Makes a lot of sense. Those guys work for years and make very little with teams historically treating the players like disposable wipes - use them until they are useless and then toss them in the trash. No pension, minimal pay/benefits, expected to do promotion for the teams with no payback beyond 'you still have a job, be thankful'. Pay increases have been slow and still are well below poverty levels unless you got a big bonus to sign or are on the cusp of the majors.

Better late than never.

This is the sort of thread that makes some of us miss reading and listening to the thoughts of Bob Tufts even more than we normally do.

Maybe we should try to get Doug Glanville to weigh in.

"well below poverty levels unless you got a big bonus. . ."

So all of them then.

Any chance they'll get the Triple A teams to have a couple players they actually sign and own, as a baby step toward independence?

Do teams ever still put a veteran pitcher and hitter at Triple A, with the understanding there's almost no way they'll get promoted? I guess Razor Shines at Indy was the longest-running example of that.

I assume this leads inevitably to less minor league teams (maybe 4 to 3 teams). I'd also guess this puts pressure on MLB payroll.

Be interesting to see how it all plays out but it's bad for owners which is why they haven't said much yet.

Do teams ever still put a veteran pitcher and hitter at Triple A

Sure, all the time. "Almost no way they'll get promoted" is out the door for pitchers given the AAA shuttle and that nearly everybody will go through at least 8 different starters -- the median # of pitchers used already is around 30, there's a lot of movement on/off the 40-man. It's something the opposite for position players with no more 40-man rosters in Sept so the organizational soldiers won't get the courtesy ML time. But just a quick check of the White Sox show a 30-yo Mark Payton having a nice season (he'd have been a Sept callup in the old days), Dwight Smith Jr (still just 29) making a brief stop and 34-yo Rafael Dolis eating up some minor-league relief innings. (Strange career, pitched in the majors during 2011-13 then not again until 2020.) The Iowa Cubs carreid 30-yo Dixon Machado for most of the year until the Giants needed a SS for a week to cover for their injured backup SS with Brandon Crawford coming off the IL at the end of the week. He's back in AAA now.

The Iowa Cubs have used 49 different pitchers this year. Lots of MLers on rehab assignements, probably a few position players but that's a lot of pitchers.

Ernie Young is who I think of as the prototype here. He became a AAA stalwart at 29, played through 37 with just 35 MLB PAs in that time, one brief stop in Japan. A career AAA line of 282/371/502 with 245 HRs and, as I recall, reasonable CF defense. He probably deserved more chances than he got. And while Brett Tomko is a ML success not a AAA lifer, he still pitched until he was 41, the last 5 years in the minors with just 18 ML innings at 38.

With unionization, the minor-league career might become more viable. It's still gonna be a tough road with long-term security only for those who can catch on as a coach or front office guy somewhere.

I assume this leads inevitably to less minor league teams (maybe 4 to 3 teams). I'd also guess this puts pressure on MLB payroll.

I assume MLB saw this coming which is why they dropped a large number of teams. It would look bad if they waited until after the minors unionized.

As a fan of MiLB, I fear that this will just lead to a dramatic reduction in the future of the Minors. The overwhelming majority of these players are just there so the prospects will have full teams to play with and against.

It's too bad that big league clubs (couldn't/refused to) put more effort into promoting the Minors to make it more appealing and thereby generate enough revenue to pay these guys decent wages.

The question becomes how to set up the minors so MLB can maximize benefits while minimizing costs? I wouldn't be shocked to see them set up more like the Dominican Summer League where it is outside of the US/Canada thus not subject to the same labor laws. You could do that with A ball and lower easily, not so much with AA/AAA due to needing to call guys up/send down regularly.

If they get rid of more leagues then I suspect we'll see more indy leagues show up with even worse conditions for players. The problem is there are so many more entertainment options now than 20-50-80 years ago that it is harder to get a local team working outside of the majors. Scary that 20 years ago you had internet, but not streaming yet (dial up...oh geez the memories of waiting all night for something to download - YouTube started in 2005 17 years ago...wow, longer than I thought).

Now, to develop players I expect to see MLB set up more non-NA leagues so IFA's can build up to AA level then get a brief taste here in AA/AAA then majors. Change the draft to be more like the NBA/NFL where you let colleges train the kids instead, then sign them ready for AA. Far cheaper, reduces risk, and cuts the number of no hope kids on teams. Plus drafting at 22-24 means no free agency until 28-30+ even for the very best of the best.

The teams could shrink by 1/3 to 1/2 if they agree to share teams. 75% of the players are non-prospects so you ought to easily be able to shrink teams by half if they play together. Less coaches, less hotels, less payroll, less of everything. And all the teams would be packed with prospects.

Teams That think they have some secret sauce on development might balk but over time I think this is where it will go. And that means if they are forced to pay much more at least they are paying it to genuine prospects.

I noted this in the last thread but I expect MLB to shut down the minors and ship everyone off to the Dominican Summer League. Basically they’d be following the same playbook that many manufactures have done for decades (ie outsource to overseas). The fact that MILB is now under MLB only makes doing this easier.

I don't see any more shrinking happening soon, and sharing is a non-starter, you can't control how the manager uses the pitchers in the way you want etc. Honestly I really do think that the reason they already shrunk the minor leagues is that they saw this coming and figured out the math on what they needed to continue control of their organizations.

Any radical changes to the minors now, will cause a public backlash, and potentially threaten their already shaky ground on monopoly exemption. Major league teams have roughly 150 players in the minors, there really is no reason to reduce that number. That is a manageable number and salary wise, even with unionization, we are talking less than 5mil per year to cover them all.

So using the 150 as a benchmark, I'm guessing 15 of those are bonafide MLB talent in a given year. Let's say 20 to be generous. So 130 people to play catch for the 20 guys who have a shot.

I don't know what the all-in cost is for keeping 4 teams in play. Maybe 50k per head which's is $7.5 million a year. Does that sound about right? If pay and benefits quadruples (it's not much today), that 7.5 may go up to 10-20 million or more

That's a big number relative to a MLB payroll. I'd think that would warrant more cost cutting.

The revenue side doesn't change so this is 100% added costs

The overwhelming majority of these [strikethrough]players[/strikethrough] teams are just there so the [strikethrough]prospects[/strikethrough] Yankees, Red Sox and Dodgers will have full teams to play with and against.

boop

It would look bad if they waited until after the minors unionized.

When has "it would look bad" ever stopped the owners before?

JeffPassan
The Major League Baseball Players Association has joined the AFL-CIO, executive director Tony Clark said.

AFL-CIO president Liz Shuler said the MLBPA is the 58th union to join the group.

75% of the players are non-prospects

The problem is you don't know which ones are the non-prospects with 100% certainty, especially with relief pitchers. Almost every 20 year old who throws 92 MPH with a decent slider could be a big league reliever some day and 1/3 of the top pitching prospects are going to wash out due to injury.

The MLBPA would be stupid if they negotiated wages high enough that it made sense to cut teams. They're going to ask for 20% raises (to make sure MILB pay can cover the union dues) and pay during spring training and fall instructionals.

Out of the 150 players 20 of them are AAA roster-filler waiting for a big leaguer to get injured, 40 of them are legitimate prospects and 30 more have a shot if they stay healthy and improve. That leaves 50-60 players who are there to fill out the rosters. Some of those extra guys become big league managers.

So using the 150 as a benchmark, I'm guessing 15 of those are bonafide MLB talent in a given year. Let's say 20 to be generous. So 130 people to play catch for the 20 guys who have a shot.

I don't know what the all-in cost is for keeping 4 teams in play. Maybe 50k per head which's is $7.5 million a year. Does that sound about right? If pay and benefits quadruples (it's not much today), that 7.5 may go up to 10-20 million or more

That's a big number relative to a MLB payroll. I'd think that would warrant more cost cutting.

The revenue side doesn't change so this is 100% added costs

Hmmm, what about the sort of free money that gets dumped into MLB's lap every year?

MLB Teams Will Receive At Least $100 Million Annually From TV Rights Contracts

21. Teams don't spend 1 minute making that connection. Revenue streams goose valuation but annual operating costs suck profits out near term and reduce dividend streams to ownership groups. They want both things: healthy year to year cash flows / dividends and new rev streams to
Create valuation upside.

Out of the 150 players 20 of them are AAA roster-filler waiting for a big leaguer to get injured, 40 of them are legitimate prospects and 30 more have a shot if they stay healthy and improve. That leaves 50-60 players who are there to fill out the rosters. Some of those extra guys become big league managers.

Even those 50-60 are not just filling out rosters. They are being used to create appropriately leveled arenas for the true prospects and semi-prospects to improve their skills as they move up. Otherwise, you could just cut half the teams, let go of the roster filler, and only have two levels of full-season minors. But the quality gap between the two levels, and between the top level and the majors, would be too great for productive training.

Fangraphs has an excellent article today on likely next steps

MLB has voluntarily recognized the minor leaguers as part of the union.