Quote from fenn68 on October 23, 2020, 11:56 am

Think the first fork in the road is the decision of a NL DH in 2021 ... supposedly decided by the end of the World Series. Heard one report that answer is NO the another report that the answer is YES.

If as we have been tossing around is a roster position for 2021 assumed at around $125MM ... and buying into Acee’s a cap near $135MM ... a starting max spend at about $10MM.

I will go with a NO DH as the assumption .... then don’t pick up Moreland option (+$2.5MM), non tender Pham ($8MM), Garcia ($1.5MM), and Strahm ($2.0MM) ... save $14MM added to the $10MM and a spending pool of $24MM to deploy on a corner OF, upgraded PH, upgraded RP. Now can they find (and sign) players to fill those needs ... ? At $24MM on the FA market that probably gives an advantage to to the teams over the players, MIGHT be able to deploy that amount more strategically and get an overall better roster while maybe a bit less in a corner OF spot. Just a high risk to do all the drops before locking in on the new adds .... but need the payroll space first before committing to the new adds.

If they keep Pham ... do the non-tenders and the pool is about $16MM but no need for a corner OF add. $16MM focused on PHs and RP might be the better route unless they have a focused target for that corner market add at less than $8MM.

========

If DH I would think they have to stick with Pham LF / Moreland DH ... add the non tenders of Garcia and Strahm and get to about $14MM to spend on RP and a RHH DH option.

Quote from fenn68 on October 23, 2020, 2:53 pm

Not sure about all the technicalities of DFA but:

1. If the Padres are considering non-tendering players (Strahm, Perdomo) on Dec 2 ... they will become immediate FA (but could be resigned if both sides agree ... but will they re-sign a minor league deal or a lower ML deal?)

However, could the Padres go the DFA route, as I understand

2. Players go on waivers and if claimed the Padres get some money or potentially get traded ... at least the Padres get something and could do that well before the Rule 5 roster set. If they clear waivers and the Padres don’t want to keep them ... release. If they want to keep them, they can keep them in the minors on a minor league contract. Don’t think either have the necessary ML time to refuse assignment or enough minor league time to be a minor league FA.

If I understand #2 correctly ... shouldn’t they do the DFA UNLESS they really want to retain these guys and have behind the scenes deal in place.

 

Quote from JasonE135 on October 23, 2020, 7:29 pm

Wow. People seem to be looking to make major changes to a team that just finished the year with the 3rd best record in baseball.

Cut Tommy Pham to have more money to spend on free agents? Does anybody think we can really get a better OF than Pham for less than $8 million dollars? We can't. No way. High OBP, 20*20 OFs cost $20-$25 million per year on the free agent market. The only other OF we have who will be ready in the next 2 years is Jorge Ona. No thanks.

Similarly, you cannot find a left-handed reliever like Strahm who has been putting up ERAs under 3.00 recently for less than $2 million per year. I know everybody wants to have money to spend so we can imagine picking up our favorite non-Padre players but that is not happening.

I absolutely expect the Padres to keep Pham. Strahm very likely as well, unless they have huge faith in guys like Altavilla, Adams, Johnson, Weathers and Williams. Perdomo will likely get non-tendered and re-signed if possible.

          $10-$15 million should be enough to re-sign one of our closers                  and a couple of backup free agent starters or starters looking for              a rebound along with a backup OF and possibly IF.

Quote from fenn68 on October 24, 2020, 10:14 am

Really doubt they non-tender Pham without a body to replace him .... and Allen or Ona or Mejia are not the answer ... plus securing a replacement body before the non-tender date  (Dec 2) is a long shot.

Remember they are replacing Profar not Pham (who as a non-factor) on a successful team. As it is, Pham is now the replacement. Better offense ..... weaker defense ... less versatility.

IF the Padres see improving the pitching as the critical need to make the next step (challenge the LAD) ... and that includes an established good SP and additional RP upgrades beyond one closer ... $10 MM may not be enough. Hence, some of the non-tender moves have to be considered. The strategy is to give a little on offense with a lower cost option in LF and take the pay difference and use that to upgrade the pitching.

That would not be my first thought but stepping back ... are we sure Lamet and Clevinger will be healthy for a full season ... are we sure Paddack can rebound to this rookie success ... are we sure Patino or Morejon or Gore can step into a starting role on a contender? In one sense, Davis has the best chance of delivering expectations.

Even if they add Rosenthal ($8-10MM?) ... are they comfortable with the other four RHRP in an era where the deep bullpen is how games are won? Are they built pitching wise for a 162 game schedule?

Bottom line, do they want to upgrade pitching at the expense of offense and can they secure an "adequate" LF replacement for Profar at low cost? Don't rule out a Preller trade.

 

 

Quote from Brian Connelly on October 24, 2020, 1:28 pm

Quote from fenn68 on October 23, 2020, 2:53 pm

Not sure about all the technicalities of DFA but:

1. If the Padres are considering non-tendering players (Strahm, Perdomo) on Dec 2 ... they will become immediate FA (but could be resigned if both sides agree ... but will they re-sign a minor league deal or a lower ML deal?)

However, could the Padres go the DFA route, as I understand

2. Players go on waivers and if claimed the Padres get some money or potentially get traded ... at least the Padres get something and could do that well before the Rule 5 roster set. If they clear waivers and the Padres don’t want to keep them ... release. If they want to keep them, they can keep them in the minors on a minor league contract. Don’t think either have the necessary ML time to refuse assignment or enough minor league time to be a minor league FA.

If I understand #2 correctly ... shouldn’t they do the DFA UNLESS they really want to retain these guys and have behind the scenes deal in place.

 

I'm not 100% sure on this, but it might be that you HAVE to Non-Tender (i.e. make them a FA immediately) an Arb eligible player?   Maybe a "right" a player @  3 yrs+ MLB service time has obtained in MLBPA to become a free agent IF controlling team chooses not to control them via their arb salary?

But players like Wingenter & Guerra I agree & think you're right that team can DFA them b/c it's more team favorable to either retain control in Minors (Wingenter) or get something in trade (Guerra) vs. just "setting them free"

Quote from fenn68 on October 24, 2020, 2:27 pm

Pretty sure a team can DFA anyone they control (under 6 years ML service time) with only those ML players with 5 years of ML service time being able to reject the minor league assignment if they clear waivers (and the team does not just release them). Neither Strahm nor Perdomo have the 5 years service time.

Pretty sure is not absolutely sure ... so?

Also, not sure on the rules surrounding re-signing non-tendered (or DFA) players ... is there a period that they cannot be resigned by their old club?

Without a roster crunch ... and considering both are still low salary even in arbitration ... could go a lot of ways.

Quote from Brian Connelly on October 24, 2020, 4:29 pm

Quote from fenn68 on October 24, 2020, 2:27 pm

Pretty sure a team can DFA anyone they control (under 6 years ML service time) with only those ML players with 5 years of ML service time being able to reject the minor league assignment if they clear waivers (and the team does not just release them). Neither Strahm nor Perdomo have the 5 years service time.

Pretty sure is not absolutely sure ... so?

Also, not sure on the rules surrounding re-signing non-tendered (or DFA) players ... is there a period that they cannot be resigned by their old club?

Without a roster crunch ... and considering both are still low salary even in arbitration ... could go a lot of ways.

You're probably right, but think any player who has reached arb (3+ yrs MLB) by definition also qualifies for Minors FA, and is going to choose FA anyway if DFA, so maybe just kind of semantics.  Advantageous for team & player to not be beholden to their arb projection by non-tendering them.   tons of players sign MLB deals < what their arb figure was.  Will just be even more of them in 2021.

Quote from fenn68 on October 24, 2020, 6:17 pm

Saw a couple of articles that agreement with the MLBPA to adopt the 2020 rules for 2021 is beginning to seem unlikely (owners want some concessions in any deal). So, on the brink of going back to NO NL DH, normal extra inning play, and back to only 2 wild card teams (one game playoff).

Then add a lot of speculation that the 2021 season has a good chance of not starting on time and resulting in a less than 162 games schedule (big risk of starting ST in Feb or Mar). Add to that the uncertainty of a minor league season or what form of alternative might materialize now that MLB is taking more control from MiLB.

Then as icing on the cake, the CBA is up after the 2021 season with most speculation that the animosity between the owners and union is getting greater and a work stoppage in 2022 is likely ... again cutting games (or a season). Plus, what changes will occur in a new CBA that may impact issues of salary, control, etc. ... unknown for both players and GMs.

=====

Now as a GM with all that staring you in the face ... coming off a year with significant cash losses ... how cannot your winter strategy be different than in a "normal" winter ... and what most fans would expect in speculation.

A case could be made for a lot of teams to just "punt" on 2021 out of the blocks .... shed marginal players who cost too much and don't have long term value. If signing someone, one year deals? Going back to the 2 wild card / 1 game playoff already diminishes playoff chances and 2022 may not exist.

=======

If Preller is being "realistic" ... on a 162 game basis ... even after a successful season with a major improvement over 2019 ... the Padres would still be 16 games behind the LAD (and they don't seem to be getting near the end of their reign). So at best the Padres are playing for that one play in game. Yes they had one of the best records in MLB but all "West" opponents over 60 games will move to games against the NL East and Central over a longer schedule. Different opponents ... different results?

If Preller (and ownership) sits down and evaluates all these permutations of unknowns .... do they make moves we don't expect (or would want) if things were "normal"?

=====

Will make the winter "interesting" for all MLB teams.

Quote from fenn68 on October 24, 2020, 7:59 pm

For a lot of teams ... would 2021 be the time to focus on playing "the kids" from your system and have them develop at the ML level sooner ... better players for when everything returns to normality in 2023? Cheaper and actually will be with the organization in 2023.

If a team really does not think they can make the playoffs makes a lot of sense in the current environment. Really an issue for the FA if maybe half (or more) of the teams just are not interested at any price. Also could crimp a lot of potential trades if most of the teams are not interested in picking up veteran players with even 3 years control since they will be arbitration (higher cost) guys with a relatively short future in an unsettled time.

Again and potentially "interesting" winter.