Forum
Forum Navigation
Cancelled !
#71 · April 10, 2020, 9:27 am
Think the "Arizona" & now "Cactus & Grapefruit" scenarios (UT writer suggested So. Cal from SD to LA using MLB & College fields!) might be necessary precursors to getting 'back to normal' eventually.... to me it's all about getting REASONABLY close to the full slate of games. Not going to happen, but HAVE to get to 120, 100, or at a rock bottom minimum: 80 games in. I don't think MLB has the luxury of waiting until the last hard hit metro area in entire U.S. gets the "all clear" from their Governor... before re-starting "normal" play/schedule in stadiums with fans.
... NO one wants to play all Summer with 95% "road" teams in AZ &/or FL... but to get the season up & running in SOME way, may have to start with something like this. I'd rather see half of 120/100/80 games MLB in this format this year than none at all b/c by the time teams can safely go back to stadiums it's too late to play any semblance of a full season. Better for teams to build TV audience & following & interest with real games ASAP (safety first of course). Issue of player availability/development/$ too; Kirby Yates makes more this season than he has in his career, Betts trade, etc etc .... if they were playing.
What I like about the idea is I feel like you could at a minimum get a similar size group (30 -50?) of high Minors guys simultaneously rolling on the back fields... I would prefer semi-normal MLB rosters; MAYBE expand to 28-30, but no more than that. 40 or 50 is ludicrous from a safety but also game integrity standpoint. Easier to just relax the callup rules ( time "down" maybe only 3 days?) I get major logistic & cost issues; but also development of major asset issues. Every team has millions invested in high draft picks &/0r Intl players... there's a multi-year issue if healthy Gore & Patino go from 90-100 IP in games last year to none this year. If I'm AAA Minor League owner, I'm pounding the table for the MLB parent team that can better afford the financial hit to step up & cover some costs.
If AZ can handle the full "200"+ players of MLB & entire Minors systems of 15 teams, that's 3,000+ players (for roughly 1 month) in normal Spring Training. Seems like even with COVID could manage say, 30 + 30 = 60 x 30 teams = 1,800 players even if all at one location. Some type of "hybrid" AAA/AA with all 30 teams in it? Anything to get max closest to MLB guys playing sooner than later.
So
#72 · April 10, 2020, 12:53 pm
I still see a July 1 start date as realistic under controlled conditions (i.e. empty stands, testing and contact restrictions on players / support personnel) in every home city. IF necessary, a more impacted region's teams could start on a full road schedule (or be temporarily homed in a safer city). That would easily get 81 games in ... add some double headers and extend games into October and hit 120 games.
That is still just under 3 months from now. Give or take, it took 3 months for shutdown to opening up (with conditions) in Wuhan, China and in the US the shutdowns are about a month in ... so the cycle may fit. We are seeing the new cases for hospitalization in NYC leveling / dropping even as at the other end the deaths are rising.
In that setup (July 1 without fans but in home cities) baseball can quickly transition to a "with fans" scenario when conditions permit. Also, might allow for carrying an expanded cadre of reserves who can work out at the facility under controlled conditions and having adequate living spaces.
#73 · April 10, 2020, 1:08 pm
Have not heard much on the minor league plans. I can't see any option by which minor league teams without fans ... those teams make virtually all their money for fan attendance ... most are not that well financed and can't (or will not) take those losses. Hard to envision MLB ... themselves losing revenue from a lack of fans ... somehow subsidizing all those minor league clubs.
MLB and MiLB already are in conflict on their longer term relationship ... and at a point where a new agreement is due to be negotiated (think at the end of 2020).
Do minor league teams refuse to put on games when the see they will just lose money for the good of the ML owners? Is MLB ... under these circumstances ... just cancel the minor league season. Will MLB "subsidize" the minor league owners? What does all this imply for future relationships between the two?
Could be a long term impact.
#74 · April 10, 2020, 6:08 pm
Quote from fenn68 on April 10, 2020, 12:53 pmI still see a July 1 start date as realistic under controlled conditions (i.e. empty stands, testing and contact restrictions on players / support personnel) in every home city. IF necessary, a more impacted region's teams could start on a full road schedule (or be temporarily homed in a safer city). That would easily get 81 games in ... add some double headers and extend games into October and hit 120 games.
That is still just under 3 months from now. Give or take, it took 3 months for shutdown to opening up (with conditions) in Wuhan, China and in the US the shutdowns are about a month in ... so the cycle may fit. We are seeing the new cases for hospitalization in NYC leveling / dropping even as at the other end the deaths are rising.
In that setup (July 1 without fans but in home cities) baseball can quickly transition to a "with fans" scenario when conditions permit. Also, might allow for carrying an expanded cadre of reserves who can work out at the facility under controlled conditions and having adequate living spaces.
Why not "control the conditions" even more by having all the players in just 1 or 2 physical locations for hopefully just the first 30 days and shoot for a June 1st start in Arizona &/or Florida? WAY less involved than the normal travel, hotels, meals, etc of a regular MLB schedule in the current climate. The bigger problem is if you just have one MLB city not "ready" by July 1st it torpedoes or causes major disruptions in the entire thing.
I realize one more month going by makes a "normal-ish" season start more likely, but my point is, no matter when that start is, it's definitely easier to temporarily execute it in 1-2 geographic locations than 30.... I assume the players are going to go to Arizona & Florida anyway for at least a brief ST restart... have to to play those games anyway! Just extend it & roll with it as long as have to before going to MLB cities....
Have to put everything on the table for this one season: expanded rosters, DH, 7 inning &/or stupid "man on 2nd" extra innings, scrapping divisions, maybe even leagues??? One suggestion was "Cactus" vs. "Grapefruit"... but if do all 30 teams in one location could keep leagues/divisions, etc.
#75 · April 10, 2020, 6:19 pm
Quote from fenn68 on April 10, 2020, 1:08 pmHave not heard much on the minor league plans. I can't see any option by which minor league teams without fans ... those teams make virtually all their money for fan attendance ... most are not that well financed and can't (or will not) take those losses. Hard to envision MLB ... themselves losing revenue from a lack of fans ... somehow subsidizing all those minor league clubs.
MLB and MiLB already are in conflict on their longer term relationship ... and at a point where a new agreement is due to be negotiated (think at the end of 2020).
Do minor league teams refuse to put on games when the see they will just lose money for the good of the ML owners? Is MLB ... under these circumstances ... just cancel the minor league season. Will MLB "subsidize" the minor league owners? What does all this imply for future relationships between the two?
Could be a long term impact.
I literally don't see how MLB can function without at least one level of Minors below it, even it is played entirely at the complex setting.... expanding rosters past 30 doesn't solve anything... that P you need when a guy goes on DL a month into season hasn't been pitching b/c he's on the bottom of the MLB depth chart and never gets in MLB games... until now when he has to.
It's the one sport where it simply doesn't work; the guys who might get called up for injury coverage (look at the Pads DL last year!) or to replace a poor performer at MLB, HAVE to be playing so they're ready when called upon.
The fact that in the big picture MLB wants to contract Minors doesn't mean they don't need them.... I feel like MLB steps in and covers AAA salaries and minors FA guys who often are high 5 low 6 figures just for minors on a prorated basis until those teams can play in stadiums in front of fans; MLB teams are the ones responsible for paying those guys anyway, right? PADS sign a minors contract with Almonte, not El Paso owners, so they have to be the ones covering guys salaries > the AAA min, correct?
#76 · April 10, 2020, 9:39 pm
Quote from Brian Connelly on April 10, 2020, 6:19 pmQuote from fenn68 on April 10, 2020, 1:08 pmHave not heard much on the minor league plans. I can't see any option by which minor league teams without fans ... those teams make virtually all their money for fan attendance ... most are not that well financed and can't (or will not) take those losses. Hard to envision MLB ... themselves losing revenue from a lack of fans ... somehow subsidizing all those minor league clubs.
MLB and MiLB already are in conflict on their longer term relationship ... and at a point where a new agreement is due to be negotiated (think at the end of 2020).
Do minor league teams refuse to put on games when the see they will just lose money for the good of the ML owners? Is MLB ... under these circumstances ... just cancel the minor league season. Will MLB "subsidize" the minor league owners? What does all this imply for future relationships between the two?
Could be a long term impact.
I literally don't see how MLB can function without at least one level of Minors below it, even it is played entirely at the complex setting.... expanding rosters past 30 doesn't solve anything... that P you need when a guy goes on DL a month into season hasn't been pitching b/c he's on the bottom of the MLB depth chart and never gets in MLB games... until now when he has to.
It's the one sport where it simply doesn't work; the guys who might get called up for injury coverage (look at the Pads DL last year!) or to replace a poor performer at MLB, HAVE to be playing so they're ready when called upon.
The fact that in the big picture MLB wants to contract Minors doesn't mean they don't need them.... I feel like MLB steps in and covers AAA salaries and minors FA guys who often are high 5 low 6 figures just for minors on a prorated basis until those teams can play in stadiums in front of fans; MLB teams are the ones responsible for paying those guys anyway, right? PADS sign a minors contract with Almonte, not El Paso owners, so they have to be the ones covering guys salaries > the AAA min, correct?
Not an issue with salaries ... that is already MLB's burden. From a minor league club standpoint is costs associated with running the ballparks (e.g. rental, insurance, club operations, etc.). Plus they would have the same health issues as MLB clubs ... maybe worse given the likely lower controls.
My guess is that (if the ML clubs are not using the ST sites) they would run a "taxi squad league" in AZ and FLA where (similar to the AZ Fall League) multiple teams combine to create a roster of players who would be likely call-ups if needed ... not focusing on "prospects" but players that may currently benefit the ML rosters ... e.g. the Almonte types ... 40 man roster and non-40 man roster types. MLB may need to be a bit more lenient on temporarily clearing 40 man roster spots for "shorter term injuries" (less than 60 days) to accommodate these guys. With that don't need any actual AAA clubs to be in play ... requires less players retained and minimizes the issue of backfilling the call-ups. I guess if the "taxi squad" begins getting depleted ... someone sitting at home can be called-in and effectively start their own personal ST to back-fill.
As for the "better prospects" ... could see in the fall an expanded AZ Fall league type situation.
===========
Personally have real doubts the "AZ bubble" concept can fly even for a short spell ... we are talking about 2000+ individuals (players, support staff, technicians, security, food/hotel support, etc.) being 100% sequestered ... the odds of that being secure is remote (especially when dealing with high testosterone athletes). One slip and that sets back the whole effort. The sooner that is attempted the higher the chance of contagion and all indications seem to be head towards a "stay at home" direction until the end of May followed by a selected softening based on some to be determined criteria.
Not so sure the players (at least all) will buy-in to the bubble concept for an undefined duration while being away from the family. Union has to agree and even then players have to show up ... not sure the upside of "forcing" anyone to be there or the legality under health concerns. Paychecks do motivate some ... but maybe not all who may opt to wait out until normalcy. Could get ugly within the Union. Should add that elements within the league want the players to take a pay cut of some type ... not a real motivator.
Same may be true among the owners with the small revenue clubs wanting the big TV revenue clubs to share during this period (e.g. the NYY and the YES Network that will rake in a bundle and demand all their games be on prime East Coast hours). Can we guess the NYY position on this ... a big NO!
Just don't see the "bubble" concept meshing with real people issues and financial issues that works for all ... and not that easy to negotiate through quickly. Wait for the home venues to be viable and if they are not in July ... we have a more significant problem than baseball.
#77 · April 11, 2020, 3:07 pm
OK, another TBD issues that may impact the Padres. Seems as though for ML players they will earn service time proportional to what they earned in 2019 if the season is cancelled ... so Yates becomes a FA and Tatis gets another year closer to arbitration / FA.
What about MiL players? If (as very likely) the minor league season is cancelled, will all the minor league players gain a year of minor league service time ... basically staying on the same track for being eligible for Rule 5 protection and gaining "6 year minor league FA" even though losing a year of development time? Basically be treated the same way as the ML players.
If so, Padres have a dilemma with 9 of their top 30 prospects becoming eligible for Rule 5 protection in December. Sort of makes the protect vs. not protect a more difficult call along with constructing a 40 man to competed at the ML level in the near term.
Eligible: #3 Patino; #5 Trammell; #8 Arias; #12 Marcano; #14 Potts; #16 Lawson; #18 J.Rosario; #24 Ornelas; #30 Bachar. If they miss a 2020 development season .. not likely any are ready to help the ML club in 2021 so some will be exposed. Even if only 5 are protected .... 40 man roster spots will already be squeezed with some rostered prospects that are not ML ready but quality prospects that would get claimed off waivers. Puts some pressure on carrying some fringe veterans / minor leaguers ... who also cost more which may not be looked on favorably while "recovering" financially from a lost season.
A lot of ways to go.
#78 · April 11, 2020, 5:20 pm
IMHO MLB needs to get together with the players union and make some changes like they are in the draft.
#79 · April 12, 2020, 8:58 am
Quote from fenn68 on April 11, 2020, 3:07 pmOK, another TBD issues that may impact the Padres. Seems as though for ML players they will earn service time proportional to what they earned in 2019 if the season is cancelled ... so Yates becomes a FA and Tatis gets another year closer to arbitration / FA.
What about MiL players? If (as very likely) the minor league season is cancelled, will all the minor league players gain a year of minor league service time ... basically staying on the same track for being eligible for Rule 5 protection and gaining "6 year minor league FA" even though losing a year of development time? Basically be treated the same way as the ML players.
If so, Padres have a dilemma with 9 of their top 30 prospects becoming eligible for Rule 5 protection in December. Sort of makes the protect vs. not protect a more difficult call along with constructing a 40 man to competed at the ML level in the near term.
Eligible: #3 Patino; #5 Trammell; #8 Arias; #12 Marcano; #14 Potts; #16 Lawson; #18 J.Rosario; #24 Ornelas; #30 Bachar. If they miss a 2020 development season .. not likely any are ready to help the ML club in 2021 so some will be exposed. Even if only 5 are protected .... 40 man roster spots will already be squeezed with some rostered prospects that are not ML ready but quality prospects that would get claimed off waivers. Puts some pressure on carrying some fringe veterans / minor leaguers ... who also cost more which may not be looked on favorably while "recovering" financially from a lost season.
A lot of ways to go.
Great question. I'm guessing that they will gain that year of "credit", since teams control them for so long from the time they're initially signed. Big issue, b/c I've contended for a long time a good "contending" MLB team simply can't afford to give very many 40-man spots to developmental "project" guys who are a full season+ away from MLB.
Presuming there is SOME MLB season, 40-man will be pressured even more by Gore who doesn't "need to be" protected but is highly likely to be added. The guys in top 10 are locks. The next guy by consensus ranking is actually Lawson, who likely won't be now after the surgery? Potts, Marcano, Ornelas, Rosario in a (consensus) group around 18-21 are really on the bubble; need breakouts answering their "big issue" questions (K rate, no power, swing changes stick?, and no power respectively) which obviously they can't have if they don't play.
Of course, the silver lining is every other team is in the same boat, and with Rule 5 rules, no one is ever going to go beyond what the Pads did a few years ago with 3 R5 guys on team.... so likely "typical" R5 with only 12 guys or whatever selected in all of MLB.
#80 · April 12, 2020, 10:41 am
Actually the simplest solution ... benefits both the organizations and the MLB players ... would be to just eliminate the Rule 5 draft.
As it is .... very few players (and fewer quality prospects) get selected and that comes at the expense of consuming 40 man roster slots that could (should) be used for ML veterans or more ML ready prospects that may actually help the current ML club. Maybe keep the “6 year minor league FA” rule in place since few players who become FA via that route are major prospects.
======
As for Gore or any other prospect that does not have to be protected in December ... create the roster spot at the point he is called-up ... that keeps the maximum assets under control into ST (and into the 2021 season) for further evaluation (or injuries) to make a better choice of who gets chopped.