Quote from fenn68 on April 21, 2020, 10:04 am

Minor-League Baseball Prepared To Accept Team Contraction

If the broad parameters of the MLB plan are indeed agreed upon, then all thirty big league clubs will end up with four affiliated apiece (120 in total). 42 places would lose the chance to field a minor-league roster of players. (from MLBTradeRumors).

=========

Not sure how this plays out.

One view could have the "short season" leagues abandoned along with the AZ/FLA Rookie leagues ... thus preserving the four full season leagues. AZ/FLA could just become permanent extended ST I guess. (this is assuming AZ/FLA Rookie leagues are considered "leagues" for this purpose).

The other view as the four full season leagues resorted into 3 leagues and keep the AZ/FLA Rookie Leagues as the first level of development. Short Season leagues fold.

Frankly the latter has the better economic benefit for the clubs (clearly not communities) and that is their objective. If AAA/AA, AA/A+, A+/A conform into three ... maybe 30ish players end up on the chopping block per team but if we honestly look at the bench in all those leagues (and in AAA some of the over the hill starters) those cuts would come from "filler" while the competition level in each of the three leagues may become different ... the challenge to some of the real prospects may be beneficial to development. This also preserves the Rookie leagues to focus on the new entries gaining professional level skills in a training environment and a local for competitive rehab.

Some win ... some lose. Plus a lot of city realignment to the "new" leagues to make this work. Probably also a lot of new PDAs between cities and ML clubs. My guess MLB/MiLB will try to settle on the least "profitable" cities for the contractions but somewhat constrained by geography. Likely the current AAA configuration will remain but some AA franchises may be in jeopardy then easily some A+/A consolidation will be required.

Going to be a interesting story.

Quote from fenn68 on May 27, 2020, 11:15 am

Tucked in John Coniff's piece today on the draft and minor league issues was this line:

"MLB desires more control over operations of the minor leagues and the facilities where they send their prospects and seeks to streamline player development."

Maybe the headlines have been the reduction of players (maybe 50+ per team) and short season ball teams ceasing to exist ... but the negotiation point this winter will be more focused on how much control of minor leagues MLB can rip away from MiL baseball .... league management, franchise owners.

MiLB leadership and more significantly MiLB franchise owners who have their money in the game are not going to give up their control / decision making to MLB who can force extra costs on the franchisees but not pay for the MiL franchise's reduced profit.

In part, can understand MLB wanting to establish some standards for playing conditions (ballpark, field, maintenance, training room facilities) but for many of these MiL franchises they are not making all that much profit and most need to negotiate with the city for improvements. Can't just flip a switch and make all that happen.

In theory, it would be better if MLB teams owned all their franchises but getting from here to there is a monumental task of getting the current MiL owners to sell (and MLB does not want to pay for that) or for MLB to squeeze franchises into bankruptcy so they can buy them on the cheap.

Just a bonus watch for this winter.

Quote from WindsorUK on May 27, 2020, 11:42 am

Not been following the MiLB during the lockdown.

Where do we currently stand? Only top tier prospects playing?

Quote from fenn68 on May 27, 2020, 1:15 pm

Quote from WindsorUK on May 27, 2020, 11:42 am

Not been following the MiLB during the lockdown.

Where do we currently stand? Only top tier prospects playing?

No one is playing ... MiLB is in total shutdown and virtually has no chance of returning this year.

 

 

Quote from hoffy51 on May 27, 2020, 4:34 pm

Any chance of the Fall Arizona League?

Quote from fenn68 on May 27, 2020, 5:27 pm

Quote from hoffy51 on May 27, 2020, 4:34 pm

Any chance of the Fall Arizona League?

A chance yes but not very likely ... at least as we knew it.

IF the owners are trying to preserve as much cash as possible ... hard to see them make a U-Turn and pony up the money to open the AZ facilities with all the required safety precautions and pay / house players.

Not sure the front office / baseball operations folks who are being furloughed / taking pay cuts would take kindly to the owners spending on that so soon rather than giving them back some of their lost pay / bring them back sooner. Think taking care of the organization's long time (and not well paid) employees should take priority ... unless they don't care.

The one idea (but still not likely) is a version of "winter instructs" at PETCO ... post MLB season. PETCO would be up and running with the necessary procedures so the incremental cost should be less. Maybe near the end a SD-TEX series of games split between PETCO and the new TEX park.

 

Quote from Brian Connelly on May 28, 2020, 9:20 am

Quote from fenn68 on May 27, 2020, 11:15 am

Tucked in John Coniff's piece today on the draft and minor league issues was this line:

"MLB desires more control over operations of the minor leagues and the facilities where they send their prospects and seeks to streamline player development."

Maybe the headlines have been the reduction of players (maybe 50+ per team) and short season ball teams ceasing to exist ... but the negotiation point this winter will be more focused on how much control of minor leagues MLB can rip away from MiL baseball .... league management, franchise owners.

MiLB leadership and more significantly MiLB franchise owners who have their money in the game are not going to give up their control / decision making to MLB who can force extra costs on the franchisees but not pay for the MiL franchise's reduced profit.

In part, can understand MLB wanting to establish some standards for playing conditions (ballpark, field, maintenance, training room facilities) but for many of these MiL franchises they are not making all that much profit and most need to negotiate with the city for improvements. Can't just flip a switch and make all that happen.

In theory, it would be better if MLB teams owned all their franchises but getting from here to there is a monumental task of getting the current MiL owners to sell (and MLB does not want to pay for that) or for MLB to squeeze franchises into bankruptcy so they can buy them on the cheap.

Just a bonus watch for this winter.

Minors are a great national tradition.  I love how the experience as a fan is just completely different even though the game is the same.   But I understand MLB wanting to reel it in.  It is a sprawling, inefficient on a National level, with wide disparities in facilities, attendance, travel for teams/players, and proximity to the MLB team (pertinent for AAA, also AA).

I've always thought it weird how MLB controls all the players, staffs, and what they're paid, but not the Minors teams?  The 2 year contracts with teams gave leverage to the cities with teams/stadiums, but is ridiculous from a long term logistics & even fanbase perspective.  MLB teams that take better care of their minor leaguers with better facilities, locations, etc would (rightfully) gain an upper hand in negotiations with draft picks (until that all changes too).

I don't think Minors owners in a contraction should be left holding the bag... if MLB clubs are gaining cost efficiencies, any teams contracted ownership should be made whole.

It's logical to get rid of the short season non-complex leagues:  College P's are usually maxed on IP anyway, so these teams tend to be more 2nd tier college guys & HS P's with 1-2 years in system.  Teams can decide for themselves if they want 2 complex teams like Pads & many others, or just 1.  Same with DSL.  Would likely shrink Draft down to 25 rounds.

Quote from fenn68 on May 28, 2020, 1:26 pm

The reduction of SS teams and the number of SS/Rookie ball payers by 50+ (down to a max of 50 in the rookie complex) makes sense ... economic sure but could argue that with only 50 they can get more one one one instruction ... and development of potential ML talent is the objective on the minors.

Maybe not great for some players who dreams will be dashed ... but that will happen as some point to almost all of them and the ones out now realistically are near the zero chance guys. Let them move on with their lives.

======

I could see a 10 round draft (11 picks for the Padres). That would add 11 draftees ... probably add 10 new Latin players annually .... maybe 20 young "holdovers" from the previous season (the younger HS/Latin players normally don't jump to full season after only 1/2 season in AZ and some of the previous year's injured college draftees may need that AZ development time) ... then add a few non-drafted FA .... and you get to 50 very quickly.

======

The hardball play will be MLB trying to take more control over minor league standards / operations ... all likely create a significant increase cost to the minor league clubs ... but without contributing to offset those requirements. Minor league clubs don't make all that much ... new cost could put a lot out of business and not sure that there will be a lot of new owners stepping into the void under those conditions.

Since MLB owners tend to do what is best for them (not always the collective) ... could see some owners try to put some minor league franchises out of business and then step in and take over ownership for pennies on the dollar. Others might negotiate to take an ownership stake (and management control) for the influx of some funding.

 

Quote from fenn68 on May 29, 2020, 2:19 pm

Padres released 26 minor league players today (had previously released 7). No names yet.

NOT unusual ... about the number released annually just in the past they released were earlier and not highlighted in the specter of the current crisis.

Still the Padres probably have about 100 players NOT on full season rosters .... if the proposed limit of AZ league next year at 50 ... and considering new draftees, non-drafted FA, Latin moves in from DSL .... we should expect an ongoing series of additional releases probably starting during ST (if not before).

Still to be clarified is if that 50 limit for AZ begins with an AZL season start (June) or at the end of ST ... keeping extended ST at 50.

======

If there is a 50 man limit in AZ could there be a ripple effect of pushing up to FW some “not quite ready” prospects to make room for the new crop ... then keep that going up the levels .... maybe more “veteran” organization” guys end up on the release list sooner?

Could that have ... eventually ... the impact of making AAA “younger” with more real prospects at the expense of some of those hanging on veterans who are more filler than providing any prospect value?