It is not difficult to understand fan distress over greedy people in baseball.

As major-league baseball players were on the verge of a strike recently, fans gathered in the various stadiums to let the athletes and their handlers know how distressed they were. In Kansas City, for example, spectators made it quite clear they were not sympathetic to the highly paid players and dared them to walk out.

Many players, of course, were unhappy that they had been treated so “shabbily” by people they thought were on their side. Some in various silly moments declared they wanted never to come back to the teams that were the targets for derision. By contract they had to, even if spiritually they weren’t up for the task. But the fans had made a point.

The gist of all this is that highly paid and often grossly overpaid baseball players were seeking all sorts of new concessions even though the average fan has a difficult time getting enough money to take a family to a game. Little wonder the fans were as disgusted as they were.

In Kansas City, for example, the average salary for a Royals squad member is something like $2.4 million a year (for about a nine-month period). There are benefits, perks and all sorts of other advantages for the professionals, including attention and adulation that many of them don’t deserve, considering their off-field activities.

Why is it so hard for players to understand fans who are upset at their talk of strike for more pay and benefits? That $2.4 million is more than most people will earn in a lifetime, let alone per year playing a game that can be quite enjoyable.

Consider, too, that whether one is or is not sympathetic to the owners, most teams are on the record as suffering huge annual losses. At last reports, no more than six teams were due to end profitably this year.

How bad is it? The Kansas City Royals in one of the small markets of the American and National leagues are due to lose $20 million this year. When he died, former owner Ewing Kauffman left some $50 million in a war chest to bail out the team in troubled times so the Royals would stay in Kansas City. That nest egg has been depleted for some time.

Last year, with a payroll in the neighborhood of $30 million, the Royals about broke even. This year they had to up that pay total to around $50 million to settle new contracts. Instant $20 million loss, it seems, since the lackluster team did not play well and did not draw large crowds at home or on the road.

The Royals have opened their books for public inspection and even though player representatives accuse the front office of lying about finances, things are pretty much on the record.

So here are Kansas City players making $2.4 million a year ready to strike for higher pay while the “business” is losing $20 million. It doesn’t take a mathematical genius to see the folly of that approach, or to understand the ire of the fans who were perturbed about the prospects for a strike.

For a long time now, realists have been stressing that the time was coming when greed, mainly by players, had a good chance to kill the goose that has been laying golden eggs. The avoidance of a strike this year may have prevented that disaster for now.

But it is not out of line to think that even though the geese may still be laying those golden eggs, the grim reality that they might some day stop has come home to roost.