Deep Thoughts: Stephen Strasburg shutdown edition

21 Comments

Mark Zuckerman of CSNWashington.com has a column up about the impending end of Stephen Strasburg’s season:

Having been informed by team management last week he will be shut down following next Wednesday’s start in New York, Strasburg finally has a clear view of the finish line on what will be remembered both as an equally remarkable and frustrating season for the young right-hander …

… “He’s all-in,” manager Davey Johnson said. “Every time he goes out, he’s committed to be the best he can be. He probably puts that standard higher than I like it. So I don’t see him ramping down to the last one of two, going at it any harder or any softer.”

Hope Johnson is right about the harder part. Because I get these visions of Strasburg, knowing that he has no reason to conserve energy because his season is over, rearing back for some extra mustard and blowing his arm out or something.  Obviously that would be horrible and no one on the planet wants that to happen, but the irony, hoo-boy, that would be thick as hell. Sorry, my mind tends to wander into dark places sometimes.

That aside, I’m pro shutdown if the only alternative is this hooey from Jack McCaffery of the Times Herald:

So how can Selig nap while the Washington Nationals are announcing that they will disengage All-Star right-hander Stephen Strasburg under some cockeyed formula they believe will keep him stronger for some other season, not this one? … Selig, though, should demand that it not reach that point. For the good of the game, every team should be made to try its best to win every time it plays. Every. Time.

Yes, Bud should FORCE teams to make this or that personnel decision. That makes total sense.

(Thanks to Steve Silver for alerting me to McCaffery’s nonsense)

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

Getty Images
2 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.