Jump to content

2019 MLB Winter Meetings Grande Thread

weams

By weams
in Orioles Talk

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 296
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

7Mo
7Mo

Cole is this years once in a decade pitcher. 

Can_of_corn
Can_of_corn

Somehow I doubt the accuracy of that statement.

24fps
24fps

And all refined, sophisticated baseball fans prefer high draft positions to mere winning.  Evidently winning is for losers.

7Mo Major Leaguer

7Mo

Posted
Posted

So help me here. Most teams have 6-7 affiliates and this plan would reduce that to 5. Most teams support 212 players and this would reduce that number to 160.

Are major league teams committed, now, to keeping 6-7 affiliates and 212 players? Why wouldn't each MLB team make their own choices and decisions about reducing?

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Can_of_corn Hangout Grand Counsel

Can_of_corn

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, 7Mo said:

So help me here. Most teams have 6-7 affiliates and this plan would reduce that to 5. Most teams support 212 players and this would reduce that number to 160.

Are major league teams committed, now, to keeping 6-7 affiliates and 212 players? Why wouldn't each MLB team make their own choices and decisions about reducing?

Teams can add or drop affiliates, the O's dropped one not too long ago. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
weams Hangout Grand Counsel

weams

Posted
  • Author
Posted
5 minutes ago, 7Mo said:

So help me here. Most teams have 6-7 affiliates and this plan would reduce that to 5. Most teams support 212 players and this would reduce that number to 160.

Are major league teams committed, now, to keeping 6-7 affiliates and 212 players? Why wouldn't each MLB team make their own choices and decisions about reducing?

They will. And they will find places for them to play. If not at the current affiliated locations. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
7Mo Major Leaguer

7Mo

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, weams said:

They will. And they will find places for them to play. If not at the current affiliated locations. 

I understand independent leagues and teams.

I'm trying to figure out why MLB is making an issue of this when each team should be able to make their own choices. Is MLB just carrying the sword on behalf of teams who would prefer not to be the first to drop affiliates down to 5 total?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Can_of_corn Hangout Grand Counsel

Can_of_corn

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, 7Mo said:

I understand independent leagues and teams.

I'm trying to figure out why MLB is making an issue of this when each team should be able to make their own choices. Is MLB just carrying the sword on behalf of teams who would prefer not to be the first to drop affiliates down to 5 total?

It is a total restructuring, not only are teams being cut leagues will be altered and eliminated.. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
7Mo Major Leaguer

7Mo

Posted
Posted
Just now, Can_of_corn said:

It is a total restructuring, not only are teams being cut leagues will be altered and eliminated.. 

I get that. But I still don't understand why the league is doing this rather than individual clubs. 

Maybe the answer is sweeping and drastic changes all at once because the bargaining power is so much greater that way. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Satyr3206 Hangout Grand Counsel

Satyr3206

Posted
Posted

This ties in to a thread I posted a while back. It's all about the money. They say the players will be paid more and better conditions blah, blah, blah. I doubt it. Once they eliminate teams, if they do, then they hold an even stronger position over the Minors. 

Some of the statements in the article about the Majors side are laughable. One said the Minors don't make a profit. Well they help produce Major League players that people pay to see and help TV ratings, jersey sales, etc. So I say they do help the ML club profit. If MLB is so concerned about facilities work out an arrangement with the Colleges and HS teams they mention. MLB won't improve the facilities with their money and I doubt the local governments will bail them out.

I think part of the logic of MLB is to winnow the field hoping more people will watch and attend MLB games because there are fewer choices. But I doubt they come out and admit it.

My bottom line is that this is a terrible long term decision and it will hurt Baseball in the long term. They should look at this from a long term perspective. Not how much it puts back in their pockets right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tryptamine Major Leaguer Rising Star

Tryptamine

Posted
Posted

It's a guise to put more money in mlb owner pockets. They've done it over and over. They added the slotting system to lower draft costs pretending it was for competitive reasons. They instituted a soft salary cap that only escalates 2M a year pretending, once again, pretending that it was for competitive reasons.  They're pushing for an international draft pretending it's going to keep the kids from getting taken advantage of when all it does is lower their signing bonuses. Now they want to cut MILB teams and just recently Manfred mentioned removing milb entirely and creating their own minor league system. This would allow them to negotiate with milb park owners individually, essentially crushing their union and removing just about all their leverage. Manfred isn't there to make baseball better, he's an owner mouthpiece tasked with putting money in their pockets. 

  • Upvote 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oriole1940 Major Leaguer Cup of Coffee

Oriole1940

Posted
Posted

I have not studied this topic, so I cannot get specific. However, after having watched  MLB operate for many years, it just might be a perceived short term solution to a perceived problem, but I would bet that in the long run it will not help the players.  Sure some players salaries MIGHT rise slightly, but there will be fewer players, fewer teams, and less help to local economies as the result of this proposal. Remember. minor leagues are the life blood of MLB.  

   

Link to comment
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.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Posts

    • Sports Guy
      Jackson Holliday 2024

      By Sports Guy · Posted

      Like I said the other day, it would be nice to hear from some scouts, the org or whoever about all the walks, lack of power, lack of BA, etc…is he tweaking things? Is the elbow bothering him to where he can’t drive the ball? Is he getting nothing to hit?     I’m surprised someone from the Banner hasn’t gotten into this because it’s obviously a big story and one that should be reported on.  
    • Warehouse
      Jackson Holliday 2024

      By Warehouse · Posted

      One thing to note is that Jackson made swing tweaks his first three weeks back in Norfolk but then abandoned them because they “didn’t feel great”. From this Baltimore Banner article:  “Earlier, as he fiddled, Holliday felt he was “surviving” and “didn’t feel great” about where his swing was, even though he produced at the Triple-A level upon his return. That has since changed. Over the last two weeks, particularly, Holliday’s return to the mechanics he’s more familiar with has helped him get back on track.” His contact rate really dropped off when he reverted back to his familiar mechanics. I worry that he gave up on the changes too soon. First three weeks back vs. after (includes tracked pitches and non-bunts)   PAs    K%           wOBA  xwOBA whiff % 4/27-5/18 91 19.8% .366 .349 21.6% 5/19-7/2 118 28.8% .392 .337 32.1%     PAs    EV      hard hit % barrel/PA 4/27-5/18 91 89.5 44.4% 4.4% 5/19-7/2 118 89.8 44.6% 4.2%
    • DrungoHazewood
      John Smoltz on why pitchers are "breaking" and what we should do about it..

      By DrungoHazewood · Posted

      Sure. And his ligaments would have likely snapped, and he'd have put that college degree to good use instead of being a ballplayer. Or he would have thrown at 90% like most everyone else and topped out with Cedar Rapids in the Three-I League.
    • DrungoHazewood
      John Smoltz on why pitchers are "breaking" and what we should do about it..

      By DrungoHazewood · Posted

      Let's say you allow the sticky stuff. The guys whose sweeper breaks 10" might now see it break 12". You think they're going to grip the ball more loosely, throw with a little less effort, get hurt less, and be content with a 10" sweeper?  No! They're going to grip the hell out of the ball and use the sticky stuff and try to get a 15" sweeper. And they'll keep getting hurt just as much. It couldn't be more clear that almost every pitcher and every coach and every team chooses the high-risk, high-reward path. You can't put the genie back in the bottle.
    • Moose Milligan
      Jackson Holliday 2024

      By Moose Milligan · Posted

      Clearly not.
    • Can_of_corn
      John Smoltz on why pitchers are "breaking" and what we should do about it..

      By Can_of_corn · Posted

      I guarantee you that if Christy could only get guys out by using his best stuff he would have.  
    • DrungoHazewood
      John Smoltz on why pitchers are "breaking" and what we should do about it..

      By DrungoHazewood · Posted

      I'm going to guess that in the olden days there was a weeding out that happened before most kids played an organized baseball game. Many, many kids played baseball all day long in the summer, and many, many of them tore up their elbow or shoulder at 11 or 13 or whatever and never pitched on a high school or other team. And nobody was Drivelining anyone. Part of the philosophy of pitching was you don't throw as hard as you possibly can because it hurts and you'll ruin your arm. A few people got away with throwing near max effort, but most couldn't. And there was a very stong stigma to coming out of a game, so pitchers knew they'd be shamed and mocked if they threw until it really hurt and had to come out. In the 1910's Christy Mathewson (or a ghostwriter) wrote Pitching in a Pinch, where he explicitly said that using your best stuff except when you really needed to was stupid.  Smoltz is a guy who idiotically venerates the past, making the era where he came up into some kind of golden nirvana. But, he is right that the driving factor in injuries today is that everyone throws at 110% of rated capacity all the time. It's just a matter of time until something tears.  The problem is that there is no simple solution, since throwing at 110% is simply more effective than throwing at 90%. 90% gets you (essentially) limitless innings. But 110% makes your ERA half a run or a run lower (numbers made up for illustration). And it couldn't be more clear that when $millions and wins are on the line, essentially everyone picks the lower ERA over the more innings. An average MLB pitcher has an ERA in the mid-4s. If he backs it off to 90% so he can pitch into the 8th or 9th, he'll likely have an ERA in the mid-5s, which puts him in AAA. The difference between pacing and pitching until it breaks is often the difference between $7M a year and $70k a year.

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...