No power. Why do we need another outfielder with no power?

Maybe he's trade bait.

So Glasnow trade is basically done while the Dodgers are working on an extension.

So why have the Guardians not added Hedges to the 40 and cut Rivas ? Got to believe that the FO was waiting on a trade. Trading Bieber should not delay adding Hedges and cutting Rivas. Right ?

Got to believe that the FO may not be adding major league ready players.

I would expect something soon.

News and Notes: Angel Martinez and Tyler Freeman Are Taking Outfield Reps

News and Notes for Thursday, December 14th, 2023

By Quincy Wheeler Dec 14, 2023, 7:00am EST

Apparently, Angel Martinez is working on playing centerfield in the Dominican Republic:

And, reportedly, Tyler Freeman is working out in the outfield, something the Guardians indicated would happen this offseason during the summer:

There was noise that the Dodgers would be landing Tyler Glasnow, but, as of the composing of this news and notes at 11:50pm EST on the 13th of December, that move had not materialized as of yet:

MLB is arranging some top prospects vs. top prospects games for Spring Training, which sounds fun!

<

probably infielders are doing the same.
Freeman is a nice hitter but certainly not a power bat. He could be an all-around utility guy, and especially useful as a right handed bat.

Guardians Prospect Deyvison De Los Santos Expresses Outfield Interest

By Logan Potosky | Last updated 12/16/23

Ten days ago, the Cleveland Guardians selected Deyvison De Los Santos from the Arizona Diamondbacks in the Major League phase of the 2023 MLB Rule 5 Draft.

Throughout his Minor League career, the 20-year-old has played 1,886.0 innings at third base and 552.0 innings at first base.

However, he appears to be open to a position change.

Guardians Executive Vice President and Assistant General Manager Matt Forman recently appeared on Bally Sports Great Lakes’ “Guardians Report,” during which he described De Los Santos’ willingness to play in the outfield.

“Deyvison’s a right-handed hitting corner infielder,” Forman said. “He’s predominantly played third base, but he’s played a little bit of first. In our conversations with him to this point, he’s expressed some interest in even getting exposure to the outfield.”

This year, in his first full Double-A season, the Guardians’ 12th-ranked prospect per MLB Pipeline hit 20 home runs with a .728 OPS for Double-A Amarillo.

If De Los Santos were to become an outfielder, he would add another power bat to this position group within Cleveland’s 40-man roster.

Johnathan Rodríguez, Cleveland’s 25th-ranked prospect per MLB Pipeline, had Guardians system-bests of 29 home runs and a .897 OPS across Double-A Akron and Triple-A Columbus this season.

Jhonkensy Noel, Cleveland’s 29th-ranked prospect per MLB Pipeline, hit 27 home runs with a .723 OPS in his first full Triple-A season with Columbus this year. He also has experience at third base like De Los Santos.

George Valera, Cleveland’s fifth-ranked prospect per MLB Pipeline, has a combined 54 home runs over his past three Minor League seasons, with an OPS of at least .746 each year.

While a position change is not guaranteed, De Los Santos seems prepared to do whatever it takes for the Guardians to get the most out of his talent.

<

Want to feel old?

Just read about the last MVPs for each team. The last MVP for Cleveland was Al Rosen in 1953.

The way other teams are throwing money around, it may be another 70 years for the G's.

Feel old all the time. We're more than 60 years since the Rocky Colavito trade. More than 1/2 century since my favorite game when Tiant struck out 19 in 10 innings
The NEW pro basketball team in town has been around only since 1969 or was it 1920?

Cleveland Guardians Perspective

I have been posting on Indians' forums and blogging about the Indians for most of the last 30 years. Stop by here to read interesting articles and opinions not allowed on most Tribe forums. This site is not affiliated with the Cleveland Guardians

Tuesday, December 19, 2023

How Do We Fix The Salary Mess?

I read a tweet the other day that posted the total salaries teams will have in 2024. Of course, the numbers were wrong because it doesn't factor in arbitration agreements/settlements that will happen. The list has Cleveland at $73 million but, unless someone is traded, their 2024 opening day 40 man will be closer to $90 million.

But the tweet brings up the typical old argument: Baseball owners are interested in keeping profits, are cheap and won't spend money on their teams. The tweet suggested a floor of $100 million for team salaries every year.

But that is an idea that won't work. Here's why:

There will be 780 guys on ML opening day rosters, not counting guys on the IL.

Those 780 guys have agreed to play for the salary they were promised. Thus, obviously, there is enough money to pay for those players. Few, in any, of them are 'holding out' for larger salaries.

On the point of holdouts, likely, these 780 will represent >95% of the best available players, not counting rookies who may be inherently better but wouldn't move the needle in terms of team salaries if they were substituted for guys already on 26 man rosters.

Here is the speculative but logical part of the argument: the other 5%, the ones who don't sign, are at or near the bottom of the quality pool for veterans. Very few, if any, of those 5% are there because they refuse to play unless they get paid more money. Most are there because there are better, cheaper internal or external options for that job and those guys have to accept minor league deals because there is just no place for them. Remember, with what MLers are paid and the benefits and the pensions they get just for being in the majors, it is worth it to stay in the minors looking to get promoted.

If you believe these arguments then there are only three scenarios if you have a salary floor for ML baseball teams:

Lesser players will make more money because teams will have to reach that $100 million threshold

Teams will bid on higher-priced free agents, driving up the salaries of the best players once they get to free agency but, likely, not changing where those free agents end up.

Teams will take on or retain bad contracts of players just to reach that $100 million floor.

So, given the above, the salary floor could do basically three things:

make inferior players get artificially high salaries,

make the top tier players get even higher salaries than they do now.

maybe, and I repeat MAYBE, cause teams to favor second tier veterans over rookies.

Neither the weaker veterans getting paid more or the best players getting paid more will change the competitive balance in baseball. I mean, do you really think if Oakland filled their roster with Ramon Laureano/Jaime Barria etc. types it will make them win more. If the A's took on Marco Gonzalez's salary would it make them more competitive? No, it would simply make the A's spend more money for the same, non-playoff outcome.

There is only ONE positive thing I think we would get from a salary floor:

teams would be more likely to meet that floor by doing a Jackson Chourio/Wander Franco thing and signing their young, pre-arbitration players to long term contracts just to meet that salary floor. Given what is going on with Franco, I don't see that as a logical pathway in most cases, especially not with pitchers (see Stephen Strasburg, for example). But I acknowledge it would be a way to get to the $100 million floor.

You are now free to ask: "OK, Mr. Negative, how do we make owners spend money in a way that addresses the competitive imbalances that exist in baseball without imposing an artificial salary floor?"

Well, I'm glad you asked.

SO, WHAT IS THE SOLUTION TO MAKING TEAMS SPEND MORE MONEY ON THEIR ROSTER?

The simple answer is that there is no reasonable way to fix this problem immediately, given that most solutions would have to be negotiated between MLB and the MLBPA. A potential solution to this problem that might be implementable right now is to incentivize/mandate the small market franchises into spending more money getting better amateur players into their system.

Here are a few things I think MLB could do right now to help make that happen.

Amateur Draft:

THE CARROT

Teams that did not make the playoffs would get an extra $5 million added to their draft budget. Looking at the budgets for the 2023 draft, here is what those budgets would have looked like for the teams 10 picks in that draft. The numbers I have included are the original budget/my proposed budget/my proposed budget plus 5% (the highest amount a team could spend before losing a draft pick the next year). All numbers are in millions.

Pirates: $16.1/$21.1/$22.1
Tigers: $15.7/$20.7/$21.7
Nationals: $14.5/$19.5/$20.4
Twins: $14.3/$19.3/$20.25
Athletics: $14.2/$19.2/$20.1
Reds: $13.8/$18.8/$19.7
Mariners: $13.2/$18.2/19.1
Marlins: $12.8/$17.8/$18.6
Royals: $12.3/$17.3/$18.1
Rockies: $11.9/$16.9/$17.7

For comparison, it is likely that the Guardians would have $20/$25/$26.2 if my system was in place next year. That is about $18 million more than they had this year, meaning they could take, and sign, more 'flyers', i.e., guys who normally would go to/back to college instead of signing.

Teams that make the playoffs who receive revenue sharing get $1 million added to their next draft budget so that they are not left out and are rewarded for their success even though they are a small market team.

THE STICK

All the teams who receive extra draft budget monies have to spend their entire budget. If they don't they lose their second draft pick the next year. The penalty on any amount that they spend over their budget (up to 4.99%) is added to whatever their draft budget money is the next year. In essence, the penalty they pay is just banked by MLB and given to them to spend on the draft the next year.

International Signing Period

All the teams in the top budget group for the international signing period will receive an additional $2 million in their budget above what they would be given in the current calculation system.

All the teams in the second group receive an extra $1 million over what the budget is calculated to be using the current calculation system.

To make the international process less of a free-for-all, no team is allowed to sign more that 10 players for more than $10,000. There is no cap on the number of players a team can sign overall, however.

Teams are fined at a 50% rate for any money left over that they do not spend on international signings.

Like amateur draft signings, however, the bonuses of all players signed for over $10,000 are made public so that fans can see how much of their international budget teams are actually using.

The date for the international draft is agreed upon before opening day 2024 with that draft starting in January, 2026.

Players who are 17 years old or younger when they sign get an extra year before they are eligible for the Rule 5 draft.

SUMMARY

These changes to the acquisition process for both drafted and international amateur players, along with the ability to protect amateur international signees from the Rule 5 for an extra year, should force teams to spend money on acquiring amateur talent. While it is theoretically possible for teams not to invest more heavily in player development infrastructure, this is a business and you want to maximize your assets so teams would likely increase their player development budgets to support the extra talent they have coming in.

Would this change the competitive balance immediately? No, it would likely take 3-5 years to see the changes. But when you take a look at teams like Baltimore, Cincinnati and Cleveland it is easy to see how you could compete under this system. In fact, if the Guardians had not squandered Nolan Jones, Will Benson, Yandy Diaz, Junior Caminero and Yainer Diaz, among others, they would be the absolute poster child for the success of a system like this.

Large market teams would still get to invest in free agents and take on large contracts of veterans players from small market teams in exchange for prospects but the small market teams, if they do their jobs correctly, would be able to compete with younger players just like the Guardians did in 2022 and we hope they do in 2024.

Posted by Dennis at 11:03 AM

<

Dennis might think he has the answer, but he doesn't.

I don't either.

Dennis spends a lot of time and energy thinking about this kind of stuff.

I don't want to think about it and neither do the owners or the players.

How many days to Pitchers and Catchers?

squandered Nolan Jones, Will Benson, Yandy Diaz, Junior Caminero and Yainer Diaz,

Well we did get something in return for at least some of those people:
Juan Brito a very good prospect
Steve Hajjer a pretty marginal prospect
Justin Boyd a high draft pick but getting nowhere so far
Edwin Encarnacion for a year
The great Tobias Myers
Myles Straw
and then there are of course the good trades:
getting us Manzardo, Joey Cantillo [not to mention Josh Naylor in the same deal], Clase

Lets not anoint Manzardo as savior yet. Remember Matt LaPorta.

Ah yes, I remember him well.

DeLauter seems much more likely to be the real thing. I think of Brad Zimmer as his ghost of seasons past

Looks like the Mariners might be sniffing around Naylor.

Comes from Seattle reports not our ace reporters.

The G's hold info very close to the vest so you never hear anything and then it happens. Usually silence, then something happens out of the blue,

Trading Naylor sounds like a pretty terrible idea to me. Either one of them.

I'd take younger brother Myles although his rookie minor league season wasn't too impressive: 21/288/381 Over 40 % of at bats end with strikeouts. give him time.

Guardians News:

More Rule Changes Coming To MLB

By Tommy Wild | Last updated 12/21/23

Baseball had a different look to it in 2023 thanks to several rule changes implemented to improve the pace of play. These modifications included a pitch clock, limited disengagements off the mound by a pitcher, and increased base size.

These were largely a success and helped the Cleveland Guardians in some areas and now MLB has announced another wave of rule changes for the 2024 season.

Here are all the official rule changes from the MLB Competition Committee themselves:

Runner’s Lane: The Runner’s Lane will be widened to include the dirt area between the foul line and the infield grass.

Timing Between Pitches: Reduce time from 20 seconds to 18 seconds with runners on base.

Batter Timeouts: Based on player feedback, MLB withdrew a proposal that would have required the home plate umpire to immediately reset the Pitch Clock after a batter called timeout.

Pitching Changes: If a new pitcher steps onto the warning track with less than 2:00 remaining on the inning break Clock, the Clock will reset to 2:00 rather than 2:15 as was the case in 2023.

Mound Visits: Mound visits will be reduced from five per game to four, and an extra mound visit will still be awarded for the ninth inning if the defensive team has zero remaining at the end of the eighth inning.

Circumvention: The FTC will now restart the timer after a dead ball (e.g., foul ball) when the pitcher has the ball and play is ready to resume.

Pitcher Who Warms Up Must Face At Least One Hitter: A pitcher who is sent out to warm up for an inning must face at least one batter (in addition to any requirements under the Three-Batter Minimum rule).

Again, the rationale for all of these changes is to increase the pace of play and are "adjustments based on feedback from Major League Player and Umpire representatives" according to the MLB Competition Committee.

Adapting the rules based on constructive criticism seems like a great idea on paper. However, the players association is not too pleased with these changes. Tony Clark, President of the MLBPA, said that "immediate and additional changes are not unnecessary and offer no meaningful benefit to fans, Players, or the competition on the field."

Will these additional changes work or be beneficial? Time will tell. They'll be implemented into games once spring training starts this February.

<