Cleveland Sports Forum

Evaluating your Cleveland Guardians trade proposals for Jesse Winker, Matt Olson, Angels in the outfield and more



PHOENIX, ARIZONA - APRIL 09: Jesse Winker #33 of the Cincinnati Reds bats against the Arizona Diamondbacks during the MLB game at Chase Field on April 09, 2021 in Phoenix, Arizona. The Reds defeated the Diamondbacks 6-5 in 10 innings. (Photo by Christian Petersen/Getty Images)

By Zack Meisel Dec 29, 2021 36

CLEVELAND — Don’t shoot the messenger. These are your trade proposals, your master plans to land Jesse Winker or Matt Olson in Cleveland. The messenger will, however, chime in with his thoughts on the Cleveland perspective, and I solicited The Athletic’s beat writers to do the same for the teams they cover. Let’s see if any of you are equipped to replace Chris Antonetti one day.

If you missed Part 1, tap or click here.

SP Zach Plesac and OF Bradley Zimmer to the Reds for OF Jesse Winker and a prospect — Brian M.
SS Amed Rosario and INF Ernie Clement to the Reds for OF Jesse Winker — Josh C.
Cleveland’s perspective: Let’s start with this: Antonetti himself would drive Rosario and Clement south on I-71 if the Reds agreed to the second deal. Winker is a great fit for Cleveland, a corner outfielder who crushes righties like few others in the sport. His numbers against lefties, on the other hand …

Winker was an All-Star in 2021, his best season to date, which boosted his career OPS to .888. That’ll play in any outfield, not just the talent-deficient pasture at Progressive Field. These teams talked over the summer. They’ve talked this offseason. Hell, they talk all the time. They’ve completed a bunch of deals in recent years. The Reds are sort of caught in the middle. Might they be interested in some of Cleveland’s starting pitching depth? Or a middle infielder? Are they ready to get younger and acquire some prospects? Either proposal here could be the foundation of an offer that Cleveland would entertain, especially the one built around Rosario, who doesn’t have a long-term fit with the Guardians.

Cincinnati’s perspective: Man, Guardians fans love them some Jesse Winker, don’t they?

When a fan base is so interested in one player, I like to go back and look at what they’ve done against that team. Sometimes that can give you an outsized view of them. (I’m still shocked Bill Hall wasn’t a Hall of Famer based on what he did against the Reds for many years.) Winker has hit .276/.364/.431 in 17 games against Cleveland and is 10-for-30 with a homer and seven walks to six strikeouts at Progressive Field. That slash line is actually worse than Winker’s career .288/.385/.504 line and the .305/.394/.556 line he put up as an All-Star in 2021.

The Reds, well, in an ideal world, they’d be looking to add an outfielder. They’d also be looking to keep Winker — a player they drafted 49th overall in 2012 — around longer than the two more seasons that he’s under team control. If there’s a 2022 season, it’s likely that the Reds will actually be able to play Winker at his best position: designated hitter.

Now, let’s get to the deals. Winker for Plesac and Zimmer seems like a good trade for the Reds. Plesac is the type of starter you can build around. He had a bit of a down year in 2021, with his strikeout rate dropping. But he gave up homers at a rate lower than the MLB average, and that’s important when looking at pitchers for Great American Ball Park. What’s important to the Reds of 2022 seems to be salary, and Winker is in his second year of arbitration, whereas Plesac isn’t yet eligible.

Then there’s the throw-in of Zimmer, which is where this gets mixed up. Zimmer is in his second year of arbitration and as the process has worked, he’d still get a little bump while not adding much production other than as a body. He’s one of those players where I recognize the name from his prospect days, but can’t tell you I’ve ever seen him produce a memorable moment on a big-league field. I’m assuming he’s included to help add an outfielder to replace the departed Winker, but based on what the Reds have done this offseason, they’d need some salary relief for Zimmer to actually be a player they’d want in the deal.

In the end, I think it would come down to what pitching coach Derek Johnson thought about Plesac, but I don’t think this is an outrageous deal. Would I do it? I’m not sure, but I’d certainly think about it.

As for Rosario and Clement? Rosario would be a stopgap at shortstop and could be fine. I’m not as high on him as some others, and Clement doesn’t do much for me. I know this is looking at the Reds needing a shortstop and thinking maybe it’s not Jose Barrero, but I’ll take Barrero over Clement any day, and is Rosario enough of an immediate upgrade over Barrero? He’s a free agent after the 2023 season, and it just doesn’t seem to be a long-term fit. — C. Trent Rosecrans

Who says no: Perhaps no one to the first deal; the Reds to the second deal

SP Triston McKenzie to the Angels for OF Jo Adell — David C.
Cleveland’s perspective: McKenzie could have as much upside as any starting pitcher on the roster not named Shane Bieber, so he might not be the front office’s first choice. This is a pretty reasonable deal, though, all things considered. Both players were top 25 prospects in baseball at one point. Both endured early struggles at the big-league level. In the end, it might make more sense for Cleveland to land an outfielder by dealing away prospects.

Los Angeles’ perspective: The Angels’ entire offseason is being driven by the need to acquire starting pitching. It would be difficult to give up a top prospect and potential superstar, but that might just be the price required. The Angels saw how good McKenzie could be when he dominated them on Aug. 21 at Progressive Field. If the Angels make this move, it’s because they believe McKenzie has the ability to be just as much of a cornerstone as Adell could become. — Sam Blum

Who says no: Depends on Cleveland’s other options, but perhaps no one

SP Zach Plesac, 3B Nolan Jones (or SS Gabriel Arias) and SS Carson Tucker to the Angels for OF Jo Adell — Howard H.
Cleveland’s perspective: The Guardians aren’t typically eager to sell low on a young player, which would be the case with Jones (and Plesac). Tucker, Cleveland’s top draft pick in 2020, is a lottery ticket at this point. This deal hinges on what the Guardians — who seem to possess a crystal ball that forecasts precisely when their starting pitchers will crumble — think about Plesac moving forward. Is league-average output with a low strikeout rate the new norm for him?

Los Angeles’ perspective: This move could be intriguing for the Angels because it allows them to immediately add to a weak farm system and gives them a stable arm in the rotation that has four more years of team control. The best bet is that the Angels will only want to move Adell for a really strong major-league player (or players), especially given their need to be competitive in 2022. But this haul could be enough. — Sam Blum

Who says no: The Guardians, but there’s a framework here that could make sense

SP Shane Bieber to the Angels for two out of three of OF Jo Adell, OF Brandon Marsh and OF Jordyn Adams — Ron U.
Cleveland’s perspective: This would probably have to be Marsh and Adell to prevent Antonetti from hanging up and blocking Angels general manager Perry Minasian’s number, but this also isn’t the time to send Bieber to his hometown team. Adams has intriguing tools, but he hasn’t played above A ball and hasn’t hit enough. Adell and Marsh could solidify Cleveland’s outfield for years, but they aren’t sure things either and, of course, there’s the tiny drawback of trading away your ace who has three more years of team control. Perhaps these teams could revisit this in a year or two.

Los Angeles’ perspective: It would seem unfathomable that the Angels would trade away their two cornerstone position players, even for a Cy Young-capable pitcher. Add on that Bieber had only six innings pitched in the second half of last season and it seems unlikely the Angels would make this move. If this does come to pass, it would likely mean Adams was involved in the deal. — Sam Blum

Who says no: Both teams

SP Zach Plesac and SS Gabriel Arias to the Angels for OF Jo Adell, SP Mason Albright and C Max Stassi — Jonathan O.
Cleveland’s perspective: The Guardians need a second catcher to pair with Austin Hedges. Stassi would be a good fit, though he’s also set to be a free agent in a year.

Los Angeles’ perspective: The one included name that might stop a deal like this in its tracks is Max Stassi. The Angels don’t even have a capable backup catcher in the organization. They really can’t afford to trade him. It’s impressive that Guardians fans are in tune with Mason Albright. The Angels are very high on him. He’s a 12th-round pick and was paid like one. This doesn’t feel like a smart deal for the Angels. — Sam Blum

Who says no: The Angels

3B Nolan Jones and SP Tanner Burns to the Cubs for OF Ian Happ — Quincy W.
SP Zach Plesac, INF Owen Miller and SS Carson Tucker to the Cubs for C Willson Contreras and OF Ian Happ — Alex H.
Chicago’s perspective: It seems like a lot for Happ and a nice get for the pair in the second deal. I assume (new Cubs GM and former Guardians assistant GM) Carter Hawkins has a ton of information on all these guys. If the Cubs can’t extend Contreras, they’ll move him. Happ, in general, is just very volatile, and they’re aware of that. So while they’re willing to see if he pops, I think they’d also jump at a deal of pre-arb guys with some upside or even just a decent floor, particularly if one is on the precipice of the big leagues. — Sahadev Sharma

Cleveland’s perspective: Contreras and Happ make sense as short-term additions, but they have only one and two years of team control remaining, respectively, so Cleveland wouldn’t want to part with anyone too valuable.

Who says no: The Guardians, perhaps, but there should be a way to make something work here


Matt Olson is expected to be a popular target on the trade market this winter. (Thearon W. Henderson / Getty Images)
SS Andrés Giménez, 1B Bobby Bradley and SP Eli Morgan to Oakland for 1B Matt Olson — Mike C.
Oakland’s perspective: This trade offer would receive an immediate dial tone. After the lockout — and let’s face it, probably during — there will be a furious bidding war for Olson among teams that need a first baseman and that fall short of winning the Freddie Freeman sweepstakes. While this offer includes three intriguing young players, the A’s will be looking for an established (read: above-average) major-league player and a top prospect, and then some more on top of that. — Steve Berman

Cleveland’s perspective: Giménez could blossom into a solid big-league shortstop and Bradley and Morgan seem like serviceable major leaguers, but given Olson’s ability, Cleveland’s executives would pop champagne in the Progressive Field offices if this opportunity were available to them.

Who says no: The A’s

SP Cody Morris, SP Tanner Burns, C Bo Naylor and SS Carson Tucker to Oakland for 1B Matt Olson — Brian M.
Oakland’s perspective: We’re getting warmer with this offer, because we’re talking about four of the top 20 or 25 prospects in Cleveland’s system, including Bo Naylor, who was Keith Law’s No. 2 Guardians prospect for 2021. If the A’s find a suitor for catcher Sean Murphy, who’s coming off a Gold Glove season, is still young (27) and is under team control through 2025, Naylor could be a nice replacement. Still, with how fantastic Olson was in 2021 and the Yankees such an obvious destination, Cleveland would probably have to go a little higher than even this package to land him. — Steve Berman

Cleveland’s perspective: Well, hey, send Murphy over here. Cleveland needs some catching help and, unlike Hedges and Sandy León, Murphy can produce at the plate, not just behind it. This package leans more toward younger prospects, and Oakland seems like a team that typically favors guys who are closer to the majors.

Who says no: The A’s

3B Nolan Jones, SP Zach Plesac, INF Aaron Bracho and 1B Bobby Bradley to Oakland for 1B Matt Olson — Matthew S.
Oakland’s perspective: Now we’re getting somewhere. Jones is the No. 68 prospect in all of baseball, according to MLB Pipeline, and Plesac is under team control for four more seasons. My only hesitations before saying this is a slam-dunk are (1) Plesac’s strikeout rate in 2021 dipped to 6.3 K/9 and (2) Bradley’s approach at the plate. The A’s already have a lefty power bat in Seth Brown who can play first. If you swap out Plesac and Bradley for Cal Quantrill, you might have a deal. Yes, I’m aware that Cleveland fans probably won’t want to give up someone like Quantrill, who was fantastic throughout the second half of 2021, but Olson is going to fetch a crazy package from someone. — Steve Berman

Cleveland’s perspective: It’s really difficult to forecast how the team’s four non-Bieber starters will fare in 2022. Quantrill is due for a bit of regression after that incredibly fruitful second half. Plesac had an uncharacteristically underwhelming 2021. McKenzie experienced results on both ends of the spectrum. Aaron Civale had flashes of brilliance and a handful of clunkers. So, if the club attempts to trade one of them, there’s plenty of risk involved. Bracho had a rough 2021, so I can’t imagine he has much trade value at the moment. This basically boils down to Jones and Plesac, who are both coming off substandard, injury-riddled years.

Who says no: As constructed, the A’s

SS Jose Tena and SP Cody Morris for OF Ramón Laureano — Quincy W.
Oakland’s perspective: I think the A’s would make this deal without a second thought. An intriguing 25-year-old starter with 12 strikeouts per nine innings at every level, plus a 20-year-old middle infielder with speed and some pop? Laureano is a fan favorite and plays a nice center field, but he’s kind of injury-prone and still has 20-plus games remaining on his suspension for a positive Nandrolone test. I figured he’d stay put for now, simply because his value’s never been lower. But if Cleveland made this offer, I can’t see why the A’s wouldn’t jump at the opportunity. — Steve Berman

Cleveland’s perspective: Laureano is an odd, yet interesting option. He’s best suited for center field, but in Cleveland, he’d probably play a corner with Myles Straw patrolling center. That might be a waste of Laureano’s positional value, though having both of them in the outfield would allow Cleveland to play anyone — Franmil Reyes, Melky Cabrera, Drew Carey, a random fan — in the other corner. Laureano owns a career 118 wRC+ (he’s been 18 percent more productive than the average hitter); can he maintain that output once he returns from the suspension?

Who says no: If anyone, the Guardians

Ben Simmons in Cleveland? Replacing Ricky Rubio, Baker Mayfield’s future and a partner for the Guardians: Jason Lloyd’s mega mailbag

By Jason Lloyd Dec 30, 2021 29
Any validity to the Ben Simmons to Cleveland rumors? What would a deal look like that would improve the team? — Aksel C.

The Cavs have been interested in Simmons for a while. The question is whether they have the necessary pieces to meet Philly’s high price. The Cavs have all of their first-round picks and a plethora of second-rounders, but no extra first-rounders laying around and their picks won’t be considered valuable if they keep winning like this. I checked around the league last summer about whether Kevin Love and Collin Sexton would get the Cavs in the conversation for Simmons (since the money matches). The overwhelming response was “not even close.”

The Cavs have a talented, young roster, but I don’t believe they have players that would interest the Sixers outside of Evan Mobley and Darius Garland. Mobley should be untouchable at this point and Garland isn’t far behind. Jarrett Allen is a duplicate of Joel Embiid. I can’t get a sense of what Sexton’s trade value would be right now, but I can’t imagine it’s higher than it was last summer. If anything, it’s probably lower. He’s entering restricted free agency next year while coming off the knee injury, he was rightfully seeking starter’s money in an extension last summer, but some teams view him more as a backup. The Cavs tried to trade him over the summer and couldn’t get the value they sought.

Koby Altman knocked it out of the park with the Jarrett Allen and Ricky Rubio trades and the Lauri Markkanen deal looks like a winner, also. He’s used to getting creative. If Simmons is going to land in Cleveland, they might have to pull in a third team to make a deal work.

Now that Rubio is done for the year what can the Cavs do to salvage their season? When Garland comes back, he obviously can’t play 48 minutes and we have no one else to fill the void. — Robert S.

On the bright side, maybe it’s more likely we can now sign Rubio to an extension after this injury? — Stacey Y.

Rubio’s loss is a devastating blow. He was a perfect fit for what this team needed as a backup point guard and secondary ballhandler. The Cavs have now lost Collin Sexton and Rubio for the season.

Kevin Pangos will get a shot in the interim, but they’ll probably have to look outside the organization for another ballhandler. The problem is, with so many players in COVID-19 protocols, there aren’t a lot of guys left to go get. Players who have been out of the league for years are back on NBA rosters because teams are so desperate for bodies. They’re probably going to have to make a trade. Theoretically, this should incentivize them to pursue someone like Simmons even more. But again, I’m just not sure the pieces align there.

As for Rubio’s future, the timing of this is terrible. He’ll be a free agent this summer and he turns 32 before next season and now trying to come back off a second ACL injury. He was good enough to still start in the NBA before this injury. It’s too early to say how the injury will affect his market and what type of player he’ll be when he returns.

Go ahead, Mr. Lloyd. You can admit it. The Cleveland team with the brightest future is the Cavaliers. — C Z.

No argument from me, although I’m getting bullish on the future of all three teams. The Guardians’ farm system and rotation remain loaded. As they close in on a minority owner/group, I’m optimistic an infusion of cash can give them quite a bit more financial flexibility, while the Browns are competent quarterback play away from being excellent in the AFC. They have everything else.

However, given the growth of Garland and Allen and the arrival of Mobley, coupled with Dan Gilbert’s aggressiveness and willingness to spend, the Cavs are way ahead of everyone’s projections — including their own. With the GM and head coach already working on their second contracts, the Cavs may finally get some of the stability at the top they so desperately need. As we close out 2021, the future of the Cavs looks extremely bright.

When I last asked you a question, you said you didn’t think the Cavs were a .500 team. Turns out, you were right … they’re much better than that! But in all seriousness, what do the Cavs do with Sexton this offseason? Assuming he is back in a Cavs uniform next season, do you think he’s willing to accept a bench role to allow room for a starting backcourt of Garland-Okoro? I don’t think Okoro is “better” than Sexton, but I do think he meshes with Garland better, and Garland is one of our three most important pieces. — Mark P.

I agree with you. I’ve thought for a few years, and scouts have told me, Sexton’s presence hurts Garland when they’re on the floor together. They’re too similar in style and it’s more important for Garland to have the ball in his hands.

I do believe there is a place for Sexton on this team, particularly now that they’re playing a style of basketball more conducive to winning. He was adapting to a new role before the knee injury. The real question will be if the two sides can agree on money. I don’t get the impression the Cavs want to give him starter’s money on a long-term deal.

As I wrote a few weeks ago, by my count, 31 players drafted in the top 10 between the 2013-17 drafts failed to reach extensions when eligible. Of those 31, only six remained with those same teams on new deals. That means the odds are low Sexton is still here next season, but it’s certainly not impossible.

Is it reasonable to think the Cavs will finish the season third in the East? It seems unlikely we overtake Brooklyn or Milwaukee, but Miami is without Bam, Bulls are a mystery, Celtics stink (#blessed) and Philly is a mess. Am I delusional? — Joseph F.

I just had this conversation on the radio this week. The only two teams in the Eastern Conference that I believe are significantly better than the Cavs right now are the Bucks and Nets. So no, it’s not outrageous to believe the Cavs can finish third. COVID-19 is the great wild card in all of this, of course, and the Cavs can’t withstand many more injuries. The Rubio loss is a big blow they’ll have to overcome. But the line of demarcation in the East for me is after Milwaukee and Brooklyn and then everyone else.

Can the Cavs get Brandon Ingram? — Justin E.

I’ve seen this a few times now and I’m not entirely sure where this Ingram chatter is starting. The Pelicans have been a disaster for much of the season, although they’re starting to play a bit better recently, and the Zion Williamson ordeal hangs over that entire franchise. They have to figure out his future in New Orleans before anything else is determined.

However, I don’t see any incentive for them to trade Ingram at this point. We had Shams Charania on the radio while I was hosting on 92.3 this week and I asked him if he had heard anything about Ingram trade rumors. He hadn’t heard anything, either. I don’t see any merit to it.

What sort of trade do you expect from the Cavs? — Jeffrey W.

Before the Rubio injury, I would’ve circled another wing as their top priority. But now it becomes someone who can handle the ball and get them into the offense. Darius Garland is now the only capable point guard on the roster, and he’s not even available because of health and safety protocols.

Does K-Love have positive trade value at this point? Any potential suitors (please do not say “Russell Westbrook”)? — Jeffrey V.

Love certainly has built a little equity within the Cavs and around the league from this summer, but I would argue he’s in the perfect role and giving the Cavs exactly what they need. They’re short on veterans as it is, and now that he is re-energized playing on a winning team, he’s one of the few reliable shooters the Cavs have. He hasn’t played more than 24 minutes in a game this season, which I like and should at least help protect him from future injuries. Love is an asset on this team. They need more shooting, not less.

I have been very impressed with Justin Anderson of the Cavs. Is he a stopgap or might he find a longer-term role on the team? He seems to bring great energy, and I believe he is a former first-round pick. Thanks for any insight. — Jeff N.

This is his fifth team in seven years, so I wouldn’t expect much out of him. Given Rubio’s injury, however, he’s going to get his chances.

Who do you think will win NBA Rookie of the Year and what’s the talk amongst beat writers for who the best rookie is? — Sam J.

As far as I’m concerned, Mobley is the NBA Rookie of the Year. I haven’t taken a poll of other writers or anything but I know a number of them feel the same way. Toronto’s Scottie Barnes also has played consistently well all season and Orlando’s Franz Wagner has been hot lately, but Mobley has been the steadiest and had the greatest impact on his team as far as I’m concerned.

The season isn’t even half over, but it looks like the Cavs landed a franchise-altering player in Evan Mobley. What are the early impressions from other general managers and players regarding Mobley? And what is a realistic ceiling for just how good of a player he can become? — Joshua J.

I wrote in May how the Cavs should hope Mobley is there when they pick because he’s exactly what they needed. He’s a perfect fit on this team and the reviews around the league match that. He has Chris Bosh/Anthony Davis potential to reach multiple All-Star Games. If he stays healthy, he’s going to be sensational.

Thanks for the great coverage of everything! What story are you most interested to cover in 2022? Potential new minority owner of the Guardians? Baker’s contract situation or the Cavs being good again? — Matt W.

It would have to be the rise of the Cavs. A new minority owner is vital to the operation, but I’m not sure it’s “interesting” to cover. Regardless of what some readers may believe, I take no joy in writing how I don’t think the Browns quarterback is very good. But watching a young team grow together and exceed expectations is always fun.


Browns quarterback Baker Mayfield. (Benny Sieu / USA Today)
Baker hasn’t played well. You’ve written about it and talked about it a lot. But to me, it seems like in addition to that, there’s something off about the team this season. They’ve been way less disciplined penalty-wise, they’ve had poor efforts (especially in the Patriots game), they’ve had parents, players and wives talking on social media. What’s going on? Why have they regressed to near-Freddie-Kitchens-level undisciplined? — Ben G.

I agree that something just seems … off. I wish I could tell you what it is, but I don’t know. They seemed to clean up the pre-snap penalties for about a month and then were hit with four more against the Packers. The two false starts in the second half were drive killers.

Zac Jackson and I have mentioned this a couple of times on the podcast, but I wonder how much COVID-19 has played a role in all of this. The building was on absolute lockdown last year and admittance was limited to essential personnel. Things have been a bit more relaxed this year. It just naturally leads to more fingers in the pot. The stuff with the family members is just silly and needs to stop immediately. Can you imagine any of that going on in New England? No chance.

When Austin Hooper walks into a grocery store, does he fall after 6 yards? — Stacey Y.

No, more like 3 yards. Somewhere in the produce section (thanks for listening to the Civilized Barking podcast).

If we move on from Baker, the question is who can the Browns get that would be better? Aaron Rodgers is not coming. Watson’s pending legal issues could be interesting, but lots of question marks if/when he’ll be cleared and how much he’ll cost. Russ is aging and expensive to land. Carr will probably stay in Vegas. (Though Mariota could be intriguing) Jimmy Garoppolo isn’t much of an improvement. Kirk Cousins would be a slight improvement, but he has not won the big games for how much his contract is. A rookie would likely not be better for a win-now team. So besides Watson and maybe Cousins, and Wilson any other thoughts on how they improve the QB situation next season? — Bill K.

I’ll answer this the way I respond to everyone who says, ‘OK if not Baker, then who?’ Did the Rams know at this time last year Matthew Stafford would be their quarterback? Of course not. Step one is identifying you need to upgrade. Step two is figuring out what’s realistic and who’s available. As you laid out, the answer might be that there is no significant upgrade available and they have to run it back with Baker and maybe a veteran like Mitch Trubisky brought in to push him. Or someone like Carr could become this offseason’s Stafford.

As Zac pointed out on the podcast, Wilson’s list of teams he’d waive his no-trade for last year did not include Cleveland, but it did include the Raiders. Would the Raiders make a move for him and make Carr available elsewhere? Could Vegas just blow the whole thing up after a miserable year off the field and start over? Anything is possible right now with the Raiders, but the fact Carr has a year left on his deal and hasn’t been extended yet is curious to me.

The general public may not believe Jimmy G. or Cousins is much of an upgrade, but what does Stefanski think? What does Andrew Berry think? I suppose we’ll find out.

Does the emergence of D’Ernest Johnson at running back make Kareem Hunt more expendable? Maybe we could try him into a deal for QB? — Drew H.

This is an interesting dilemma the Browns are going to face this offseason. Johnson is essentially a free agent next spring and has proven himself as a viable NFL running back. Do the Browns have the cap space to keep all three? Hunt has missed half the season now with calf and ankle injuries. He’s only 26 and doesn’t have a ton of wear and tear given his time out of football, but he has a physical running style and constantly seeks contact. You have to at least wonder if this is the start of his body breaking down, particularly since calf injuries can linger (ask Kevin Love and Josh Donaldson). It isn’t the worst idea to at least float Hunt, who has a year left on his contract, and see what his value would be on the open market.

Browns: Who’s your top WR in the draft this year? Do you think we get one of the top 3 guys? Cavs: What’s the plan with Markkanen going forward? Do we want to replace him or does his performance so far this season justify keeping him long term? — Riley D.

I’ll start with the Cavs. Considering Markkanen just signed a $67 million deal, he’s going to be here a while. The Bulls needed him to be a franchise pillar. The Cavs just need him to play a role. I think he’s going to do just fine here long term. As for the Browns, I think Garrett Wilson would look great in a Browns jersey next season. I would expect receiver to be a position they invest heavily in this offseason, whether in free agency or the draft.

As a long-standing Browns fan, I struggle between criticism, praise and reality. We as fans should be allowed to voice displeasure or happiness equally. As long as it’s done without hate, vitriol and bad language. Similarly, the criticism you and Zac Jackson get also is unfair. You both are just reporting what you see and feel, both as fans and beat writers, not fanboys. With that in mind here’s my suggestion: The Browns should contact and contract with Jordan Palmer and have him evaluate Baker. If he can find out what’s wrong with him and fix it, we can honestly say that we’ve done everything possible to salvage him and his career as a Brown. If that doesn’t work, for sure we move on. Happy holidays! — J. Blank M.

I appreciate the kind words and happy holidays to you, too. I guess my answer would be the Browns have someone whose job it is to evaluate and fix Mayfield: Alex Van Pelt. I know Jordan Palmer’s reputation in getting players ready for the draft, but I believe Van Pelt is more equipped to fix Mayfield because of their time together.

Since you asked, however, here’s what Palmer had to say about Mayfield a few weeks ago. The most telling part to me was “you have to be able to throw into tight windows from tight spaces.” And, basically, Mayfield never had to do that at Oklahoma and hasn’t progressed much in that area in four years with the Browns. Palmer also said, however, he errs on the side of caution in these instances and would always give a guy another year in the system rather than start over after they’ve invested so much time and so many resources into developing Mayfield.



Browns fans are delusional to think we’re in the Aaron Rodgers, Russell Wilson, Deshaun Watson sweepstakes. Prove me wrong. — William J.

Rodgers is having such a marvelous season that I’d be surprised at this point if he’s not back for yet another season. Wilson has a no-trade clause and Cleveland isn’t on the list — at least it wasn’t last year. Watson is the wild card. Can Browns ownership and management look the other way on the off-field issues? Do they have enough trade assets to go get him or would they be outbid by a team with better/more draft capital? Of those three, Watson is probably the most likely, but only because I don’t think the other two are realistic options anymore.

Who has a worse quarterback situation going into the offseason: the Steelers needing to find a new starting quarterback behind a subpar offensive line or the Browns having to figure out what they should do about Baker Mayfield? — Max S.

The Steelers certainly are in a worse situation because Mayfield, for all of his flaws, is far superior to anything left on the Steelers roster behind Ben Roethlisberger. If the Browns’ worst-case scenario is bringing back Baker for another season, that’s much better than having to rely on Mason Rudolph at this point.

If either of the worst-case scenarios comes to play Sunday or Monday, do you believe there is any chance the Browns would bench Mayfield for the final game(s) to see what they have in Nick Mullens? — John L.



What major issue is brewing with any of the three Cleveland teams that is not getting as much attention now as it should? (As in, in 1992, a Browns relocation and an Indians emergence were not on the radar, but should have been. Kyrie’s discontent was not widely reported before his trade demand.) — Ryan L.

I love this question for a variety of reasons. I stuck it with the Guardians because my biggest concern in town right now is probably signing Shane Bieber to an extension. I’ll have more on this in an upcoming column, but I’m concerned the window might already be closing. He’s entering arbitration now and will likely earn north of $4 million. Where’s his incentive to give up years of team control when he’s inching closer and closer to free agency? If the Guardians can’t get something done with him this offseason, I’m not sure they’ll get another opportunity.

With the Guardians possibly getting a new minority owner, what happens to the payroll? I’m not advocating for Kershaw and Trevor Story, but could we see a Bieber and Ramirez extension? — Andrew L.

That would certainly be the hope. As I pointed out before, the spikes and slashes of the payroll can be corroborated with John Sherman’s money coming into and going out of the organization. Finding a partner(s) would hopefully allow for another injection. I wouldn’t expect any dramatic free agent boom this offseason, but extensions for one or both of the guys you mentioned would be a great start.

Why did Paul Dolan change the name of the Indians when he knew he’d be selling the team. — Brian M.

It was never a secret they were searching for another minority investor. What remains an unanswered question is how long the Dolans will maintain majority control. All indications last summer were the Dolans expected to still lead this team for the next five-plus years. Now was that posturing? Perhaps. It’s difficult to attract minority investors without a concrete timeline for the transfer of power.

As for why they changed the name now, I believe it had a lot to do with cleaning up any sort of political mess and not saddling a prospective buyer with that decision.

Eighteen of the Guardians’ 21 draft picks were college pitchers last year. Before the reorganization of the minors, most of them would be put in Low A or High A the first full year after they were drafted. But now I wonder what the “normal progression” is. If they’re all going to A ball, who plays in Arizona? Surely we’d all like to see Gavin Williams sooner than later. — Matt S.

I liked this question, but I called in a reliever for help. Zack Meisel is more equipped to adequately answer it. This is what he said: “Probably too soon to say. Not sure yet. I’d imagine some will be in Arizona and maybe a handful in Class A ball, depending on how they look this spring. A lot depends on conditioning and since everyone has had a weird last two years, that’ll dictate a lot, and they’ll probably have some piggybacking and six-man rotations, etc. …”

My two cents: This has been an unprecedented two years in sports for everyone, but particularly baseball, and especially pitchers. I don’t believe even the Guardians know at this point how this will all come together.

I’ve been struck by the importance Ruben Niebla had on the organization. Why do you think the Guardians decided to stick with Carl Willis instead of promoting Niebla to pitching coach? Don’t you think it’s a bigger risk to lose Niebla rather than to keep him? I think Willis has done a great job, but to me, it seems like losing Niebla is a much bigger risk than losing Willis. — Aaron C.

Zack has been mentioning Niebla to me for years as a big part of the pitching factory Cleveland has created. However, I’ve thought for a while now that Willis never seems to get the credit he deserves. He is too often viewed as a castoff or overlooked. It used to be Trevor Bauer’s influence on the pitchers, then it was Matt Blake and Niebla. At some point, we have to credit the guy who is in the seat as well. If the team believed Niebla was more vital to the operation, they could’ve fired Willis and promoted Niebla knowing they ran the risk of losing him. Did they make the right decision? Time will tell.

The Indians are so good at developing pitching, it was only a matter of time before they started losing these guys. First, it was Blake to the Yankees, now Niebla to the Padres. You can’t keep them all.

Most likely to happen: Simmons to the Cavs, Watson to the Browns or Ramirez traded? Also which has the biggest impact? — Bill S.

First off, let me be clear that I don’t think any of these are going to happen. But if I had to pick most likely, I’d go with Jose Ramirez being dealt. I’ve been adamant for more than a year he’d remain in Cleveland. I believe he’ll be here all of next season, too. I just don’t think the Cavs have the necessary pieces to land Simmons (or else he’d be here already), and I’m not sure the Browns have enough draft capital (or the stomach) to land Watson. That leaves Ramirez as the most feasible.

Is this a make or break year for Nolan Jones and could you see him being included in a trade package instead? The next non-LeBron Cavs jersey to be hanging in the rafters will be _______. — Carson M.

I can’t call this a make-or-break year for someone who hasn’t even debuted yet in the majors, although if he doesn’t get to Cleveland this season, something went wrong. Jones got off to a horrid start in the minors last year, especially against left-handers, although his numbers improved throughout the season. The Guardians have traded top prospects before (Clint Frazier, Drew Pomeranz) but those were midseason deals when they were in it and making a run for the pennant.

I thought the time to make that type of Nolan Jones trade was the pandemic-shortened 2020 season. If they knew it was going to be Francisco Lindor’s last year in Cleveland (and by that point, they most certainly knew), then go all out and try to win a World Series before dismantling the roster — even in a shortened season. That didn’t happen. Never say never, but I expect Jones to be in Cleveland. He’s too close to the majors to deal him now before getting a look at him, particularly since he’s a bat within a franchise desperate for more hitting. One of their eleventeen middle infield prospects seems far more likely to go in a trade.

And the next non-LeBron jersey will be Kevin Love or Kyrie Irving. Probably Love. I believe all three should have their jerseys in the rafters for what they meant to the championship team, but there might be a few more wounds to close with Irving before that happens.

Barring some kind of emergency, do you think George Valera gets anything more than a September call-up this season? — Kyle P.

Since he has less than 100 at-bats above Class A, no, I don’t expect Valera to play a major role at this point. But he’s 21, he’s already on the 40-man roster and we’re seeing more and more teams get aggressive in how quickly they promote prospects. If he gets off to a hot start, and depending on need in Cleveland, he could move quickly. Zack Meisel, however, did not list him among his 13 prospects most likely to make it to Cleveland next season.

MLB lockout mailbag: Major sticking points, potential spring training delays, minor-league players and more


By Evan Drellich Dec 30, 2021 178

Major League Baseball and the Major League Baseball Players Association haven’t talked core economics for close to a month now, and it’s unclear when that will change. The sport’s shut down and there’s a chance spring training will be interrupted, so we solicited questions from both readers and The Athletic’s MLB staff. Questions have been edited for length and clarity.

Can you please explain what the point is in this lockout? So far I haven’t seen a point. Rob Manfred claimed it would spur negotiations, but we all knew that was a lie. Look, we all know that with or without this lockout, this thing isn’t getting settled until right before spring training at the earliest. These two sides were always going to wait until the 11th hour to start negotiations and get a deal, lockout or no lockout. It will get done in time for some sort of spring training because nobody wants to lose money. So why run the risk of alienating fans with any kind of work stoppage and ruin a good run of labor peace for no reason? Why not simply work under the expired CBA, let the negotiations continue and get a deal in time for spring training to start? — Scott N.

I agree there is, at the least, an irony to commissioner Rob Manfred talking about the need for a lockout and then having negotiations effectively sit still for a month. There is also an element of control the owners wanted to achieve. If the owners allow spring training to start without a new deal, they’re giving players the chance to walk out on strike, then or later. Owners want to wield the work-stoppage hammer themselves. Now, could the owners have instead said, “we’ll wait to do a lockout until, say, Jan. 20, shortly before spring training?” Technically, yes, but the CBA is written in a way where it’s a little more complicated legally if a new one isn’t in place right away upon expiration, which was Dec. 1. (The luxury tax would have disappeared, at least until a new deal was reached.) That wouldn’t have been insurmountable, but it’s all about pressure, and what the league believed would exert the most. MLB, rightly or wrongly, saw an advantage to putting it to the players right away. And the union’s message in response was: you’re only provoking us.

I’ve been thinking about the CBT. Given the relatively small amount of money that the CBT generates, how staunchly the MLBPA opposes it, and how some of the wealthier owners are handcuffed by it, how likely is it that the CBT remains in place? If the owners eliminated it, that would be a major concession to the MLBPA and possibly open major doors in negotiations. It would cost the owners as a group absolutely nothing! — Henry M.

But it would cost the owners something, because it’s a restraint on player spending, even if teams aren’t often paying the tax itself. Without the CBT, you’d see teams behaving differently, and more spending would drive up prices across the league. The owners argue the CBT is an issue of competitive integrity — which, when it was introduced, it was generally accepted to be. But the competitive-integrity element has become, at least in part, a window dressing for cost control, particularly these days, when there’s so much money in the sport and teams aren’t about to keel over. Sure, the players would love for the CBT to disappear entirely, but owners won’t be having that.

Recognizing that teams can’t negotiate with players directly, can teams discuss trades amongst themselves during the lockout? That way, when the lockout ends, all they need are physicals. Might help expedite some of the roster construction leading up to whatever remains of spring training. — Gregory C.

Technically, teams are not supposed to discuss trades during the lockout. Does that mean every club executive will follow that requirement to a T? I’d guess no, and I’d also guess you’re unlikely to hear about it if it does happen.

Why is revenue sharing up for collective bargaining? Isn’t this something that the owners should work out themselves? — Henry M.

The owners certainly would like that. In talks thus far, MLB is effectively telling the players to mind their own business. Per MLBPA lead negotiator Bruce Meyer, the league is saying it won’t change revenue sharing.

I want to take a rain check on giving you a definitive answer as to whether owners technically ever had to make the money they share between themselves a subject of bargaining. There are definitely some in management who think the answer is no: that the decision to bargain revenue sharing with the players was a significant mistake that the owners made in the 1990s. The players, of course, feel it is very much their business, as it affects player markets and spending.

Put the historical question aside, though. The bottom line is that revenue sharing is a subject of bargaining today, and has been for a long time, so that’s not now going to change. It’s a significant issue, too, one that’s always divided the owners themselves. The MLBPA and some big-market teams believe some smaller-market teams sit back and let money come to them without trying hard enough to sign players and win.

The players’ interest in eliminating tanking is pretty clear. The owners, ever shortsighted in their avarice, want to water down the value of the regular season by expanding the postseason. Does a draft policy something like the Gold Plan for the NHL Draft have a chance of bridging that gap and supporting the value of competitive play during the regular season? — Wm S.

Players and owners are far apart on a lot, including the draft, but in a basic sense, you can see some daylight on this topic. Both have proposed variants of a lottery. An equivalent of the Gold Plan hasn’t specifically been discussed. But it would seem to be a question not of whether the MLB draft changes, but how much does it change — how far do players take it toward something that actually disincentivizes tanking? Owners don’t want to be in a situation where they always have to spend, so by extension, tanking isn’t something they’re eager to thoroughly eliminate.

How likely is it that the players seek better influence with respect to rule changes (versus current “owners can implement with one year’s notice” provision)? — Kevin C.

This is a reference to the commissioner’s ability to implement on-field rule changes if a year’s notice is provided to the union. Technically, that power is granted by the CBA and the union, so if the players wanted, they could try to remove it. But it’s not something they’ve asked to change this go-around, and it’s been in the CBA for a long time. Why don’t the players ask to change it? My guess would be because A, the league wouldn’t go for it; B, the players feel they have bigger fish to fry.

Why do the other three major professional sports leagues (NFL, NHL and NBA) seem to avoid the acrimony and disillusionment of their fans, but MLB and the MLBPA seem to be unable to work together to resolve issues and divide up billions of dollars? — Nelson W.

I think I understand where this notion comes from, and we can unpack it a little, but the premise is incorrect. Baseball just ended the longest streak among the four major men’s sports without a work stoppage. Since 1995, all the other leagues have had lockouts. Baseball hadn’t, until now.

The NHL has had two lockouts this century, one wiping out a season. The NBA and NFL have had one apiece. There are plenty of fights in the other leagues too, even absent a work stoppage.

Now, it’d be weird if there were never any acrimony. Management and labor groups are supposed to have sometimes disparate interests. But I think a few things are at play with the perception that MLB’s fighting is heavier. For one thing, if you’re of a certain age, baseball used to have work stoppages every other minute. I think it’s also safe to say that because the MLBPA has been the strongest sports union over time, it has been willing to fight in ways other sports unions would like to, but cannot do so as confidently.

And that starts to get to the core of why baseball stands out: The topics fought over in baseball are, indeed, sometimes different than those in other leagues. Baseball, remember, is the only sport that doesn’t have a salary cap, and doesn’t have the accompanying direct split of revenues between players and owners. That distinction is one of the MLBPA’s signature accomplishments.

If you think back to 2020 — and I imagine you might be doing so — there was a loud fight over how much baseball players would be paid in a pandemic-shortened season. Baseball players had a leg to stand on that players in the other leagues didn’t, because baseball player pay isn’t directly tied to revenues as it is in the NBA, NFL and NHL. Baseball players, not coincidentally, came out a lot better than players in other leagues. And it’s not like everything was hunky-dory in the other leagues.

What are the chances they just extend the current CBA and negotiate during the season? Another work stoppage will really damage the sport. — Kevin C.

Very low. The players are unhappy with the status quo, so they would see an extension of the current CBA as a win for management. Something drastic would have to change in the union’s thinking for an extension to be possible.

Without an agreement, in what week of January or February will spring training require a delay? And what might a delayed spring training look like? (i.e. all games still played, just at a later date? Or will they try to shorten the season? Or door No. 3?). — Noog N.

You have to reverse engineer it and do a little guessing. In 2020, COVID-19 shut down regular spring training, and then the parties agreed to a shortened version, “summer camp,” that lasted about three weeks. It seems safe to assume that the players wouldn’t, two years later, allow for a spring training any shorter than three weeks. Now, whether they would even be comfortable doing just three weeks again isn’t known yet. But it’s safe to assume you can shorten spring training by some number of games and still be able to play the regular season on time. So be conservative and say that spring training 2022 would need to be, at minimum, four weeks long. Then your deadline is really about March 1, or the days leading up to it to allow for travel. Opening Day is scheduled for March 31, so if we’re in late February and a new deal hasn’t been agreed to, they’re on the brink of jeopardizing Opening Day. And if they can stomach a three-week camp again, then the deadline is about a week into March.

What percentage would you give the season starting on time at this point? I feel like there’s less than a 50 percent chance of it happening because neither side seems to care about making a deal any time soon. — Kyle B.

I’d say an 85 percent chance the season starts on time, but it’s really hard to gauge from where we sit today. The first pressure point is spring training, and the chance camps open on time is lower. How much lower? I was an English major, but put it this way: You shouldn’t be shocked if spring training is delayed.

The sides, right now, are clearly very far apart, and haven’t talked core economics in a month — but a lot can happen quickly. If you start to see spring training delayed, then the chances of the regular season starting on time will steadily drop.

As of now, though, it’s hard to see exactly how either party would sell a long work stoppage into the regular season. For one, there’s a massive amount of money on the line for both parties. It’s also not clear yet what issues either side will plant a flag on and declare, “this issue must be a certain way, or we will not play.” Time will tell, though.

We know the players want changes. Which become the final battlegrounds? Just as an example: The players, hypothetically, could say, “We won’t agree to a new deal unless all players can get to arbitration after two years of service time.” If owners decided that to be untenable — and Manfred has publicly suggested as much already — then sure, some regular-season games could be on the line.

So it’s really going to come down to the specific issues. If I had to guess, I’d bet the endgame includes something along the lines of that hypothetical — arbitration eligibility and the effort to get younger players paid more.

Which players can sign minor-league deals? The Reds signed Jake Bauers to a minor-league deal last week. Why can Bauers, who played in 111 big-league games in 2021, sign a minor-league deal while Carlos Correa can’t sign a minor-league deal with a $300 million guarantee if he makes the big-league roster? — C. Trent Rosecrans

Minor league deals are permitted during the lockout, but only for minor league free agents. If a player became a free agent as a major league player — like Carlos Correa — he can’t sign any contract (major or minor) with a club. Bauers was a minor league free agent.

Can minor-league camp start on time? — C. Trent Rosecrans

Yes, even if major-league spring training is delayed, minor league spring training can still get underway on time. The major-league teams control the timing of minor-league spring training, so it would be up to them, and there’s no obvious reason they would delay minor-league camp. Most minor-league players are not members of the MLBPA, and minor-league players don’t have a separate union of their own (but there’s a growing effort to change that).

What are teams allowed to do in terms of player development and talking to minor leaguers and how uniform is that policy league-wide? — Fabian Ardaya

Indeed, most minor-league players are not in the union, but some are — think top prospects or some Triple-A types. The technical distinction is whether a player is on a 40-man roster. If you’re on the 40-man, you’re a member of the union.

In-season, you can think of it as three groups of players:

1. 40-man, major leaguer. Everyone you see on a nightly basis at a major-league stadium.

2. 40-man, minor leaguer. Think the reliever who got demoted to Triple-A for no other reason than he just threw too many pitches, and will likely be called up again in two weeks.

3. Off 40-man, minor leaguer. The vast majority of minor leaguers.

For lockout purposes, the third group is what we mean by “minor leaguer.” Those players are not directly restricted by a lockout, because they’re not part of the union. Their teams and staffs can communicate and interact with them as they would normally. And if the lockout were to drag on and the regular season were to be delayed, “strikes or lockouts cover all players on a Club’s 40-man roster, but 40-man roster players assigned to the minors prior to a strike or a lockout are free to continue to play in the minor leagues,” per the MLBPA’s agent guide.

But what does that actually mean? Not much, because 40-man players at this point in the calendar aren’t actually assigned to minor league rosters, and can’t be put on one before spring training. So the end result is this:

If a player is currently on a 40-man roster, he will not be eligible to play in minor-league games — regardless of what level he played at in 2021.

If a player is entirely off a 40-man roster and signs a purely minor-league contract — which has happened for some players during the lockout — that player will be able to play in minor league games.

Editor’s note: This story has been updated to correct information about whether, hypothetically, Carlos Correa could sign as a minor league free agent if he wanted to.

All stuff fans don't care about.

Perhaps this is the best takeaway: I’d say an 85 percent chance the season starts on time, but it’s really hard to gauge

This from a Twins site:

Uh-Oh! What if the Cleveland Guardians Get Competent Ownership?
Sherry Cerny

News broke last month that the Cleveland Guardians are close to selling 35% of their ownership to David Blitzer.The potential for a corporate investor could shake things up, making the newly-minted Guardians a force to be reckoned with in the near future.

A LOOK BACK AT THE CLEVELAND OWNERSHIP
Cleveland had a dynamic decade. Playing them was always a daunting task. They have been blessed with outstanding pitchers such as Shane Bieber, Corey Kluber, Trevor Bauer, and Mike Clevinger. The hitting and defense of players like Francisco Lindor, Jose Ramirez, and Carlos Santana moved them swiftly through the playoffs before losing the 2016 World Series to the Cubs.

Terry Francona is still at the helm, and there is still solid pitching and Jose Ramirez, but their payroll has been reduced significantly due to several big trades. The Cleveland ball club has not had payrolls this low for over a decade. Their payroll in 2018 was $134 million, per Cot’s. . A year ago, it was just $49 million.

Whether those cuts in payroll are because the Dolan family is tired of investing money, or whether they are trying to make the organization more attractive to investors. It might not matter. Either way, a new investment in the franchise could benefit the fans.

And the fans could use a break. One of the biggest examples of payroll cutting was the trade of fan-favorite, Francisco Lindor, to the Mets before the 2021 season. While fans in Cleveland were not surprised, it knocked the wind out of the community.

USHERING IN A NEW ERA
With all the decisions the Dolan family has made, this deal with David Blitzer to become a minority owner seems to be a good one for the Cleveland fans. While he has not invested in baseball yet, there was a whisper of interest regarding buying the Mets before Steve Cohen purchased them.

David Blitzer of HBSE is rumored to have acquired a significant stake in the Guardians; some estimate 35%. It was known that co-owner John Sherman needed to sell his 20% because he took partial ownership of another team, the Kansas City Royals, in 2019. But Sportico is reporting that the deal includes another 15%, and includes a path to majority ownership.

HBSE is not new to investing in professional teams. David Blitzer seems to have made it his life's work to take over teams that seem to be falling apart or fading quickly. In fact, he took hold of the 76er's (2011) and the New Jersey Devils (2013), breathing new life into their franchises.

Neither team has won a title since their acquisition. Still, both teams have remained intensely competitive because Blitzer realizes the value of good players and does not have any issues paying for them. When HBSE took over, the 76ers were in a meager state. During Sam Hinkie's three seasons as General Manager of the 76ers, he was able to acquire strong players, Joel Embiid, Ben Simmons, and Dario Saric, that led them to their first playoff run since Blitzer took over.

Blitzer's willingness to sink cash into big names (and more importantly, big talent) creates fan bases that have just as much excitement about their teams as the players. The 76ers are relevant again, and players want to play there because they know they will get paid and play to win.

BRING BACK THE COMPETITIVE EDGE
Let's admit it. Watching the White-Sox win, the division in 2021 told us a lot about the teams in the Central Division. Cleveland's competitiveness has disappeared along with their roster. But Cleveland has a number of hidden strengths.

The Guardians are still a competitive team. In 2021, the Guardians won 80 games last year, despite the fact that most of the veterans had either been traded or spent time on the Injured List. If Blitzer has a say in player acquisition and retention, he could create a dangerous lineup, comparable to what he did with the 76ers and the Devils. A good veteran core, along with the Guardians' coaching staff, could make a team that could stay strong for years.

Cleveland has a solid farm system. MLB.com ranked Cleveland as the #13 farm system in MLB this last August, specifically calling out the amount of talent they have age 21 years old and younger. That is rare for an organization nearing the end of their competitive window. It either gives them a head start if they decide to do a full rebuild, or trade assets if they decide to reload.

Cleveland could use a culture change. New ownership for the Guardians could bring about a huge culture change. Blitzer's staff is known for shaking things up from coaching to players. The teams Blitzer has invested in ended up producing large fan bases, strong player core, and culture for corporate ownership. The fan base has slowly dwindled over the years as fans lost faith in the front office and, subsequently, the team.

If there is one thing about the Ohio fan base, they are loyal, and what teams put into them, they give back ten-fold. The Guardians just got a new name and are proposing a $435 million stadium renovation that would include a new lease for fifteen years. With a complete stadium renovation and re-branding, this is a huge opportunity to get fans back in the seats at Progressive Field. Some empty seats were due to the pandemic, the team ranked 21st this past season in attendance.

Corporate ownership, or investment, can have its perks when it comes to ownership: more money, more growth opportunities, and an overall better atmosphere. Given their struggles with payroll, and several other hidden advantages that the Guardians have, bringing Blitzer and his investment team into Cleveland’s ownership group could bring resources and stability the franchise and their fan base has craved. It could be very good news for the Guardians. And bad news for the Twins.

David Blitzer of HBSE is rumored to have acquired a significant stake in the Guardians; some estimate 35%. It was known that co-owner John Sherman needed to sell his 20% because he took partial ownership of another team, the Kansas City Royals, in 2019. But Sportico is reporting that the deal includes another 15%, and includes a path to majority ownership.

I didn't know it has happened.

Thought they were still talking.

"is rumored to have acquired "

by whom is the rumor being spread?

not on the Plain Dealer website; not on espn website; I found a link in some newish story to the "rumor that he has acquiired" which simply takes you back to the Dec 21 story that he's negotiating

So the answer is: No news is no news. Perhaps someday it will be news.

Ten predictions for the Cleveland Guardians in 2022: Trades, rising prospects, postseason hopes and more



CLEVELAND, OH - AUGUST 26: Cleveland Indians third baseman Jose Ramirez (11) asks for time out after stealing second base during the fourth inning of the Major League Baseball game between the Texas Rangers and Cleveland Indians on August 26, 2021, at Progressive Field in Cleveland, OH. (Photo by Frank Jansky/Icon Sportswire via Getty Images)
By Zack Meisel Jan 10, 2022 45
CLEVELAND — Has Major League Baseball ever felt more irrelevant? Instead of hot stove activity, a robust rumor mill, fan fests and spring training preparations, we have … silence.

It’s sad, really. It’s certainly not healthy for the sport. And it’s disappointing that a column like this must come with the disclaimer, “Here’s hoping we get a full, 162-game slate. Otherwise, some of these predictions might not be possible.”

With that said, let’s complete some guesswork about how the Guardians’ 2022 season might unfold.

1. The Guardians will trade for an established corner outfielder.
The wheel spins …

A dart is tossed …

… and, hey, it landed on Austin Meadows!

Bryan Reynolds, Cedric Mullins and Ketel Marte have all likely slipped into Chris Antonetti’s nighttime subconscious, but good luck trying to strong-arm their rebuilding clubs during the post-lockout period of chaos. The Rays, meanwhile, are always up for a trade, especially of an arbitration-eligible player in a crowded outfield.

The Guardians’ 40-man roster is stocked with prospects, so a trade is pretty much required at some point this winter to balance the roster and equip the club with more major-league depth. Perhaps they’ll get involved in the first-base trade market as well, since there are a handful of enticing (and not bank account-breaking) outfield alternatives available via free agency. Signing an outfielder and trading for Luke Voit, for instance, could be a sensible route.

The main point is they’ll do something worthwhile to shore up a corner outfield spot, and their 40-man maneuvering before the lockout — they currently boast 14 infielders, more starting pitchers than relievers and 14 players who have never appeared in a big-league game — conveyed that the front office realizes this roster is not a finished product. They’ll need plans and contingency plans and contingency plans for those contingency plans because whenever the lockout ceases, there figures to be a few weeks of hot stove madness.

2. Franmil Reyes will hit at least 40 home runs.
Ah, an annual tradition unlike any other. No Cleveland player has reached the 40-homer mark since Travis Hafner in 2006, and no fearless forecaster has imprudently pegged Reyes as the next to do so more often than I have. But here we are, another predictions column and another prognostication devoted to Reyes’ power.

This time, he agrees there’s greater potential in his Terminal Tower-sized frame.

“The years I’ve been having,” Reyes said during the final series of last season in Texas, “37 homers (in 2019), the 30 homers this season, I don’t think it’s enough. In my heart, it’s not enough. I don’t know. Maybe I can (have) a 45 to 50 home run season with 120 RBIs. Cleveland hasn’t seen it all. I haven’t seen it all. I don’t know what the limit is. I don’t have a limit.”

3. The middle-infield puzzle will remain a confounding logjam.
There’s little doubt that some combination of Amed Rosario, Andrés Giménez, Gabriel Arias, Brayan Rocchio, Tyler Freeman, Owen Miller, Yu Chang and Jose Tena can eventually produce a formidable middle-infield duo in Cleveland. Just how the front office and coaching staff are going to determine which pairing works best remains to be seen. A trade involving one or two of those players seems inevitable. The Guardians will have to figure out the proper position for Rosario and afford the proper amount of playing time to the younger options to learn who belongs in the big leagues. That might be easier said than done. After all, we didn’t learn much in 2021.

Rosario, Giménez and Arias will be the early front-runners for regular playing time this season, with Miller and Chang vying for opportunities as well. Ernie Clement could factor into the utility infielder equation, too. Here’s guessing Giménez takes a significant step forward in 2022. FanGraphs’ ZiPS projection system believes he’ll be the club’s second most valuable position player, behind only José Ramírez. That’s a good sign for Giménez, and a not-so-good sign for this offense.

4. Logan Allen — no, the other one — and Cody Morris will be two names you can’t stop discussing this summer.
I wouldn’t be shocked if Morris forced his way into consideration for an Opening Day bullpen spot. The Guardians have enough depth in the upper level of the minors to shift him into that role and, barring a trade, the major-league rotation is already set. Either way, Morris should receive plenty of opportunities to stick in the majors in some capacity.

Allen made his professional debut last year, and it couldn’t have gone better: 9-0, 2.26 ERA, 143 strikeouts in 111 innings, .193/.251/.328 opponent slash line. The 23-year-old southpaw will start this season at Double-A Akron or Triple-A Columbus and could be knocking on the big-league door by the summer months.

5. You or someone you know will be clamoring for George Valera to be promoted to the majors by July.
His bat, his patience and, most of all, his bat flips seem major league-ready, or close to it. As a 20-year-old, Valera posted a .260/.405/.505 slash line with 11 stolen bases in 86 games between High A and Double A in 2021. He’ll probably start the season at Akron and progress to Columbus at some point. A year from now, he’ll be widely considered the team’s top prospect.

6. Shane Bieber will piece together an ace-worthy season.
A bolder prediction would include which rotation member will emerge as his sidekick, the team’s No. 2 starter. Really, though, that could be any of the four options. Cal Quantrill played the part after the All-Star break last season. Zach Plesac flashed that sort of potential in 2020. Aaron Civale and Triston McKenzie have had their moments, too.

Bieber returned from a 15-week hiatus in late September and promptly retired all nine White Sox batters he encountered. It looked effortless, the antithesis of how he labored through some starts before being shelved with a shoulder injury. Bieber logged a 3.17 ERA (3.03 FIP) in 96 2/3 innings last season, which seemed pedestrian by his standards. His name will surface on some Cy Young Award ballots after the 2022 campaign.

7. The bullpen will be a team strength.
Even if the league “figures out” Emmanuel Clase in his second full season, what can a hitter actually accomplish when attempting to conquer a 101 mph cutter and a 94 mph slider? The best-case scenario for any sucker standing in the batter’s box in the ninth inning is usually an infield single. It’ll be worth monitoring Nick Sandlin and Anthony Gose after they gained experience last season. Perhaps Sam Hentges will prosper in a relief role. Maybe Nick Mikolajchak emerges, or Morris or another starter winds up contributing out of the bullpen. There’s always the threat of an unheralded veteran pickup paying dividends.

The key, though, is James Karinchak. If he can unearth a stickyless way to be effective, this bullpen could make life miserable for opponents with an array of varied approaches.

8. José Ramírez will not be traded.
Look, I don’t know if a contract extension will materialize. There are significant hurdles in the way, though I do believe it’s far more feasible than a Francisco Lindor extension ever was.

That said, it’s difficult to envision a Ramírez trade in 2022. The circumstances are quite different than they were with previous Cleveland stars who were sent packing before they reached free agency. There’s a rebrand at hand, a payroll that’s already been stripped to the studs and a perennial MVP candidate (who’s willing to remain in town, by the way) bound to a bargain-basement contract for another two years.

And then there’s the ownership situation. I wonder how much an eventual agreement on a new structure at the top might change the conversation.

If Paul Dolan knows he’s handing the reins to David Blitzer in five years, shouldn’t he be willing to act a bit more aggressively in an attempt to cap his family’s ownership tenure with a title to end the league’s longest World Series drought? (Yes, though there’s limited evidence of Dolan approving opportunistic, albeit slightly uncomfortable, decisions.)

And isn’t that task exponentially more attainable with Ramírez in the fold? (Yes, though it doesn’t fix the outfield nor solve other roster deficiencies.)

And if Ramírez ultimately flops once he reaches his mid-30s, wouldn’t that be Blitzer’s problem? (Yes, though he might assess risk in a different manner.)

Not to mention, if the organization wants people donning Guardians gear in the stands, it might behoove it to ensure the fans that the team’s heart and soul will be here beyond 2022.

9. Many will forget the rebrand even happened.
They announced the new name in July, out of concern it would leak before they were ready to reveal it. They started to sell the new gear in late November, only after they paid the local roller derby team to take a hike. Because of that dispute, there was limited promotion and minimal buzz ahead of the big day. There was no roster move or contract extension to coincide with the rebrand in an effort to capitalize on the potential to move a lot of merchandise. There were no players present at the team shop to attract customers. Then the team shop sign plummeted to the sidewalk. And the new Guardians sign on the ballpark marquee was positioned off-center for a few weeks.

It’s been a messy start to the Guardians era, and the lockout hasn’t helped. The rebrand just sort of … exists. The uniforms will look similar to the old ones. There will still be a massive team name perched atop the scoreboard. Certainly, some fans will continue to seethe about the name change. (Bonus prediction: A reader will simply leave the word “Indians” in the comments section.) But this entire process was carried out in such a strangely subtle, underwhelming manner that, to some, it’ll feel like it never even happened.

10. An expanded postseason setup will help Cleveland’s cause.
It’s difficult to forecast how formidable of a team Terry Francona and company will field in 2022, given the makeup of the unbalanced, question mark-loaded roster. An abundance of young players can lead to a wide variety of potential outcomes, and with all of the Guardians’ offseason work still ahead of them — I’d be floored if they entered the season with Steven Kwan and Josh Naylor as their starting corner outfielders — it’s tough to pinpoint where they might wind up in the AL Central.

It feels unavoidable that the new collective bargaining agreement will mandate additional playoff teams in each league. That should help Cleveland, as the White Sox will be heavy favorites to repeat as division champion. The other four teams in the Central all seem to think they can contend in some capacity. For the Guardians, it might take time to determine who belongs in the middle infield, the corner outfield and the bullpen before they hit their stride.

By Zack Meisel Jan 10, 2022 45
CLEVELAND — Has Major League Baseball ever felt more irrelevant? Instead of hot stove activity, a robust rumor mill, fan fests and spring training preparations, we have … silence.

It’s sad, really. It’s certainly not healthy for the sport.

Skimmed the rest of this article without much interest after reading this opening line.

Bummer.

I happened to have a chance to talk with a mid-level official of a major league team a couple days ago.
He noted that the owners start losing money when spring training games are canceled. Players don't lose until the season starts and their paychecks will stop.
He has no insight on the [non-]negotiations but seems to think that a deal will be reached when parties have something to lose and that the season should proceed at least relatively as normal.


But MLB's ability to spread disinterest among marginal fans is unrivaled in pro and college sports.

https://www.cleveland.com/guardians/202 ... staff.html

Lots of promotions and pats on the back for a club that underachieved.

MLB’s first proposal after locking out players creates little progress as spring training looms


By Evan Drellich Jan 13, 2022 248
At this point, the issue isn’t so much whether spring training will be delayed. The better question is, why should one believe it will start on time?

The good news Thursday afternoon was that Major League Baseball and the Players Association talked core economics for the first time in 43 days, and the first time since owners locked out the players on Dec. 2. The bad news was that the players were discouraged by the proposal MLB made, a proposal that avoided some core subjects where the players are hoping to make gains, and in other areas included changes the players felt were insignificant.

No follow-up bargaining session was immediately scheduled as of Thursday afternoon, people with knowledge of the talks said. The union will hold internal discussions on how to respond.

Pitchers and catchers would typically be required to report to spring training about a month from now, but the gap between the sides remains large. Movement in labor disputes often waits until the proverbial last minute, making Thursday’s proceedings, in a way, expected.

Perhaps the most notable change that MLB offered to the players was the elimination of the salary arbitration process for Super Two players — the small group of players who become eligible for arbitration with two-plus years of service time. MLB offered to pay those players instead based on a formula, while maintaining the current arbitration process for players with three to five years of service time.

MLB believes that the formula would pay Super Two players more, but the union and agents do not want to move away from a setup where players have the right to advocate for a higher salary, as they do in the current system. Previously, MLB had proposed to eliminate the arbitration process altogether, which wasn’t received well by players. Introducing the concept on a smaller scale — one that, if accepted, MLB could try to expand in future CBAs — remains unappealing for players. The MLBPA instead wants to increase the number of players eligible for arbitration.

MLB also proposed a tweak to its amateur draft vision, where both sides have made proposals around a lottery. MLB’s proposal on Thursday again included a lottery for the top three picks, which the union previously felt was too few. The players had proposed a lottery for the top eight picks.

As a mechanism for fighting service-time manipulation, MLB proposed rewarding teams with an amateur or international draft pick if players who were on their top-100 prospect lists qualified for certain major-league awards, such as Rookie of the Year. Notably, the MLBPA hasn’t agreed to an international draft, which MLB has proposed.

MLB is still proposing a 14-team expanded playoffs and the universal DH.

MLB didn’t newly adjust its proposal for league minimum salaries, which would introduce a tiered system based on service time, paying players $600,000 to $700,000. (There is no tiering presently.) The players in the past have proposed a league minimum of $775,000, escalating to $875,000 during the course of the deal.

MLB did not propose anything new on the competitive balance tax, a crucial issue to players. MLB previously offered to raise the threshold to $214 million and $220 million, a modest increase from the current $210 million figure. In conjunction, the league also wants to increase the penalty for surpassing that first threshold, proposing a 50 percent tax and the surrender of a third-round draft pick, with penalties escalating from there. Those are stronger penalties than are in place now. (MLB in this system would be eliminating the changes in penalties based on how many consecutive years a team finished above the first tier.) Meanwhile, the MLBPA’s most recent proposal included a first tier of $245 million.

Unsurprisingly, MLB did not make a proposal to adjust the time it takes players to reach free agency, or on revenue sharing. Commissioner Rob Manfred has spoken out against changes on those fronts, and MLBPA lead negotiator Bruce Meyer has said that MLB has said at the table that it will not make any changes in those areas. The players, however, haven’t shown a willingness to drop those requests at this point.

— The Athletic’s Ken Rosenthal contributed to this report.