Quote from fenn68 on April 14, 2020, 3:23 pm

Somewhat as a continuation of the the issues putting the season in doubt (even without fans) .... there is a report out that COLLEGE football is considering moving its season to Feb-May, 2021 in light of the virus concerns and the discussions at a number of institutions to not open on-campus classes until 2021. Basically wait for the vaccine to be available.

Listening to Gov. Newsom this afternoon, CA may make some moves to ease the stay in place orders ... at some point ... but the likelihood of approving large gatherings before the vaccine is not likely, and priority for protection will go to the medical personnel / patients and the vulnerable first.

I guess MLB could find a more flexible state but Manfred is hedging on any of the "ideas" being floated as in the works. He is being more accommodating to the medical side of the debate ... so maybe may not want to push to hard to play thinking a potential backlash for most of the country.

Quote from MrPadre19 on April 15, 2020, 5:29 am

This is agony!
At least in the off season we have moves to discuss etc.....this is just a complete pause of all things that are good!

Quote from fenn68 on April 16, 2020, 11:42 am

Interesting speculation on the linkage of the various issues of concern in baseball and the delay/cancellation of the 2020 season (note the writer is from Forbes ... a business perspective):

===

• Maury Brown of Forbes examines the difficulties that Major League Baseball faces — and some of the possible financial solutions it could pursue. In particular, Brown posits that lost revenues — the full scope of which aren’t yet known but which are sure to be massive — could spur MLB commissioner Rob Manfred to press forward with long-pondered plans for expansion. That could also dovetail with the minor-league realignment efforts the league had already launched. Kevin Reichard of Ballpark Digest wrote recently about the fact that new MLB clubs would need additional minor-league clubs. As Brown explains it, MLB could clean house on certain existing affiliates and then “quickly whip around and expand into markets where state-of-the-art ballpark facilities could be built,” while also collecting “some form of expansion fees.”

============

That sequence does appeal to me .... getting MLB to 32 teams creates a better chance to create a more common sense schedule. Will not "need" inter-league games to have a full slate of games. 32 teams could be aligned with 8 divisions or 4 divisions ... so each league could play a full slate of games without crossing leagues ... making the World Series (and All-Star game) maybe more interesting. Also, sets up a potential for a more balanced schedule in which all teams in a division play same mix of opponents.

Additionally, opens the door to realignment ... creating more "natural rivalries" ... close by opponents that save cost of travel for teams while making it easier for team fans to travel to the opponents sites. Side bonus is if the realignment focuses on geography ... make the local TV potentially more valuable (e.g. in NYC they may not have west coast games starting at 10 PM (ending at 2 AM).

Actually a Pacific Coast Division for the Padres would benefit both the fans, the teams, and the players. AZ-SD-ANA-LAD-OAK-SF-SEA-COLO ... 8 teams maybe match with a MidWest league: TEX-HOU-KC-STL-MINN-MILW- CWS-CUBS. I could buy into that arrangement.

 

Quote from fenn68 on April 16, 2020, 3:02 pm

Would think the following should reduce the chances of any season games:

As Major League Baseball ponders various scenarios in which the 2020 season could commence in empty parks without fans in attendance, Ken Rosenthal and Evan Drellich of The Athletic write that empty-stadium games could prompt ownership to ask that the players make further concessions in terms of their 2020 salary.

The two sides already reached an agreement on service time, player salaries and a broad framework for an abbreviated draft late last month. Within that agreement, players agreed to prorated salaries that are directly proportional to the reduction of total games played.

=======

As year progresses without a definitive plan or a start date .... and players already losing salary for games not played ... asking them to take further pay cuts to help ownership stay profitable becomes a tough sell. At some point the pay they would get would not be enough to convince a lot of the players to consent to be lockdown for months (?) without their families.

MLB is NOT on the brink of bankruptcy even if the season is cancelled ... this operating risk should be on the ownership not the workers (no matter how well paid).

Quote from fenn68 on April 22, 2020, 2:13 pm

Well MLB still wants some semblance of a season and a different plan is being discussed (one of many).

Keeping in mind that it is clear they want to play the maximum number of games and seem to be willing to "modify" leagues and rules for 2020 get games in.

To that end, the latest scenario is playing (without fans) in 5 ML domed stadiums ... MIA, TB, HOU, TEX (new), AZ. Makes sense to only use domed stadiums to eliminate all weather issues (rain, inclement weather if they play into November).

They would "cluster" 6 teams in each location (has to be an even number for every team to play every day) and they could get 3 games in each day. From a TV point of view .... if games start 9AM, 2PM, 7PM in the East, Central, West ... everyone would get a full slate from early morning to late evening.

Play July 1 through Oct 31 and could get 120 games and then use Nov for the playoffs.

Since this is under any scenario a "one off" year .... could establish each cluster either based on how teams finished 2019 ... i.e. MIA gets #1-6-11-16- 21-26 (or similar) ... or mix and match based on rivalries or potential rivalries ... e.g. NYY and NYM in the same pod, same with Cubs and CWS.

Actually sounds better than cluttering in minor league ballparks in AZ/FLA ... beyond the weather issues ... MLB ballplayers likely would be more willing to play on ML fields (weather protected) and ML clubhouses / medical facilities. Also, a ML domed stadium should have better security and the infrastructure to to the setup for TV/Radio broadcasting.

Actually one of the better ideas if playing games is the prime objective.

Quote from MrPadre19 on April 28, 2020, 11:17 am

While no new earth shattering news here at least it's looking more and more likely we will at least have an abbreviated season "this year".

https://www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/mlb-could-start-2020-season-with-opening-day-by-fourth-of-july-report-says/

 

I still like the idea of a Fourth of July "Opening Day".

 

Quote from fenn68 on May 2, 2020, 10:02 am

Random thoughts from a mind trapped in a body required to stay at home:

1. Although I like the 3 state / domed stadium plan that minimizes the points of contact / exposure opportunities for all involved, eliminates the chance of postponements / game delays from weather, and provides a ML quality playing field (and support facilities) for the players / media .... still see the major delaying factor being the lack of testing available for the "higher priority" folks (medical, first responders, symptomatic, etc.). Not so sure society as a whole would take kindly to new 2000 individuals getting tested over and over while others go wanting (remember we baseball fans are the minority).
2. Given the current state of infection in NY/NJ and other states ... hard to believe they would be open to MLB by July ... and not all that sure the MLB players would be all that interested in going to those areas even in a lock down. (gives reason for the three state option as a priority)
3. Players (both ML and MiL) need to get some play in before 2021 to keep some semblance of form .... so even if there is a "shortened" season ... would MLB consider an expanded set of winter instructs in AZ/FLA .... would MLB "negotiate" with the Caribbean Winter Leagues to allow for more US based players to play?

With the recent report that the NBA is now considering cancelling the remainder of its season (needed about 2 months with playoffs) and delaying the start of next season until December .... beginning to think starting MLB on July 4th is "optimistic".

Quote from fenn68 on May 2, 2020, 10:43 am

Some Padre focused random thoughts:

1. For the Padres (my assumption based on various media comments) is that the loss of 2 million in attendance (along with concessions, et al), advertising revenue, and potentially some media revenues would NOT be offset by the decreased cost of player (and non-player) salaries .... therefore a cash squeeze to cover the fixed costs. (the value of the club may not change .. but that is non-cash and bills get paid with cash).
2. With the cash squeeze outlined in #1 and considering the $150MM planned 2020 payroll being the highest (maybe a stretch) in Padre history .... will the Padres pare down the 2021 payroll? Consider:
   1. FA (and ending dead money) after 2020 will reduce the payroll by about $29MM .... Richards, Yates, Profar, Kinsler, Olivera, and buyouts of Warren and Loup. Letting them go drops the payroll to a legit $120-125MM. (guessing the Padres will not be the only team to consider this path)
   2. A number of players will be in arbitration ... given 2020 not likely to get increases from the 2020 level. However, a number of players would be entering their last control season: Pham $7.9MM (will be 34); Davies $5.2MM; Stammen $4MM (will be 38); Johnson $3MM; and Garcia $1.5MM. Would the Padres consider trading these guys? Pham, Davies, and Garcia could be non-tendered if needed.
   3. The Padres' prospects will all be a year older (maybe not more experienced unless they get work in winter ball) and unless the Padres see a real shot at the playoffs in 2021 ... might opt to go with the prospects over aging veterans. A number of teams may go that route to rebuild their cash positions.
3. On the flip side, will the FA be squeezed into shorter / low cost deals if most clubs choose to step back? Hard to see Profar getting $5.7MM again given his recent performance. How does a team justify paying a 32 year old Richards who has not produced for years? Yates will be 34 ... a RP who would have pursued a big dollar multi-year deal ... tuff one.
4. The CBA ends after the 2021 season ... tension already exists ... this "season" is just adding stress to the negotiations ... if the payrolls drop / veterans get the boot for 2021 ... 2022 a strike season? Might happened under any circumstances but another reason to preserve cash in the 2021 season to cushion 2022 cash flow losses.

I am depressed.

Quote from MrPadre19 on May 4, 2020, 1:20 pm

One of the "many" drawbacks to this whole delay is losing the opportunity to trade someone like Yates.

If we had played the season as usual and were not in contention he may have netted us quite a haul at the trade deadline.

Now not gonna happen.

Same could be said of others but he's the one that really hurts.

 

I agree Fenn that the loss of revenue "this year" could affect payroll for "next year".

Letting all those players with expiring contracts go and not replacing that payroll seems fairly likely.

Play this season(if ever happens) at $150 and next season at $125.

 

So.....let's all say it!

"Come on 2022!!!"