That wasn't your argument, though.
"The Red Sox bought a World Series in 2004."
"The 2 highest payrolls for any championship teams were the Sox in 07 and the Sox in 04."
In both of those seasons, the Yankees SIGNIFICANTLY outspent the Boston Red Sox. What exactly are you accusing the Red Sox of, exactly?
[table]Year|Highest Payroll|Amount|Second Highest Payroll|Amount|% above #2
1996|NYY|$61,511,870|BAL|$55,127,855|11.580%
1997|NYY|$73,389,577|BAL|$64,611,399|13.586%
1998|BAL|$74,170,921|NYY|$73,963,698|0.280%
1999|NYY|$91,990,955|TEX|$80,801,598|13.848%
2000|NYY|$113,365,877|ATL|$95,010,734|19.319%
2001|NYY|$109,791,893|BOS|$109,558,908|0.213%
2002|NYY|$125,928,583|BOS|$108,366,060|16.207%
2003|NYY|$149,710,995|NYM|$116,868,613|28.102%
2004|NYY|$182,835,513|BOS|$125,208,542|46.025%
2005|NYY|$208,306,817|BOS|$123,505,125|68.662%
2006|NYY|$194,663,079|BOS|$120,099,824|62.084%
2007|NYY|$195,229,045|BOS|$143,526,214|36.023%
2008|NYY|$209,081,579|DET|$138,685,197|50.760%[/table]
My point is, can you really use an argument that says the Sox had the highest payroll of any WS winner when the Yankees outspent them by 46 and 36%, respectively?