Jump to content
Luke-OH

Frederick Keys on the chopping block

Recommended Posts

The article, like others, doesn't refer to a proposal under which MLB would "eliminate" or "cut" these MiL teams. It says the MiL teams' "affiliations" with ML teams would be "severed."

Let's say I own the Erie SeaWolves. Under this proposal, would MLB buy me out since it's sucking virtually all the value out of my franchise? Or is MLB just going to tell me, "Hey, good luck with those SeaWolves," leaving me with my ownership of a franchise but no league to play in and depriving me of the source of players, managers, coaches, baseballs and other equipment I've had for 25 years? 

And what about the ballparks, many of which (I'm guessing) are owned by cities and towns, and were built with the support of state and local governments? (Just last year, Pennsylvania committed to $18 million to fund improvements to the SeaWolves' stadium.) The teams aren't going to be able to pay rent to the ballpark owners if they're not having games. The owners of the ballparks will be left to scramble for concerts, wrestling matches, and the like. Is MLB obligated to, or planning to, do anything to help the ballpark owners?

At the heart of all this is what kind of contract rights these MiL teams have against their parent teams or against MLB. Are those arrangements standard, or do they differ from MiL team to team? Were some or all of the 42 MiL teams chosen because their rights are less extensive or valuable?

I guess the only things we can be certain of at this point are that MLB will thoroughly think through all the consequences and that whatever it decides will be for the good of baseball.  😏

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, AnythingO's said:

Do the Orioles get to appeal this? I would think they would want to keep Frederick, Bowie, Norfolk together to better support the fan base for Baltimore and sacrifice one of Aberdeen or Delmarva.

The Orioles are on-board with this, the only way it's going to change is in the negotiations with the National Association of Professional Baseball Leagues. The current agreement with the NAPBL expires after the 2020 season. So this would go into effect in 2021 if agreed upon. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Satyr3206 said:

You obviously haven't read anything about Branch Rickey.

That was 75 years ago.  Teams didn't have sprawling networks of scouts, connected online, sharing video and reports nearly instantly.  The Dodgers and others had like 40 minor league teams because they signed everyone they could get their hands on and then sorted out who was good from there.  The minors have never been quite the same since TV.  In 1948 there were 70-some leagues, as tracked by bb-ref.  By 1965 it was down to 34, literally half of the professional leagues went out of business in less than 20 years.  We're at 34 today, and that includes four Japanese Leagues and the Korean League.  And many of those leagues, unfortunately like the Appy League, probably couldn't exist without MLB financial support.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, spiritof66 said:

The article, like others, doesn't refer to a proposal under which MLB would "eliminate" or "cut" these MiL teams. It says the MiL teams' "affiliations" with ML teams would be "severed."

Let's say I own the Erie SeaWolves. Under this proposal, would MLB buy me out since it's sucking virtually all the value out of my franchise? Or is MLB just going to tell me, "Hey, good luck with those SeaWolves," leaving me with my ownership of a franchise but no league to play in and depriving me of the source of players, managers, coaches, baseballs and other equipment I've had for 25 years? 

And what about the ballparks, many of which (I'm guessing) are owned by cities and towns, and were built with the support of state and local governments? (Just last year, Pennsylvania committed to $18 million to fund improvements to the SeaWolves' stadium.) The teams aren't going to be able to pay rent to the ballpark owners if they're not having games. The owners of the ballparks will be left to scramble for concerts, wrestling matches, and the like. Is MLB obligated to, or planning to, do anything to help the ballpark owners?

At the heart of all this is what kind of contract rights these MiL teams have against their parent teams or against MLB. Are those arrangements standard, or do they differ from MiL team to team? Were some or all of the 42 MiL teams chosen because their rights are less extensive or valuable?

I guess the only things we can be certain of at this point are that MLB will thoroughly think through all the consequences and that whatever it decides will be for the good of baseball.  😏

It's almost like MiLB teams and owners should have thought through this contingency when they signed up for a business model that completely relies on MLB to subsidize them enough to make a profit, but on limited-term contracts that might not be renewed.

I know this is water long under the bridge, but nearly a century ago almost all MiLB teams traded being a real team hat fights for championships and players for the supposed security of being affiliated and subsidized.  I guess it's worked for a long time.  But maybe not any more.  And there are almost no fans left to root for independent teams who try to go it on their own and make money by playing exciting baseball.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

They cut one affiliate from every team then they give everyone left a 5% raise and wait for the pats on the back.

Don't you think this is part of the strategy to combat the "pay minor leaguers a living wage" issue?  They're basically saying that if they have to pay their minor leaguers anything approaching minimum wage they can't keep all these teams.  So here... you want your pay raise... you get it, if you still have a job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DrungoHazewood said:

That was 75 years ago.  Teams didn't have sprawling networks of scouts, connected online, sharing video and reports nearly instantly.  The Dodgers and others had like 40 minor league teams because they signed everyone they could get their hands on and then sorted out who was good from there.  The minors have never been quite the same since TV.  In 1948 there were 70-some leagues, as tracked by bb-ref.  By 1965 it was down to 34, literally half of the professional leagues went out of business in less than 20 years.  We're at 34 today, and that includes four Japanese Leagues and the Korean League.  And many of those leagues, unfortunately like the Appy League, probably couldn't exist without MLB financial support.

I understand that. But the Scouts, streaming, video, etc don't play the game. You need players to do that and some develop later than others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DrungoHazewood said:

It's almost like MiLB teams and owners should have thought through this contingency when they signed up for a business model that completely relies on MLB to subsidize them enough to make a profit, but on limited-term contracts that might not be renewed.

I know this is water long under the bridge, but nearly a century ago almost all MiLB teams traded being a real team hat fights for championships and players for the supposed security of being affiliated and subsidized.  I guess it's worked for a long time.  But maybe not any more.  And there are almost no fans left to root for independent teams who try to go it on their own and make money by playing exciting baseball.

Sad. And pretty close to a fact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Luke-OH said:

The Orioles are on-board with this, the only way it's going to change is in the negotiations with the National Association of Professional Baseball Leagues. The current agreement with the NAPBL expires after the 2020 season. So this would go into effect in 2021 if agreed upon. 

It would be cool if the NAPBL took a united stand and said “sorry, we’re not going to house any affiliated players unless you keep all our teams.”   It’s not like the majors could just go find a bunch of other cities and stadia to play their MiL games in on short notice.   

  • Upvote 1
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Don't you think this is part of the strategy to combat the "pay minor leaguers a living wage" issue?  They're basically saying that if they have to pay their minor leaguers anything approaching minimum wage they can't keep all these teams.  So here... you want your pay raise... you get it, if you still have a job.

Yes, I do think that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Frobby said:

It would be cool if the NAPBL took a united stand and said “sorry, we’re not going to house any affiliated players unless you keep all our teams.”   It’s not like the majors could just go find a bunch of other cities and stadia to play their MiL games in on short notice.   

That's a damn good idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Frobby said:

It would be cool if the NAPBL took a united stand and said “sorry, we’re not going to house any affiliated players unless you keep all our teams.”   It’s not like the majors could just go find a bunch of other cities and stadia to play their MiL games in on short notice.   

Yeah, but they already caved on salaries. They helped the MLB with the ruling on MiLB pay because they were threatened with contraction. Now they are getting contracted anyways. 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ftw/2018/03/19/mlb-is-reportedly-lobbying-congress-to-keep-minor-leaguers-from-earning-minimum-wage/111140308/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Frobby said:

It would be cool if the NAPBL took a united stand and said “sorry, we’re not going to house any affiliated players .you keep all our teams.”   It’s not like the majors could just go find a bunch of other cities and stadia to play their MiL games in on short notice.   

I'm not sure that would work. MLB might call their bluff and move most of the minor leagues to the Caribbean and South and Central America, plus Cape Cod and other college league sites where there are underused ballparks. It would be interesting if the "surviving" clubs took a stand, but it could get pretty ugly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting tidbit from JJ Cooper...

He said to pay zero attention to which teams' affiliates are getting axed. That this plan would re-distribute affiliations and leagues. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Frederick supports the Keys well, it's a good little stadium, and the Keys are successful.  Be a mistake to mess with that.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


Orioles Information


Orioles News and Information

Daily Organizational Boxscores

News

Tony's Takes

Orioles Roster Resource

Orioles Prospect Information

2018 End of Season Top 30 Prospects List

Prospect Scouting Reports

Statistics

2019 Orioles Stats

2019 Orioles Minor League Stats

Baseball Savant Stats







×
×
  • Create New...