Keuchel - The Principled Social Warrior Of Fairness

[TeeJoe]

The writer did his best to paint Dallas as that no nonsense warrior for what is right. Patiently trying to battle for the greater good of all.
https://www.yahoo.com/sports/dallas-keuchel-knows-what-hes-worth-and-will-not-settle-035643666.html

Didn't the Astros offer 2 years at 18MM? I'm having a really hard time being sympathetic to 9MM a year not being enough fair pay to play baseball.

[Waldo]

Didn't the Astros offer 2 years at 18MM? I'm having a really hard time being sympathetic to 9MM a year not being enough fair pay to play baseball.

Maybe I missed something, but I think the only Astros offers I've read about were in the $18mm AAV range, like the 2016 offer, a similar standing offer prior to this past offseason, and then the $17.9mm QO.

[TeeJoe]

Maybe I missed something, but I think the only Astros offers I've read about were in the $18mm AAV range, like the 2016 offer, a similar standing offer prior to this past offseason, and then the $17.9mm QO.

You didn't miss anything. You're correct about the offers that were reported. I was mistaken about the amount of the reported 2 year offer. From more reading I've yet to see a money amount attached to the 2 year offer. My mistake.

[JimR]

Maybe I missed something, but I think the only Astros offers I've read about were in the $18mm AAV range, like the 2016 offer, a similar standing offer prior to this past offseason, and then the $17.9mm QO.

After he turned down the QO, they later offered him one and two year deals. I never read what the money was, but he said no.

Fuck him.

[geezerdonk]

The genius of Luhnow on display. Miley reasonably replicates Keuchel's effectiveness for a small fraction of the cost and the drama.

[HudsonHawk]

The writer did his best to paint Dallas as that no nonsense warrior for what is right. Patiently trying to battle for the greater good of all.
https://www.yahoo.com/sports/dallas-keuchel-knows-what-hes-worth-and-will-not-settle-035643666.html

Didn't the Astros offer 2 years at 18MM? I'm having a really hard time being sympathetic to 9MM a year not being enough fair pay to play baseball.

He was offered $90MM over 5 years and turned it down.  He keeps saying he's simply evaluating the analytical data and determining his market value.  But if you think the analytical data are telling you you're worth more than the market will offer you, you fundamentally misunderstand the data.  I like Keuchel, I'm sure he's a good dude.  But his pride is costing him tens of millions of dollars, so I have no sympathy for his situation.

[Waldo]

But his pride is costing him tens of millions of dollars, so I have no sympathy for his situation.

I think the only people truly sympathizing with players not getting paid like they once were are other players and a handful of sportswriters.

[HudsonHawk]

I think the only people truly sympathizing with players not getting paid like they once were are other players and a handful of sportswriters.

They're getting paid better than any players in history.  It's not enough for them.  It's just plain avarice. 

[TerryPuhl21]

The genius of Luhnow on display. Miley reasonably replicates Keuchel's effectiveness for a small fraction of the cost and the drama.

^^^^ This all day long.....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Bench]

They're getting paid better than any players in history.  It's not enough for them.  It's just plain avarice.

I don't agree with this. The owners are making more money than any owners in history. The players deserve their fair share. But these issues can only be addressed in a new CBA and Keuchel has to deal with the playing field he's on, and he hasn't done a very good job of maximizing his value.

[Bench]

I think the only people truly sympathizing with players not getting paid like they once were are other players and a handful of sportswriters.

And me.

[doyce7]

I don't agree with this. The owners are making more money than any owners in history. The players deserve their fair share. But these issues can only be addressed in a new CBA and Keuchel has to deal with the playing field he's on, and he hasn't done a very good job of maximizing his value.

This pretty much exactly where I stand

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

[subnuclear]

I'm sure the player's union pays close attention to MLB revenue and want to maintain their slice of the pie, but the better way to do that is to pay minor leaguer's and young players more and not overpay mid-tier guys like Keuchel.

[TeeJoe]

I'm sure the player's union pays close attention to MLB revenue and want to maintain their slice of the pie, but the better way to do that is to pay minor leaguer's and young players more and not overpay mid-tier guys like Keuchel.

Exactly!

[das]

I don't agree with this. The owners are making more money than any owners in history. The players deserve their fair share. But these issues can only be addressed in a new CBA and Keuchel has to deal with the playing field he's on, and he hasn't done a very good job of maximizing his value.

I’m not sure how I feel about this. In what reality in this capitalist market is there a direct correlation between entity profitability and employee wages?  When owners (shareholders, private owners, franchisers, etc...) go through profitable periods, employees get paid what the market will bear. When those owners sustain losses, employees still get paid what the market will bear until the thing becomes insolvent. I’m not sure it’s a reasonable expectation that owners equally share profits but bear all the risk for the ebb and flow of profitability.  I guess an analog would be a franchise like McDonalds. They are rapidly moving towards a living wage for employees but that has nothing to do with profit sharing. It’s all about customer pressures in response to socioeconomic mindset shifts.

Interesting to think through.

[juliogotay]

He was offered $90MM over 5 years and turned it down.  He keeps saying he's simply evaluating the analytical data and determining his market value.  But if you think the analytical data are telling you you're worth more than the market will offer you, you fundamentally misunderstand the data.  I like Keuchel, I'm sure he's a good dude.  But his pride is costing him tens of millions of dollars, so I have no sympathy for his situation.

Well said.

[JimR]

I’m not sure how I feel about this. In what reality in this capitalist market is there a direct correlation between entity profitability and employee wages?  When owners (shareholders, private owners, franchisers, etc...) go through profitable periods, employees get paid what the market will bear. When those owners sustain losses, employees still get paid what the market will bear until the thing becomes insolvent. I’m not sure it’s a reasonable expectation that owners equally share profits but bear all the risk for the ebb and flow of profitability.  I guess an analog would be a franchise like McDonalds. They are rapidly moving towards a living wage for employees but that has nothing to do with profit sharing. It’s all about customer pressures in response to socioeconomic mindset shifts.

Interesting to think through.

Outstanding post, das.

[Fredia]

no matter what facts and figures say you are worth at your job  the job is only worth as much as your paycheck and what worth is that if there is no paycheck

[subnuclear]

I’m not sure how I feel about this. In what reality in this capitalist market is there a direct correlation between entity profitability and employee wages?  When owners (shareholders, private owners, franchisers, etc...) go through profitable periods, employees get paid what the market will bear. When those owners sustain losses, employees still get paid what the market will bear until the thing becomes insolvent. I’m not sure it’s a reasonable expectation that owners equally share profits but bear all the risk for the ebb and flow of profitability.  I guess an analog would be a franchise like McDonalds. They are rapidly moving towards a living wage for employees but that has nothing to do with profit sharing. It’s all about customer pressures in response to socioeconomic mindset shifts.

Interesting to think through.

The relationship between worker salaries and owner profits is not linear, but it does exist (Google and Facebook pay well above market price for labor) and it's not unreasonable thing to point out in negotiating especially when you hire professional negotiators like the player's union does.

[Bench]

I'm sure the player's union pays close attention to MLB revenue and want to maintain their slice of the pie, but the better way to do that is to pay minor leaguer's and young players more and not overpay mid-tier guys like Keuchel.

They absolutely should. And I think the approach that the Astros took with Bregman is a good example of what the model should be. Compensate the prime years. The model of over-paying for what a player has already accomplished doesn't make any sense.

[Bench]

I’m not sure how I feel about this. In what reality in this capitalist market is there a direct correlation between entity profitability and employee wages?  When owners (shareholders, private owners, franchisers, etc...) go through profitable periods, employees get paid what the market will bear. When those owners sustain losses, employees still get paid what the market will bear until the thing becomes insolvent. I’m not sure it’s a reasonable expectation that owners equally share profits but bear all the risk for the ebb and flow of profitability.  I guess an analog would be a franchise like McDonalds. They are rapidly moving towards a living wage for employees but that has nothing to do with profit sharing. It’s all about customer pressures in response to socioeconomic mindset shifts.

Interesting to think through.

I think there are several differences inherent in the unique structure of a sports league as a legal cartel, which is why it is best addressed through a CBA. Also, the employees are the product.

Outside of the unique arena of professional sports, I also believe that the "stakeholders" who determine corporate policy -- including compensation -- should include the employees' interests.

[moriartp]

They absolutely should. And I think the approach that the Astros took with Bregman is a good example of what the model should be. Compensate the prime years. The model of over-paying for what a player has already accomplished doesn't make any sense.

+1000. The old bargain that emerged along with free agency—“get underpaid today and overpaid tomorrow”—is a very bad way to handle things in a market where performance peaks at age 27 or earlier. This whole mess is avoidable if the sides are willing to approach CBA negotiations in good faith.

[doyce7]

I’m not sure how I feel about this. In what reality in this capitalist market is there a direct correlation between entity profitability and employee wages?  When owners (shareholders, private owners, franchisers, etc...) go through profitable periods, employees get paid what the market will bear. When those owners sustain losses, employees still get paid what the market will bear until the thing becomes insolvent. I’m not sure it’s a reasonable expectation that owners equally share profits but bear all the risk for the ebb and flow of profitability.  I guess an analog would be a franchise like McDonalds. They are rapidly moving towards a living wage for employees but that has nothing to do with profit sharing. It’s all about customer pressures in response to socioeconomic mindset shifts.

Interesting to think through.

The difference is that McDonald's doesn't rely directly on it's employees to make money for the company and the employee is easily replaceable with anybody off the street. That's not the case here, the players are the product. Nobody goes to McDonald's for the employees and nobody goes to the ballpark for the owners.


That's why the players deserve half the profits. No players, no game, no money. If McDonald's or walmart or companies like them lose all of their employees tomorrow they can replace them within a week and be just fine.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

[BizidyDizidy]

Generally in markets where the employees are the product / differentiating factor and not fungible commodities, they get paid a serious percentage of the overall profitability of the enterprise. There is a "joke" that investment banks are socialist paradises run for the benefits of the workers, because more of the overall earnings of the firms go to pay than go to shareholders (don't pay up, it's easy to jump to someone who will).

[HudsonHawk]

I don't agree with this. The owners are making more money than any owners in history. The players deserve their fair share. But these issues can only be addressed in a new CBA and Keuchel has to deal with the playing field he's on, and he hasn't done a very good job of maximizing his value.

1) I have a hard time accepting that $20MM for working February through September isn't fair.  For any job.
2) I agree that a new CBA is what the players need.  But they simply can't see past their own greed to negotiate what's best for them.  Were it me, I'd insist on some sort of salary floor, tied to revenue and would accept a cap to get it.  But the players won't hear of it.  So they've negotiated themselves into a corner.
3) I disagree that he's not maximizing his value.  I  think he simply overestimates it.

[moriartp]

Were it me, I'd insist on some sort of salary floor, tied to revenue and would accept a cap to get it.  But the players won't hear of it.

They’ve already accepted a de facto cap, so getting ownership to agree to a floor might be an even bigger hurdle.

[JimR]

The difference is that McDonald's doesn't rely directly on it's employees to make money for the company and the employee is easily replaceable with anybody off the street. That's not the case here, the players are the product. Nobody goes to McDonald's for the employees and nobody goes to the ballpark for the owners.


That's why the players deserve half the profits. No players, no game, no money. If McDonald's or walmart or companies like them lose all of their employees tomorrow they can replace them within a week and be just fine.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

Half the profits? Bullshit.

[doyce7]

Half the profits? Bullshit.

Meant revenue. The NFL players get 48.5% of revenue, NBA has roughly a 50/50 split. I don't think it's outlandish, or bullshit, to say the players deserve a 50/50 split

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

[Col. Sphinx Drummond]

Meant revenue. The NFL players get 48.5% of revenue, NBA has roughly a 50/50 split. I don't think it's outlandish, or bullshit, to say the players deserve a 50/50 split

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

ITYM profit. I hadn't been in skool for a long time but I think revenue minus expense still equals profit.

[doyce7]

ITYM profit. I hadn't been in skool for a long time but I think revenue minus expense still equals profit.

No, I mistyped in my first post. Player salaries are a part of expenses. I'm saying that player salaries should be 50% of the money that is brought in because without them there is no money at all. That 50% should also include minor leaguers who should at minimum make twice as much as they do now.

MLB teams make money hand over fist. The value of MLB teams has gone up and up and up every year but the money being spent on players has stagnated in recent years. That's what the players are upset about, player salaries are being outpaced by MLB income and the gap is only going to grow until the CBA expires

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

[HudsonHawk]

Meant revenue. The NFL players get 48.5% of revenue, NBA has roughly a 50/50 split. I don't think it's outlandish, or bullshit, to say the players deserve a 50/50 split

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

The issue is the way revenue is divided.  In the NFL, "national" revenue is pooled and shared equally.  This includes television revenue, merchandizing, licensing, etc.  It's their largest chunk of money.  In the NBA, the revenue sharing includes ticket sales and concessions.  It's very "share and share alike".  But MLB has balked at this idea forever.  They allow each team to create their own TV deals, and aside from a relatively minor "luxury tax" on salaries, it lacks any sort of comprehensive revenue sharing plan and the disparity between big and small market teams is glaring.  To compound the problem, players have fought for years to *not* tie salaries to revenue, as they argued it artificially limited salaries.  Which it does limit salaries, but not arbitrarily and it allows the players to share a greater percentage.  I think the players have been very shortsighted in this regard. 

[HudsonHawk]

They’ve already accepted a de facto cap, so getting ownership to agree to a floor might be an even bigger hurdle.

The owners would love a cap and floor.  At least ownership outside the of the Big Four (Yankees, Red Sox, Cubs and Dodgers).  What they don't want is to share their revenue without one.

[Mr. Happy]

They absolutely should. And I think the approach that the Astros took with Bregman is a good example of what the model should be. Compensate the prime years. The model of over-paying for what a player has already accomplished doesn't make any sense.

+1