Tim Lincecum narrowly defeats Cardinals duo for second straight NL Cy Young

Leave a comment

Showing more than ever before that they’re smartly willing to look beyond win-loss records to determine the league’s best pitcher, the Baseball Writers Association of America followed up their selection of 16-game winner Zack Greinke as AL Cy Young by giving 15-game winner Tim Lincecum the NL award.
Lincecum received just 11 of 32 first-place votes, which is actually one fewer than Adam Wainwright, but was second on 12 ballots and third on nine ballots to narrowly defeat runner-up Chris Carpenter. Wainwright finished third, because while a dozen voters were still swayed by his league-leading win total 15 of 32 ballots placed him third.
Javier Jazquez and Dan Haren were the only other pitchers to receive votes on the three-line ballots, both at the expense of Carpenter being absent. Vazquez received a second-place vote and Haren got a third-place nod. Cardinals fans will no doubt be upset about the NL balloting, but Lincecum and Greinke are the rightful choices as the best pitchers in each league and the fact that the BBWAA awarded two guys who combined for just 31 wins is a big step in the right direction.
Lincecum joins Greg Maddux, Randy Johnson, Sandy Koufax, Roger Clemens, Pedro Martinez, Denny McLain, and Jim Palmer as back-to-back Cy Young winners, which is pretty amazing company for the 25-year-old Giants ace. Perhaps just as amazing is the BBWAA producing the exact same order, one through five, as my ballot. Actually, so far three of the four major awards have matched my picks, and I’m hopeful that the BBWAA can continue their logical voting next week with Joe Mauer and Albert Pujols as the MVPs.

Must-Click Link: Do the players even care about money anymore?

Getty Images
10 Comments

Yesterday I wrote about how the union has come to find itself in the extraordinarily weak position it’s in. The upshot: their leadership and their membership, happily wealthy by virtue of gains realized in the 1970s-1990s, has chosen to focus on small, day-to-day, quality of life issues rather than big-picture financial issues. As a result, ownership has cleaned their clock in the past few Collective Bargaining Agreements. If the union is to ever get back the considerable amount of ground it has lost over the past 15 years, it’ll require a ton of hard work and perhaps drastic measures.

A few hours later, Yahoo’s Jeff Passan dropped an absolute must-read that expands on that topic. Through weeks of interviews with league officials, agents and players, he explains why the free agent market is as bad as it is for players right now and why so many of them and so many fans seem not to understand just how bad a spot the players are in, business wise.

Passan keys on the media’s credulousness regarding teams’ stated rationales for not spending in free agency. About how, with even a little bit of scrutiny, the “[Team] wants to get below the luxury tax” argument makes no sense. About how the claim that this is a weak free agent class, however true that may be, does not explain why so few players are being signed.  About how so few teams seem interested in actually competing and how fans, somehow, seem totally OK with it.

Passan makes a compelling argument, backed by multiple sources, that, even if there is a lot of money flowing around, the fundamental financial model of the game is broken. The young players are the most valuable but are paid pennies while players with 6-10 years service time are the least valuable yet are the ones, theoretically anyway, positioned to make the most money. The owners have figured it out. The union has dropped the ball as it has worried about, well, whatever the heck it is worried about. The killer passage on all of this is damning in this regard:

During the negotiations leading to the 2016 basic agreement that governs baseball, officials at MLB left bargaining stupefied almost on a daily basis. Something had changed at the MLBPA, and the league couldn’t help but beam at its good fortune: The core principle that for decades guided the union no longer seemed a priority.

“It was like they didn’t care about money anymore,” one league official said.

Personally, I don’t believe that they don’t care about money anymore. I think the union has simply dropped the ball on educating its membership about the business structure of the game and the stakes involved with any given rule in the CBA. I think that they either so not understand the financial implications of that to which they have agreed or are indifferent to them because they do not understand their scope and long term impact.

It’s a union’s job to educate its membership about the big issues that may escape any one member’s notice — like the long term effects of a decision about the luxury tax or amateur and international salary caps — and convince them that it’s worth fighting for. Does the MLBPA do that? Does it even try? If it hasn’t tried for the past couple of cycles and it suddenly starts to now, will there be a player civil war, with some not caring to jeopardize their short term well-being for the long term gain of the players who follow them?

If you care at all about the business and financial aspects of the game, Passan’s article is essential.