tony&rodney

Many people have suggestions about what strategies the players or owners should have in the negotiations, but we just need to understand that each side has their own agenda. The players are trying to stop the loss of their economic position from the past three CBAs. The owners want to keep their hand where it is currently. The CBT, a misnomer because it is really a soft salary cap, doesn't affect many teams but does hold down acquisitions. Joey Gallo was traded last year with cash to keep the Yankees below the limit. The minor leagues are totally controlled by MLB. It's a monopoly that the PA has no say in whatsoever and MLB would not entertain any interference in that. I might agree that players should ask for a reduction in times a team can send players down to the minors, say three times. I might like a simple salary scale of $1M, $2M, and $3M for players in their first three years but MLB and the PA are focused on separate goals. So, both sides have some positions that seem disingenuous to me. Maybe this is resolved tomorrow. They are less than $5 million per team apart and this is easily accounted for in how each team builds out their roster. I understand that the owners initiated a lockout because they would not chance a strike later in the season but now they need to step forward, because they win in any event.

I'm not sure about others but speaking just for myself, there is no hatred. The example of the car is actually fair. The owners are faced with an increased expenditure of near $5 million per team. This, of course, could easily be absorbed into the budget because there is not any minimum for team salary. The Twins, for example, could easily field a team with a budget of $90-110 million this year. While I might have prepared a different set of requests for the players than the PA, the power play by the owners is unnecessary because they win no matter the outcome of a new CBA. The lockout (various people have incorrectly called it a strike or walkout) should have been resolved already and maybe it will be tomorrow. The effect on fans is a net negative towards baseball for the most part. The comments that refer to research that shows baseball losing out among younger people is not necessarily a good preview for future growth of the game. Both sides seem adrift on growing the game, but the onus for the current situation does lie with the owners because they precipitated a lockout.

Willie Banks is a name to cause caution regarding pitching prospects. I remember him well.

Jax does seem like a good bet to be on the staff. Does Jax make Duffey expendable and available to trade? Walls?

I am as excited as anyone to eventually see some of the Twins young prospects. The Twins have an average or slightly below average farm system with no pitchers currently projected by scouts or analysts to be frontline starters. This is according to pretty much every single system that rates the prospects. Of course, we don't have to agree. I, for one, am not ready to have the Twins lose 100+ games per year and replicate the Baltimore experience. In this post a few players were forwarded as possibly gaining an advantage because they are in camp while others are locked out. The lockout hurts Winder but helps Canterino. I have never been a big fan of Smeltzer but he gains an advantage over Thorpe and others because he is in camp. I can also see Martin being an option as our left fielder. However, JD and other experienced players remain the foundation of the Twins team and mixing in prospects as they are ready is the best option for competitiveness.

"When the love of the game" I have pulled off the road to watch a few innings of youth baseball just for the ambience more than a few times. This despite having played, coached, and attended thousands of games, not counting my Twins addiction via radio and video. The pandemic backed up to the lockout does push the sanity of my choices forward to some extent. There are some vast differences between MLB and the other levels of baseball other than the obvious talent. I like them all but want them to remain distinctly separate. For example, a pinch runner for the catcher in baseball in high school and seven inning games is ok but I don't want those in MLB. ... "meets the business side of the game" I cancelled my mlb.com account after twenty years. MLB has bullied the public into building stadiums across the country and the benefit remains controversial. The PA has taken some odd stances in my opinion but have also indisputably lost financial position in the 21st century economics of baseball. Like everyone else, there are issues that would seem very beneficial for the union and players not currently in discussion in the present negotiations, but I defer the choices of battle to each side because I am an outsider. Meanwhile, the owners want the players to remember who is the boss. I cannot support their side for a raft of reasons. The reserve clause is reason enough on its own, but the history of malfeasance by the owners, well documented, buttresses my position. A settlement could be reached today for the cost of one Colome or even a Shoemaker, but not cost as much as one Happ. Greed and power are ugly sides to take and I'm not pleased with the current fight between these two sides. Finally, where love meets business gets played out in the comment section of newspapers, magazines, and online forums. While the writers of the vast majority of sources see this lockout as primarily a mistake by the owners, the comments raise an interesting side of a national consciousness. Many, many comments refer to the wages of players as unjust and too high and wish for the end of the PA union. These same people are in favor of TIF and excessive handouts for the owners. Half of the owners inherited their teams, which is an interesting and somewhat ironic side note considering the entire discussion at hand. It is an interesting commentary to see the comments promote welfare for the owners and a wish for authoritarian control over the players. Perhaps each side finds a way this week to end this untimely debacle. One thing that seems to be unfolding, however, is that the current business decisions will include changes most certain to erode my love of the game even as it satisfies the needs of others. When baseball draws little circles where a fielder must stand before each pitch, puts in the larger bases, and reduces the umpires to pointless participants listening to a headset for their calls, and their other changes, an entire set of fans will become enamored with the "modernization" of the game while a few people like myself will just fade away from a game we once loved.

Good call on these players. It seems like Smeltzer could benefit the most in the early season, providing there is something happening by May. He will have his routines down by April and could be pretty tuned in for St. Paul. Those on the 40 person roster will face a period where they need to ramp up. The pitchers are already three weeks behind and despite some who view Spring Training as a little pointless, the time from mid February to the end of March is critical for developing a feel for pitches against hitters and gaining some stamina. Smeltzer gets an improved opportunity in the current situation.

On 3/5/2022 at 6:56 AM, Major League Ready said: You know baseball but when baseball people think they are business analysts or understand economic analysis we get this type of exceptionally poor conclusions, especially when considerable bias is at hand. The owners are just playing a power game. They win in any iteration of a final CBA. The PA position would add $5-6 million per team and they have retreated from their ask since that was broken down by the folks at Fangraphs. You haven't added a single cogent thought in any of your posts to date or contributed positively to any conversations, except to suggest repeatedly that the owners are the guardian angels of the future of baseball. Of course, you are entitled to your own ideas. I think everyone understands your position.

Leave baseball rules alone. Eliminate Manfredball. If people want a video game, buy a video game. There is nothing wrong with liking different games or entertainment, but all of the recent changes have diluted the game. 26 person roster - bad outcome, 10 day injury list - bad outcome, 7 day concussion - bad outcome, unlimited demotions back and forth to the minors - bad outcome. Last year Tampa Bay ran more than 50 players (too lazy to look it up, maybe 62) through their roster. Look at their attendance - fans do not know who is even on the team and believe it or not that matters. There was a time when umpires did not grant catchers trips to the mound if they found it onerous or just a slow down tactic, nor allowed batters to step out. I'm not harking back to the 60s or 70s. The manipulations started in the 90s. If anything, give the umpires more jurisdiction over pace of play. There is plenty of money to go around. Owners can make money and players can too. We have a situation revolved around a power struggle at the moment. If Manfredball grows, baseball will certainly slip well behind soccer in this country within 10 years and schools will drop baseball in favor of lacrosse, which is already diminishing the numbers of athletes playing baseball. Baseball needs to reduce the changes and return to some former rules which made it impossible to manipulate the injuries and roster changes if it hopes to sustain success. The slow, chess like battle between batter and pitcher is the foundation of baseball, which can go fast when players are allowed to just play without so many interruptions. Managers cannot make so many pitching changes if they must protect the arms they have because they cannot just be shuttled off to bring in a new set of arms. Baseball messed with the roster moves and this resulted in so many max effort pitchers and resultant velocity. But first, the owners actually have to sit down and make good with the players and the players need to make good with the owners.

The pitching staff pointed toward the final result. Colome crashed worse than I expected but Shoemaker and Happ ..... expected.

The idea that Boras is manipulating the entire CBA is preposterous. Other than irrational fear of a boogie man or jealousy, this entire concept runs anathema to his career as a promoter of the welfare of baseball. He is a player rep, a really good one, but that is it. Scott Boras will retire in a few years and those who disparage his performance will likely miss him more than is necessary. The dispute still breaks down to about $5 million or so per team. The owners can adjust quickly to recoup that number. Similar to a Screen Actors' Guild clash, this entertainment mess could be resolved very quickly if each side sees fit and the owners hold the best cards. A little resolve, a little humility, and a little give from both is actually possible - within a week and play a full schedule.

Mays - 7024 PO in CF. Griffey - 537 PO in CF.

MLBTradeRumors.com, FanGraphs.com, and TheAthletic all lay out the specifics pretty clearly. Other sites also explain the entire debacle. For reasons beyond all discussion, the owners are just playing a power game. There isn't much to discuss really, except many of us want to see baseball solve their problems and put forth our own ideas about what might be solutions. So suggestions are made but the speculation is really over.

The player's association has had difficulty building a simple straight-forward agenda that both benefits their members and has positive gains for the game, at least in the sense that they are the clear carriers for baseball in the contract morass. The building of a platform, however, is very complex. There should be some attention towards the salaries of milb despite their players not being actually in the union. I would think a floor of some type would be advisable as well, which brings on a salary cap. I'll leave the particulars to the PA, but wanted to, at the very least, acknowledge that it takes two sides to create a dispute. However. This is a heavy word here. MLB has been fighting to put the toothpaste back ever since free agency and despite record gains in profit and valuations, neither of which I hold against the owners, there are constant egregious actions by the owners that are really impossible to defend. This did start with the granting of free agency and it was severely exasperated by several rounds of collusion where the owners paid hefty legal settlements, not to mention those times where absolute proof was less ably connected. The blatant push by baseball to encourage steroids and home runs cannot easily just be thrown off onto the players, although they certainly could and should have avoided the temptation. MLB has played games with veterans much more capable than rookies for small gains in many instances. The nonsense with the baseball itself was ridiculous. Teams cheated to win and the penalties were a farce, the owners and managers still active. Finally, we entered an age with changes which some agree with, Manfredball. I can accept that I will be swept away by the changes that many want to the rules: ghost runners, high school length games, specific circles where fielders stand before each pitch, electronic strike zones and umpires, onsite gambling, etc. Quibble with any and all of these ideas cascading from the halls of Manfred and MLB owners if you will, but the totality of actions emanating from their castles has left a PA that distrusts nary a word nor action from Manfred or his team and some of the owners' ideas may in fact be good for the game. Baseball is in a bad place and it has fallen to the players to find agreements for the last dozen plus years. They know they have a fair deal in life but they also know the economics of the games and are seeking to call a halt to the demise of their positions. How many times do you listen to someone overtly lie and cheat you before the trust you once may have had is weakened? This seems like an underlying doubt with the PA. Yes, the players make fab money. The owners win financially though, no matter what. The players cannot force the teams to sign players. Roster salary will be set according to revenue, etc., etc. and profits will always be protected. This negotiation is a power play, pure and simple. That's sad.

Hilarious. Manfredball needs to go away forever. Ghost runners, high school length games, safety bags, designated spots where a fielder stands, etc. The picture says it all.

Arguments against the work of the union in baseball are just silly. Dave Boswell made as much money painting houses as he did playing baseball. The goals of the PA could be more streamlined and focused. The past two CBA have totally shifted towards the owners. The PA just wants to maintain some balance. Either way, the owners win. Baseball does NOT have typical ownership. Half of the owners inherited their team. MLB is a closed club. No person can just have enough money and buy a team (see Mark Cuban). Baseball still has anti-trust exemption status, which is a real travesty of justice, unless you really believe that MLB is THE American treasure.

Take a look at comparative league averages. 1968 was the height of pitching dominance. Mays also missed time for service duty. Griffey was the face of baseball for his time and energized millions of young people to love baseball, but as great as he was, no comparison to Mays. What number did Griffey wear?

The list is nearly endless, but think Lewis Thorpe and Fernando Romero for just two examples. I remain very hopeful for their current prospects but experience matters.

Any player on a MLB 40 person roster can apply to the PA for financial assistance. February and March aid was set at $5,000 per month and it goes to $15,000 per month on April 1. Financially, the players are fine. They will not "cave". This is more than the salaries of AAA players. Hopefully, each side will take a few days and recognize that games are in their mutual interest. Setting a more difficult course would create real problems. While I'm in favor of an 8 team playoff structure myself, there was agreement for a 12 team playoffs. The players could take that back and then there would be a round of retrenchments. Not good. Again, hopefully the two sides look again at their battles and find a compromise.

Let the defensive players line up however they want to for each hitter. In 1968 our kid team shifted against a specific powerful hitter. SS, 2B, and 1B were all on the edge of the outfield grass and a one hop line drive to 1B was a 3-1 putout. Strategy has always been a part of the game. It is more obvious today because it is more frequent due to the employment of people whose job entails crunching numbers. The only thing I can offer as a change is that a batter must keep in the box once the at bat begins, with a quick look to the 3B coach, and that pitcher's need to get the ball back and go to the pitching rubber. By the way, every single player in today's game grew up playing quickly.

I encourage you to go to college, high school, town ball, and organized youth league games plus minor league games when they all start up. MLB is not a place for lesser players. You wouldn't come to me for surgery. I'm very frustrated with the lockout myself though.

Your comment is right on imho. It is a real travesty for the sport to miss games. I also think something simple, modest, could have been proposed by the PA for milb as suggested by diehardtwinsfan above.

Nothing is guaranteed, for sure, when it comes to the expectations of baseball players' performances. An experienced player has better odds than a prospect, but nothing is certain.

This is an interesting take, one that I have been curious about quite a bit in the past month. I loved the report on Julien. I wonder if someone down in Florida can tell us how Palacios looks. He is not on the 40 man roster.

I get what you are saying about lineup construction and agree. For example, perhaps Martin will be a really good corner outfielder despite less than optimal power. The Twins should be focused on using all nine spots in their order to maximize production and maybe using Arraez as a DH instead of Sano will be the best decision. I do think that teams have always tried to do that though. The shifting of players to keep a solid defense in the field while maintaining the most destructive batting order is a constant discussion. Harmon Killebrew, for one, was shifted around to a number of positions because his bat played anywhere but his defense was not gold glove worthy. This has been done for many decades. Yogi Berra is another example. Pete Rose too. I'm just totally confused why you used Mays and CF though as an example. Everyone loved Griffey and Puckett, but there was literally nothing, absolutely nothing that either of them could ever do nearly as well as Willie Mays: hit, run, field, throw, power, talk, or smile. I'm not nostalgic in any fashion but just confused at the example.