which also meant leaving the fans, but he was given an opportunity to keep the Bay Area, so he did. That doesn't mean he isn't going to miss what he's left behind. After all, he did care enough to say goodbye, and to do it publically. The ad that he took out in the San Francisco Chronicle shows a great deal of heart, of class, and of respect for the people he is leaving behind - all of the people he is leaving behind.

I've been a Barry Zito fan for a few years now, and I don't know what his departure from my team will mean for the status of my fanness in the future. I might follow his Giants. I might not. What I do know is that I feel like I SHOULD call him a sell out, but in my heart I don't feel like he is one. Barry Zito is a man with an incredible amount of class, and it is impossible for me to label him as someone to be booed, shunned, and hated. He may have sold out, but he's not a sell out.