2020 Minor League Thread

Lineup protection isn’t a real thing

Derek said:

Lineup protection isn’t a real thing

Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure dropping our second highest OBP guy to #6 isn't wise either.

Out of the Rafters at the Q said:

I'm pretty sure dropping our second highest OBP guy to #6 isn't wise either.

Click to expand...

He hasn't been getting on base much lately. Pitchers have stopped walking him. In his last 34 plate appearances he has one walk and four hits.

Wham with the Right Hand said:

He hasn't been getting on base much lately. Pitchers have stopped walking him. In his last 34 plate appearances he has one walk and four hits.

Click to expand...

So, what we're trying to do is predict future success.

The last 34 plate appearances deviate from the previous 6,300.

Do you feel 34 plate appearances should carry significant weight in comparison to the body of work? If so, why?

Derek said:

Lineup protection isn’t a real thing

Click to expand...

I wouldn't ever call it lineup protection but pitchers/batteries do take into account who is up on deck. Right now I would rather pitch to Santana than Lindor or Reyes. But otherwise, it's more of what is the opposing teams strategy rather than lineup protection.

I do not like the fact we cannot see what's going in the minors this season since we don't know how guys are progressing. Next season overall will be strange since we don't got a clue on how guys are developing that arent on the roster.

Out of the Rafters at the Q said:

So, what we're trying to do is predict future success.

The last 34 plate appearances deviate from the previous 6,300.

Do you feel 34 plate appearances should carry significant weight in comparison to the body of work? If so, why?

Click to expand...

He's 34 years old. Bats tend to slow down as players get into their middle 30's. There are some exceptions, however. Nelson Cruz comes to mind.

Santana was hitting .173 in 98 at-bats against RHP's coming into this game. Still not a lot of at-bats, but more than 34.

Alomar thinks he's jerking when he swings left-handed and using too much body. I hope he's right and that it's an easy fix.

Wham with the Right Hand said:

He's 34 years old. Bats tend to slow down as players get into their middle 30's. There are some exceptions, however. Nelson Cruz comes to mind.

Santana was hitting .173 in 98 at-bats against RHP's coming into this game. Still not a lot of at-bats, but more than 34.

Alomar thinks he's jerking when he swings left-handed and using too much body. I hope he's right and that it's an easy fix.

Click to expand...

I think you're reaching.

I also don't know why this conversation is in the minor league thread.

Out of the Rafters at the Q said:

I think you're reaching.

I also don't know why this conversation is in the minor league thread.

Click to expand...

I can't be the only one who finds it hilarious that the poster who was adamant on Santana being our leadoff hitter, solely because he's out best OBP player, now wants to Santana to 6th after 1 particularly poor week. All the while still ranking 2nd in Team OBP despite hitting poorly this season.

Out of the Rafters at the Q said:

I think you're reaching.

I also don't know why this conversation is in the minor league thread.

Click to expand...

Is that a comment as to quality?!?

No 40-man players in instructional camps, union says

By Ken Rosenthal and Evan Drellich 7h ago 15

As teams begin to organize instructional training camps that will take place after the season, the Players Association has informed Major League Baseball that it will not grant permission for clubs to include 40-man players except under certain circumstances.

A memo the union sent to player agents Tuesday night states: “Work schedules/calendars are core terms and conditions of employment. Allowing these camps to proceed for 40-man players would represent an extension of the 2020 work calendar and a fundamental change to collectively bargained rights.”

The union said the only exceptions it will consider are for 40-man players who want to participate in such a camp for medical reasons — a current injury under rehabilitation, for example, or a COVID-19-related medical history.

Regardless of circumstance, a player cannot decide on his own to attend a camp, just as he could not decide to do anything else contrary to the sport’s collective-bargaining agreement. The union must approve his request, and such approval will not be automatic, the memo said. The union will assess each request on an individual basis, then decide whether to grant permission after consulting directly with the player.

The commissioner’s office does not dispute that the union must consent to any 40-man player’s participation, according to the memo. A source with knowledge of the league’s position confirmed that teams were informed they needed such consent. Some 40-man players already have been approved, the source added.

The union said it will honor a club’s request for consent only if the club commits to provide living allowances and benefits that disabled players are entitled to receive under Article VII(F) of the CBA.

The union began its memo by saying it has learned from players and agents that multiple clubs were organizing the instructional training camps either in their home city or at another location, such as their spring-training facility.

“For some teams, it appears that only non-40 man roster players are being invited. For several other teams, however, 40-man roster players are being invited as well,” the memo said. “And while these camps are being advertised by most clubs as ‘voluntary,’ we have heard from several sources that players are being pressured to attend, and also that several players fear adverse consequences from club decision-makers if they choose to instead return home.”

The purpose of the memo, the union said, was to inform agents of its positions, which were also communicated to the player representatives in all 30 clubhouses and to the commissioner’s office.

The memo concludes, “Thank you in advance for your assistance in ensuring that clubs are not permitted to circumvent the Basic Agreement.”

Goodbye Scrappers as we knew them.

DCTribefan said:

Goodbye Scrappers as we knew them.

Appalachian League leads off contraction process

The Appalachian League has converted to a college summer circuit for rising freshmen and sophomores, with many teams from the Pioneer League and New York-Penn League also likely to become part of college summer leagues.

www.espn.com

Click to expand...

If-IF- this leads to a livable wage for the remaining minor Leaguers then awesome. I just doubt it can and keep minor league ball affordable and family friendly (which the minord has trended away from imo).

macbdog said:

If-IF- this leads to a livable wage for the remaining minor Leaguers then awesome. I just doubt it can and keep minor league ball affordable and family friendly (which the minord has trended away from imo).

Click to expand...

The terminology would suggest that there will be living expenses covered.. cost of instruction covered.. up keep and maintenance of facilities and new/modern equipment covered.. but, no change w/r to pay as the "amateur status" remains rooted in the dark ages. Given the notion that MiLB baseball and college baseball cannot, on its own, be commercially viable at this time.. the ability to become commercially viable will be left to the newly formed summer league through re-branding and other revenue opportunities and incentives.

It's a start down a slippery slope.. with the results being, clearly, unknown... i.m.h.o., MiLB and college baseball has two major obstacles that may show why MLB is making this change:

1. 2 to 3 in 100,000 college/minor league/other players ever step foot competitively on a major league field. Paying for the 0.9997 or 0.0098 percent of guys who "fill roster spots" is fiscal insanity. Contraction only takes the burden of cost from the sport, Major League Baseball, that benefits from the development of the 2 or 3 guys who "make it".. btw, those 2 or 3 guys do get paid.. and paid handsomely.. even pre-arbitration..

2. Burden shifting as opposed to burden sharing will do more harm than what would otherwise be imagineable. By cutting off an avenue whereby young men are able to exist (or subsist, as indicated in your comment), more and more talented athletes will find other means to ply their physical skills and talent. In short.. cutting off the flow of talent.. even the lowest perceived talent, creates the death spiral for the sport. Flowery edifications of love for the game aside.. taking away the dregs and only supporting the stars will have the effect of an improved product.. but, it won't attracted the ground swell of masses to the sport from the earliest fanhood. I.O.W. & put another way, Even Bo Gentry can't hit a 5 run homer.. he needs 'ducks on the pond' to be a hero..

Thoughts?..

I'm afraid MiLB could be significantly changed forever. In player development there are some basic facts.
The best way to get better at baseball is to play baseball games.
Of all the prospects in an organization, only a handful are good enough to eventually play MLB. But in order to develop those handful, they have to play games against "organizational" players. It can also be helpful in development to play against other players of your approximate age. This system has been working for decades. It's not a fair system for everyone in the organization, but it does give players a chance. Illusion or not.

But economics eventually calls the shots. There will be fewer MiLB teams, and fewer players in each organization. I can forsee more leagues like the AFL, where MLB clubs share their prospects to form a single team. That could become the norm.
On the other hand I am positive there will be MLB expansion in the very near future. That means more jobs.

So I thought I would just look to see who the Indians selected for Arizona to see who is included and who is not according to FanGraph top 54 prospects to see if there is any insights…. The names on list are from FanGraph (not Arizona list).

Catchers



Not much to see here as we know we don’t have many near ready prospects (2-3 years out). The other invitee is Yainer Diaz has contact issues per FanGraph and would appear on some people’s near top-50 list.

Outfielders

This is probably the most interesting as there were significant additions and names left off.



Johnson was left off due to being on the 40 man already. Planez was probably left off due to being a Valenzuela kid unable to get out for now (but other Valenzuela kids are in Arizona). They added Will Brennan and Ka’ai Tom who were not on the Lake County Taxi Squad for a reason … Yet, leaving off Rodriquez and Holmes says a lot when Indians need outfields coming up the system (but they aren’t highly thought of).

Infielders



The only significant person left off other than Bradley being on the 40 man is Nova (being 52nd) and too many infielders already. Note, Jones is added to the list as he is not yet on the 40-man. Also note the Valenzuela kids are invited here (so why is Planez off?). A few extras were added in Lara, Naranjo and Pestrano.



Pitchers



Here the list seems to have some common themes…. The relief pitchers in Lake County taxi squad were not added (I assume they got their pitch count for year up already) in Gose, Sandlin and Scott, while starters of Morgan Hankins and Espino (sim games only) were brought down to Arizona too. Other high-level relievers who could have been added like Martinez, Dowdy, Siri and Robinson (at #47) were left off. Some additions to Arizona were Herrin, Curry, McCarthy (SP), McCarty, Marman, Janczak and Mikolajchak (at #49).

Thus, overall, you could have taken FanGraph top 52 list and got relatively close to the Arizona list … not bad for comparing how Indians evaluate talent and FanGraphs … especially in deep system.