Adjusted for inflation, buying power isn’t what it used to be in MLB

NEW YORK, NY - FEBRUARY 06: Yankee exhibit with Babe Ruth photo on display in the lobby for 'Bronx Bombers' Opening Night on Broadway at Circle in the Square Theatre on February 6, 2014 in New York City. (Photo by Walter McBride/WireImage)
NEW YORK, NY - FEBRUARY 06: Yankee exhibit with Babe Ruth photo on display in the lobby for 'Bronx Bombers' Opening Night on Broadway at Circle in the Square Theatre on February 6, 2014 in New York City. (Photo by Walter McBride/WireImage)
2 of 10
Joe DiMaggio (right) with Yankee teammate Allie Reynolds. (Photo by Sports Studio Photos/Getty Images)
Joe DiMaggio (right) with Yankee teammate Allie Reynolds. (Photo by Sports Studio Photos/Getty Images)

From $50k to $100k

When Hank Greenberg died in 1986, numerous news sources eulogized him as the game’s first $100,000 player. It was written that Greenberg got that much from the Pittsburgh Pirates after they purchased him from Detroit prior to the 1947 season.

You can still find internet sources today who assert that Greenberg was the first to $100,000.

Our best understanding of the facts suggest otherwise. They say Greenberg only actually got about $85,000 from the Pirates, and that the $100,000 barrier lasted two more seasons until being broken by Joe DiMaggio in 1949.

By 1949 standards, DiMaggio’s six-figure deal sounds rewarding. Again, however, adjusted for inflation, it looks puny by modern standards.

It adjusts to $1.25 million in today’s currency. Who today will earn about $1.25 million? That happens to be precisely the amount for which Austin Gomber will labor to get opponents out in Colorado.

Is Austin Gomber the modern equivalent of Joe DiMaggio? On the field, not hardly. Gomber was 5-7 with a 5.56 ERA  in 17 starts for the Rockies in 2022. That equated to a 0.3 WAR. DiMaggio amassed a 4.3 WAR in helping the Yankees to the 1949 World Series title. Inflation can’t explain that difference.

Best case scenario: That’s something for Gomber to shoot for in 2023 … but you probably don’t want to bet on it.