The claim "the market succeeds in incentivizing good decisions on a short timescale" is at odds with the article's demonstrated conclusion "the market fails to incentivize good decisions on a short timescale in the field of baseball". So you're left with two possible ways to resolve this: either baseball is unique and the market doesn't work properly there for reasons that don't generalize (but the article gives some reasons to believe that this isn't the right way to resolve the contradiction), or baseball isn't special and non-baseball markets very likely do similar things.