Quote from fenn68 on May 16, 2020, 7:39 am

Undoubtably part of the owner - union negotiation (but have heard no status) is the date for the "trade deadline" in 2020. Most seem to feel it will move back from July 31 if the games resume in July although some may argue that not having a trade window at all ... given the circumstances with health / player disruption may be warranted.

IF their is a trade window in 2020 (and clearly next winter) ... the wealthier teams may have a big advantage with greater resources to take on bigger contracts (arguable the better players) while the poorer teams are trying to move those contracts (probably with an under value return). Teams such as TB, KC, OAK, CLEV, and others may go some sort of housecleaning to recoup some of their 2020 losses. Given the owners' approach to minimizing the draft and reducing baseball operations staff ... at some point conserving cash is more critical than players, at least in the short run. Should see that same inequity in the FA market (note, I believe, the owners have agreed to eliminate revenue sharing of revenues from attendance among teams for 2021 ... so that would be really hurting some low attendance teams).

Not sure were SD will stand but 2020 was ticketed as their highest payroll ever ... should see a pull back making the resigning of Yates, Profar, and Richards less likely if some other team is interested and since the "lost" money from their contracts in 2020 they will follow the money as their career timeline shrinks. Might speculate that players with  2021 being their last year before FA could be moved (traded, non-tendered) if there is a capable, lower cost alternative. Pham? Davies? Garcia?

Will not be normal for sure.

Quote from Brian Connelly on May 16, 2020, 9:57 am

I have to think whether Trades are allowed at all this year has to at least be an on the table option...

Almost no time to evaluate players on your or another team.  NO way to evaluate from current playing any player in Minors likely below AA.... if you can't evaluate the asset either way on current info, what are you basing the decision on?  40 games in to an 80 game season?

But the bigger issue of course is simply the inherent health risk with moving players/families around at this time.

I could change my mind, but with an expanded playoff field in a short weird season, my initial gut reaction says there should be no trade deadline in season, MAYBE allow them up until season starts?  Even that is dubious.  Every team's financial position is going to vary so wildly by the end of 2020... think it's fair to say 99%+ major FA/Trade moves (except Puig) prior to season starting had already happened... teams were clearly pretty "set" before all this; it was "just" down to Spring Training roster battles.

Quote from fenn68 on May 16, 2020, 11:33 am

Would tend to agree that the no trade approach makes a lot of sense given the issues ... especially from the player perspective.

However, owners could try to make the case that a trade ... at some point (e g August 31) ... may help owners in financial stress needing to shed contact money in 2020 if another team is willing to take on money ... no real issue in evaluation minor league prospects since their prospect status is pretty well documented. Plus could argue that moving talent to contenders makes for better baseball viewing for the fans ... playoff viewership ... money.

Not sure the players would be all that sympathetic to those factors. Again, points for negotiation.

If no trades, that structure of the 20 player "taxi squad" (non-active roster / non-roster players) will have to be "strategic" to really cover injuries at every position with potential ML ready talent ... if the team is a legit contender. Last I read, they are still a max of 50 players in the reboot of ST.

Quote from Ben Davey on May 16, 2020, 5:40 pm

The good news for teams like Tampa and Miami, is they didnt have fans anyway, so will it really make that much of a difference?

While payroll is a real issue, I also think teams can strike a deal with hotels, flights, etc... to save cost (since people arnt traveling and staying in hotels anyway, might be able to save a few 100k over the season).

While salary dumping is normal, if there is a trade deadline, I'd be optimistic that Manfred will make sure deals make sense and its not just dumping money for nothing (unless its Wil Myers)

Quote from fenn68 on May 17, 2020, 7:02 am

Quote from Ben Davey on May 16, 2020, 5:40 pm

The good news for teams like Tampa and Miami, is they didnt have fans anyway, so will it really make that much of a difference?

While payroll is a real issue, I also think teams can strike a deal with hotels, flights, etc... to save cost (since people arnt traveling and staying in hotels anyway, might be able to save a few 100k over the season).

While salary dumping is normal, if there is a trade deadline, I'd be optimistic that Manfred will make sure deals make sense and its not just dumping money for nothing (unless its Wil Myers)

Actually for a financially strapped team that was receiving “revenue sharing” (which I believe has been eliminated for 2020 AND 2021 .. not fully sure) any payroll savings is important .... especially if they can move a player who has an expensive deal beyond 2020.

Have to think the owners will push hard for allowing trades .... especially the poorer teams: PITT, KC, CLEV, OAK, TB .... a pretty good shot group.

Besides stopping deals during 2020 season just delays the enviable (maybe even makes worse) ... some extensive financially based player moves next winter.

Hard to see the more financially strapped teams pursuing any major FA ... can see them more aggressively non-tender players not living up to their salary (probably not a big trade market of those guys) ... and if they can find buyers trade out of large contracts.

On the other hand, FA are going to find it hard to find teams to sign them ... and anywhere they thought they could sign for. “Older” FA after losing a lot of salary in 2020 and the next contract may be their last ... going to be challenging with limited money floating around to make a call on the value of signing early (securing a salary) or hold back for bigger dollars (may never come). May see a lot of “bargains” as the winter progresses and FA have no takers.

Remember, the CBA ends after 2021 and if the owners appear too cost focused in 2021 ... just makes the negotiation more difficult. No clear path that is “right”.

 

Quote from Brian Connelly on May 17, 2020, 8:04 am

I realize some deeper pocketed teams can theoretically "take advantage" of those who aren't, but I just don't see too many teams trading for big contracts in the midst of this season with all the economic uncertainty...  Obviously teams want to win while they can, but just seems like everyone is going to be "in it" 40 games into an 80 game season.   Franmil Reyes was traded at deadline last year; 55 games left with Indians = 1/3 season.  That would be 27 games left this year?

A "regular" deadline prorated is too late to be impactful this (astericked anyway) season to take on future years of $ obligation.  An early before season deadline feels risky & unfair to players & their families...  Trades are to change course, add the missing piece, replace injured players, build for the future, etc AFTER half of a season.... the first half of this season = nothing.  Teams will know a lot more about where they stand financially & talent wise after this season.

I'd make teams just run with who they've got, but do think many teams might take a hard look at current ARB last year guys (i.e. Profar) they had planned to keep as one way to cut costs.  Assume the % of salary the player would get if released before season starts would be the same % (1/6?), but might be a small pool of players unexpectedly available as FA due to this.

Quote from Brian Connelly on May 17, 2020, 8:34 am

How about this idea?

I've maintained that one of the biggest overlooked issues to playing this season is that you need AT LEAST one level of Minors guys playing to draw upon for injury replacements.  You can only expand a 26-man roster so much before guys are just sitting there growing cobwebs; players have to be playing to step in for guys who get injured.

Sounds like "taxi" squad idea is going to take hold, so how about this?  Have the taxi squad play "JV" games on the same field as the MLB team before the MLB game.  Could just limit games to 9 or even 7 innings & accept ties, so no time overrun issues.

A LOT of positives here:

•  Could televise these games too locally?  Should be interest
• MLB Coaches/Managers would have WAY more "eyes on" these players than typical Minors season.
• Would see guys playing at PETCO, etc ... not the PCL bandboxes... easier to evaluate especially position players
• Eventually a possibility to have limited fans at these games.  The JV team would actually be easier to manage seating since not going to sell out; could cap sales at whatever in Petco....  5K, 10K, et... cheap but safe family entertainment to just go see some essentially AAA/AA caliber baseball in major U.S. cities when the time is right.  IF fans before year end in MLB, would help solve too much demand issue, since unlikely to admit anywhere near "sold out" capacity, but might be huge demand later in season.
• These players & coaches treated exactly like the MLB teams with respect to testing; easier to manage 30 groups of 50 players & coaches/staff playing @ 30 MLB venues than 60 groups of 25 players/coaches playing @ 60 different locations.
• Players would benefit watching their MLB teams live & feel much more connected.

I realize there's some issues with Minors esp the AAA teams, but maybe some type of win-win scenario even though not playing at El Paso, etc?

Quote from Brian Connelly on May 17, 2020, 9:02 am

Other random ideas...

If a team navigates the marathon of a 162 game season over 6 months with a 40-man roster, I don't think THAT should be expanded for a somewhat compressed 80 game season over 3 months.

BUT do need to account for season compression by adjusting/prorating IL rules for this season only.    Most important would be to prorate 60 day IL down to 30 day.  Open 40-man roster spot if a guy going to miss 1/3 of season (regardless of days/games).

Teams manipulating 10-day IL had caused it to go back to 15-day, but that should be dropped back to 10-day AT MOST.  More logical would be 7-day.  Personally, I'd like to see: 3-day IL all position players, 5-day IL RP's, 7-day IL SP's.  Yes, it would probably lead to roster manipulation, but teams should/would be at full strength every game with each game literally being twice as important as a "normal" season.  Teams should never be down a guy who can't play a day or 2, but can't afford to IL him.   This very likely more frequent use of "call ups" would be a huge argument for simply having the taxi squad be a full JV team travelling with the MLB team.

IMO, there would also need to be at least a skeleton staff of coaches/trainers at the Spring Training facilities for rehab & a smaller group of players...  12? 15? 20? who are "backups to the backups" that would flow up to the JV team to fill in as needed for injured players; remember, injuries happen at all levels all other seasons... have to have a way to backfill no matter how few actual "levels" of the minors there are this year.  3 MLB + 2 "JV" injured players ultimately opens 5 spots on the JV team for example. Could maybe pair up with another team to comprise a full "team" to at least have backfield game settings there (i.e 7-8 'teams' in Arizona)?  But logistically harder.  Maybe just simulated games, bullpens, etc.

Just popped into head.  Could have 4-team Minors playoffs:  Winner of each "division" (West, Central, East) + next best record.  Host at one neutral location.

Quote from fenn68 on May 17, 2020, 10:59 am

Don't really have a good idea around how to set-up and utilize the 50 man limit (30 active / 20 inactive) in part since the primary purpose of the "taxi squad" is to cover injury on the active ML roster ... so having them play in a competitive environment creates greater injury risk for them eliminating the ML clubs insurance policy if the same position gets hit with an injury at the ML level ... most obvious is catcher. Plus if they play competitively, will have to use 2 of those slot for catchers. Cannot get a good ML quality replacement "easily" if no minor league clubs are playing and trades are not happening. Maybe a team can call one of their minor leaguers ... sitting at home doing nothing and (if the rules allow) have them changed out for an injured taxi squad guy ... I am sure they can convince some veteran minor league body to show up for 1 month even at some minimal minor league type money just as emergency support. Then again will a team be allowed to replace (or changeout) any of the taxi squad?

A lot to consider ... negotiate. Clearly someone on the 30 man roster is earning service time. Would assume the 20 man is a mix of 40 man roster and non-roster types. Is a 40 man roster guy being assigned to the taxi squad considered using an option year? If not put on the taxi squad are they using a minor league option? If part of the taxi squad is non-roster ... are the same rules of adding them to the 30 man in place ... e.g. have to drop a 40 man roster player to make room? Does that impact which non-roster player added to the taxi squad .... better short term ML value vs. not quite ML ready but longer term value who may need to be added to the 40 man next winter (unless they dump the Rule 5 as part of all this). Maybe a Dozier vs. Arias type debate. Might depend a bit on how realistically a team believes in its ability to contend.

IF A then B or C or D ... not easy.