DocBauer

I'm with Ash on this one. 3 shutouts with few hits involved screams the need for a difference maker. Sano could have been that guy.

I've stayed out of this conversation the last week or so for various reasons. The fact that an offer is actually being discussed and there is a real chance for baseball being played...though I haven't found exact details...lead me to catch up on this thread and comment. Again, I take no sides here. I have offered, and will offer, comment and opinion that could lead someone to believe that I indeed am on either side of the aisle. That is not the case. I simply try to look at the work, this situation, as logically as I can. First, while a few players have made some comments that I can only describe as outrageous considering society and the world as a whole right now, attempting to attribute those comments and opinions to all players is also very wrong and outrageous. Second, while the players will not make as much $ with baseball in 2020, they will not lose money. Unless they are mortgaged to the hip, in which case something is better than nothing. I have also objected to the arguement that they have to earn ever dollar they can as their career is so short. Every player has the ability to invest, seek out expert advice, and then find something else to do with their life after they are done playing, even if it doesn't involve earning hundreds of thousands or millions of $. Thirdly, unlike the very old days of MLB, owners don't make a living/income from MLB. Until or unless they sell a franchise years down the road,the vast majority of owners may make money, but it is their other businesses that support their life and their families, albeit in a way none of us can understand or comprehend. So no-one should feel sorry for owners losing money in 2020 or suddenly hitting the skids. But at the same time, said owners are probably losing money in their other investments, and that's a very real thing in our society/world. Why should we care? Maybe we shouldn't. Maybe it's not important. But we as fans, and the players who are paid by the owners, and the milb players, and the hot dog and beer guy who is hoping baseball comes back AT LEAST in 2021 to some sense of normalcy, we might care about the future of the game beyond 2020 and how stable it is. Fourth, and part of point 3 as well as point 2, simple logic and intelligence should make it clear the owners ARE going to lose $ in 2020 regardless. Now, even without fans, there are some teams like N.Y. or L.A., etc, that might not due to media deals, merchandising and pure nation wide support. And maybe this profit sharing idea helps mitigate the losses of Minnesota, K.C. And others. I don't know the details. And while the financial numbers posted here by others in very intelligent arguments may not be 100% spot on, there seems to be a general truth to what is presented. But is it so far fetched to believe the owners are willing to take a loss on their MLB franchises, mitigated by a new agreement, for the health of their sport for 2021 and beyond? Again, ego and fun is the reason these billionaires own these franchises. They spend massive amounts of $ to purchase these franchises and see profit from them, absolutely, but don't enjoy any huge payday until years later if and when they sell said franchise. The context is absurdly different, but still similar to any of us making an investment over time and cashing in years down the road. In conclusion, it is up to both sides to find a solution that works for 2020, not just financially but logistically. If anyone wants to sit out and not play due to health concerns, I believe they have that right to do so. They forfeit their salary, but they should not be chastised or blackmailed from playing again. That crosses a line, financially, morally and legally I don't think anyone is really prepared to deal with. Salary cap with a floor...something other sports have...be damned. BOTH SIDES have a lot to lose and so much to gain! And I'm not just talking about making $ or losing less. I'm talking about the health of the sport in 2021 and beyond, especially with another labor deal pending. It's easy to be flippant and say blow it all up, but that is just not practical for anyone involved. Now, to me, the onus is on management at this juncture. And I don't just mean for 2020. Just be smart and act in good faith. There is greed and want from both sides. But maybe this is the perfect time for 20 owners, approximately, to show some backbone and step up to the plate...yes, an obvious pun...and challenge the other 10 owners, with or without Manfred, and look at the good of the future of the game. Cap, no cap, if you're willing to share more equitably for 2020 between yourselves, and the players, then why can't you do so going forward? If the basic financial floor of MLB going forward was more balanced, the game grows as more teams can compete year to year. You're telling me that doesn't pique the interest of fans and TV watchers everywhere and gate receipts? Remember, there are watchers, listeners, beer and dog consumers, and jersey/hat purchasing fans across this country besides L.A. and N.Y. and Boston and Chicago. I'm talking about long term investment in the sport itself. You're telling me there is no market for "game of the week" between the Dodgers and the Padres if both teams are competitive? ALL the various networks thrive on viewership. Point is, growing the sport. Perfect time for the owners to step forward for the good of the league and make it stronger. The players could only benefit with further growth as well.

A bit crazy and frustrating to look back at this season. How many years did the Twins have the offense but no or not enough pitching? And then they had plenty in 2005 but so little offense for various reasons. I lament but never really dwell on letting Ortiz go. Mistakes happen and the Twins have benefited from other team's mistakes. And it happened so long ago that to dwell seems counter productive. But I never understood the issues with Lohse. He did not have a great career, but he had a solid one with a few really nice seasons here and there. Something just never seemed to "fit" between he and the Twins.

2020......so far

The LHP Shuster sounds like the perfect selection if he's still around for our second selection. A little under the radar and projectable.

In regard to the original 10: 1] Garver: HR% numbers could drop league wide depending on the ball. But the HR and launch angle trend in MLB is real. So is Garver's power, approach and swing. Can we even really call last year a true "breakout" season when it was really his first year as the "primary" receiver and only 2nd season overall? I think he's for real. 2] Garver games caught: Ugh, math. Still a good platoon partner. But a short season. 50 games, which is 60%. 3] Sano at 1B: He's going to miss a few balls and botch a few plays. He's played there before but is learning the nuances. He won't be great right away, but he will be solid. He will also use his natural athleticism to make a few plays that will make you say; "Whoa! If he could just do that more consistently...." 4] Arraez: You won't see such a natural hitter slump even if he doesn't hit .330 in his second season. Even a dip to .310-.315 with a .390ish OB is excellent. He'll improve defensively and might even muscle up on the XB production. 5] Polanco: No, probably, because there won't be an All Star game. Not unless they want to have one after the season, similar to the NFL, which I doubt for various reasons. But he could make an All Star 1st-3rd team All Star post season selection team. 6] Rosario: He's been bothered the 2nd half of each of the last 2 seasons with different injuries. Healthy, smart enough talented enough, still young enough, healthy and just a small improvement in approach lifts an already good game to a more consistent level. And he will be back in 2021 Because he's good, still won't be overly expensive, and there are doubts anyone will be ready to replace him considering how weird this whole year is going to be. 7] Buxton: He will be dinged, like most players, and miss a few games. But not only should experience be teaching him how to save his body better, and it's a short season, but law of averages will come in to play here to balance some bad luck. 8] Kepler: Reference the law of averages again while factoring in youth, talent, approach, great swing and adjustments being made. At some point his ridiculous BABIP will adjust, even a little. We still haven't seen the best from Max. 9] Cruz: Father time will beat him. But it won't happen this year. Witness not only 2019 but the ST he was having before thjngs shut down. Now factor in a half season. He might not have another career season, even in an abbreviated one, but he will be fine. I would have said the same thing in regard to a full and complete 2020 season, with the idea Father Time would start to pull ahead in 2021. But in a Twins uniform or not for 2021, I'm thinking a short 2020 may put off the inevitable by another year. 10] Donlaldson: He won't be crushing on Twins pitching, but he has crushed about anyone, anywhere, in his career when healthy. I have no doubts he will continue to do so for the first 2-3yrs of his contract, as long as he remains healthy. Guy is a stud hitter. Like Cruz, the half season may actually work to an advantage. Yep, I'm an optimist, but I think all of this is logical and true.

First of all, if the Twins win the whole thing, you better believe I'm counting it!! Secondly, I don't buy all 30 teams involved. You still have a partial season for a buy in. Maybe 12-14 teams. The playoffs and WS are played at the neutral site of Hawaii. No weather issues, presumably. Then MLB and the owners have an NBA pingpong ball raffle for fans of each team's highest prolific website for a trip for 2, or a couple trips considering the length of the competition. The balls would be weighted for years of blogging, numbers of posts, and rewarded for less or zero numbers or warning points. We get our ultimate champion, MLB looks warm and fuzzy, and there are real fans in the stands!

Guess I'm going to end up echoing allot of things already pondered here. The Twins are absolutely in WIN NOW mode and they have to keep some AAA guys around who can "come up" from the taxi squad to fill in as needed, whether they are in Minnesota or Florida. And somehow,some way, those guys need to PLAY, scrimmages or whatnot. They can't just have bullpens and batting practice and stay sharp. I'm still hoping for some sort of limited or very limited type of milb season/set up where they can play other teams, even if it has a but of a pickup game feel to it. I would need to sit down with pen and paper to make a list as to who I might select for that taxi squad, but I think the original 30 man roster is easy to figure out. I don't think you necessarily need 3 reserve catchers, however, when you will already have 3 on the ML roster. Two probably works fine. But do you include Jeffers in that 2? And to me that begins the biggest issue. Can the Twins, or anyone, really afford to have members of their top 10-ish prospects that are a season or potentially half a season away just sit for a year? If there really and truly is no form of milb season, no MLB version of a "Cape Cod" league or modified EST, etc, then how does that affect 2021 and beyond for all teams when guys lose an entire season? It's debatable how much, if at all, Lewis, Kirilloff, Larnach, Jeffers, etc, would be needed or able to contribute this year if they are placed on the taxi squad. But if they are, they could still get valuable developmental time. But then again, does that screw up their service time? Not to mention 40 man implications for next offseason. What if you're a team like the Tigers...sorry to pick on your team Gardy...and you realistically have nothing to play for in 2020? You might as well load up your 50 man total roster with all the young talent you can to get them as much development and experience as you can to jump start 2021. Kind of an unfair advantage toward building your roster going forward. 40 man restrictions need to be thrown out the window with some sort of negated or prorated service time. Taxi squads need to play in some format. And the entire milb system needs to be addressed to SOME degree. Players need SOME sort of pay, losses be damned as they are part of each organization, and SOME sort of short season needs to be implemented later this summer or fall for ALL of milb just for development. Make some sort of Cactus/Grapefruit league work for a couple months at facilities even for a couple months. Considering the locations involved, you could even do so after the ML season. Call it an Americanized version of the winter leagues.

I like the principal here, especially early on, when an abbreviated ST part 2 May not have everyone fully ramped up anyway. And if the roster really is sitting at around 30 players, then this makes it a very practical idea, especially considering the depth the Twins have. The obvious caveat, of course being fewer days off of a series of double headers, could change plans for "secondary" starters to be made available to do just that, start games. Still a bit perplexed by the 80 games when a slightly extended season and some double headers could provide something closer to 90-92 games, but whatever. Just a personal comment, the 3rd one through a lineup situation can be made clear through numbers, like those posted here. But in a normal season, like 2019, those numbers presumably existed. And yet, pitchers like Odorizzi and Pineda ultimately prevailed with quality years and quality seasons. So it's not like we are talking about bailing out bums in the rotation.

NOT picking on sandbun, his post or feelings, in any way shape of form. But I find his comments/feelings about the Pohlad's to be interesting because there is such a far ranging opinion about Twins ownership. (I'm sure that's true of the majority of professional sports teams, to be honest). As fans, in general we get very upset at the players on our teams when they hold out, or make contract demands that could affect our favorite team. I don't think it's every personal, we just want our players to play and be part of the team. When financial situations disrupt that team, or lead to a loss of a favorite player, we lament the situation and sometimes forget it is still a business. When we feel ownership doesn't spend enough, or becomes "cheap" in any way, we become equally divisive about them. Again, forgetting sometimes it is still a business. On the one hand...and I'm NOT starting an old debate here, PLEASE...ownership has a reputation financially, right or wrong. And the entire potential contraction scenario brought about much fear angst and vitriol. Was possible contraction only a power play? Was it real? We may never truly have an answer, at least not one that everyone agrees to. If a power play, they certainly wouldn't be the first owners of ANY business to do so. But then again, not only was the Metrodome dieing a quick death, but we have seen the financial landscape change in all sports, not just baseball, over the last decade plus where you have to wonder where the Twins would even be today without Target Field. But on the other hand, current ownership basically saved Minnesota baseball when they bought the franchise. That should never be forgotten. They brought 2 WS titles and several winning seasons of quality baseball since said contraction speculation. No sides here, just...interesting how you want to look at things. 2000 and 2001 offered hope and promise again that 2002 began to fulfill. It's been a long while since the Twins have been to the WS, that much is true. But this was the start of a string of years of competitive ball that were fun and where we had a shot.

What I remember wasn't the final record, but a feeling akin to the early 80's teams when guys were coming up that the team was setting a foundation of hope.

The actual milb franchises exist, run and maintain from limited TV and radio deals, but count on gate receipts, concessions and the such much more as their lifeblood. But aren't player salaries paid for by the parent club? Someone please correct me here if I'm wrong. Even in this crazy, mixed up pandemic situation, don't the owners HAVE to find a way to have at least some sort of partial season or re-configured EST? Despite a small percentage of players who actually reach the ML and contribute, much less become regular performers, it is still the lifeblood of the MLB product. For the future of MLB, can they really expect some sort of expanded roster to work with only top prospects on some sort of reserve capacity to keep the integrity of the game intact? Need to find some way to pay the milb players, and engage their development for this season even on a limited basis. If not, then guys quitting, limited drafts, limited signings, MLB is going to end up with a potentially inferior product in the next couple of years with guys promoted before they are ready

One thing that concerns me here is teams with deeper pockets using the limited draft to their advantage. And I was reminded today listening to Gleeman and the Geek that the changes to the draft will probably extend to 2021 as well. HS players, with little exception, will be forced to go to college now. If you are a TOP HS prospect, you probably still sign even though you only get around $100K or so initially. But you get the rest of your bonus money over the next 2yrs. So you still probably sign. Over slot HS signings just probably don't sign and go to school. College players are just screwed. IF your school will allow you to come back, IF they will honor any scholarship money made available to you...big IF's at this point...you can try to go back for another season and see what happens with ANOTHER potentially limited draft in 2021. OR, you can sign with a ML team for $20K and peruse your dream for the bonus money that would be paid to a 14+ round draft selection and hope for a normal 2021 milb season. If that is your choice, and the Yankees or Dodgers, as an example, come calling, do you look at the Twins, or Royals, or Padres, etc. Some teams could use deep pocket reserves to offer a ton of $20k contracts others couldn't match. OR, would big market teams not interest you if you felt the road to the majors was a tougher road due to prospect depth and future FA acquisitions? OR, is there a loophole in the $20K bonus deep pocket teams see where they could offer incentives to make this an unfair free for all? Amongst the many things that have to be worked out for a ML season, including development of current milb systems and players, ownership needs to find a way to make any draft and potential signings fair and equitable across the board. If they don't, they end up further screwing up an already disjointed situation. And if they aren't smart about this, college pkayers will end up in the independent leagues for 2021 and a potentially unfair bidding war will take place then. It's not hard to imagine a collection of college players in independent leagues next season, 2021, developing/dominating/, and being offered contracts by big market teams who have greater financial flexibility coming off whatever 2020 ends up offering. There are ramifications that have to be considered beyond just "saving money" in regard to the 2020 and 2021 draft.

The actual milb franchises exist, run and maintain from limited TV and radio deals, but count on gate receipts, concessions and the such much more as their lifeblood. But aren't player salaries paid for by the parent club? Someone please correct me here if I'm wrong. Even in this crazy, mixed up pandemic situation, don't the owners HAVE to find a way to have at least some sort of partial season or re-configured EST? Despite a small percentage of players who actually reach the ML and contribute, much less become regular performers, it is still the lifeblood of the MLB product. For the future of MLB, can they really expect some sort of expanded roster to work with only top prospects on some sort of reserve capacity to keep the integrity of the game intact? Need to find some way to pay the milb players, and engage their development for this season even on a limited basis. If not, then guys quitting, limited drafts, limited signings, MLB is going to end up with a potentially inferior product in the next couple of years with guys promoted before they are ready.

Logic would dictate little action in a short season, especially since trading teams would be uncertain what they are getting back in terms of prospects with no milb season, as been projected. With expanded rosters...some sort of 40+ total roster for reserves, call ups, etc, working out and possibly scrimmaging, teams just won't know exactly what they are trading for. Agreed you need about 2/3 of the season to be played before you hit a deadline. Everyone needs to see what they have and where they are trending. September 1st could be a target date. Could a contending team, especially a team with deep pockets who figure they could over-sign next year, over pay to make a move to push them over the top? Would a team with injuries or covid cases also potentially over pay? Or would they fold up tents? Just so much we can only speculate at this point.

If Marwin has a good 2020, not so sure he doesn't re-sign with the Twins for another season or two but at less than he is currently earning due to age and the fact that I think FA is going to adjust downward for a number of players due to losses incurred in 2020. What Marwin has is a better bat than Hernandez. If Adrianza is brought back, you already have a Hernandez type on your roster who may be a better hitter. Not saying he would be a bad signing just the opposite, but he could be redundant with the guys already on the roster. Quintana would be very interesting. Honestly, I think I'd rather have Odorizzi back. And I'm expecting 3yrs in the $15-16M range, less than what he would have gotten had 2020 been a normal full year with no pandemic. But I think that's going to be true for a lot of guys. I'd almost wonder, with top prospects being delayed due to a missed season, FA $ dropping, Hill and a couple other guys potentially coming off the books, could the Twins afford to keep Odorizzi AND sign Quintana? Hill is going to be prorated like everyone, but he had the potential to earn up to $14M IIRC. could he essentially replace Hill??? I'd rather keep May over Herrera. Period. With a little luck, wisdom and maturity, the one good thing that will come out of this pandemic and mixed up short season is the owners and players association realizing how important coming to some sort of mutually beneficial labor resolution really is for all involved. Both sides have power. Both sides need and want baseball for income. Period. The public also wants and needs baseball. With fear, change of lifestyle, loss of jobs and income, missing sports in general, can baseball suffer another work stoppage at this point? The ramifications could be heavy for both sides I regard to finances and public opinion, which will in return further affect income and profitability. FA and even trades, as well as options and the such, could and will be affected next off-season. How much will each side be willing to lose even more? Let's hope cooler and smarter heads will prevail?

Equal or over on everyone except Arraez. Bad luck runs out eventually. While he might miss a few games, Buck will flash! Cruz is Steve Austin...the bionic man...and will mash as long as his wrist holds out. Might be a sort of farewell tour, but he will be ready. Maeda is damn good. He's changed his approach somewhat, and is coming off his best season against LH hitters. Also, new league that doesn't know him as well. Garver's bat is for real. And while he won't have to play daily, he also doesn't have to worry about being worn down. I expect some regression, but he will be above the .888 mark. Hunch on Arraez says he will be just fine but sophomore "slump" will factor in and he won't hit .320. Might hit .319, but I think he returns to mere mortal status for a season.

Still betting the suspension of Pineda will be reduced. How could it not be considering the fluidity of, well, EVERYTHING. Hill bas always been a hopeful question mark. Does anybody have any idea how the surgery turned out? How is he feeling? Even without direct contact with Twins trainers and support staff, surely he's finding some way to rehab and on a throwing program. Berrios, Odorizzi, Hill, Maeda, Pineda, Bailey, Dobnak, Smeltzer, Thorpe and a strong pen. Liked the staff without Hill. Loved the staff if we could get a half season of Hill. Is it possible a half season of ball could actually work in our favor?

Sorry, no debate should be necessary, Rosario is #1 for cool factor. Agree 100% Cruz should be in the rankings as well. Marwin should be honorable mention for his beard.

I think it's basically a given that MLB, and the owners, are not making a profit this year. Its about mitigating losses to break even, IMO. IF the owners ARE trying to make a profit for any sort of 2020 season then shame on them and they are being very misguided. As I stated before elsewhere, everyone should be looking for part of something because all of nothing is exactly that, nothing. The people who own ML teams, by themselves or as majority owners with minor partners, I would just about guarantee, don't enjoy profits from baseball to earn any sort of living. The owners, sole/majority/minor, own and run many other businesses and corporations. Sure profits from baseball line their coffers, but it is not some primary income for them. So yes, they can afford to have a zero balance sheet for 2020. Absolutely. But to suggest because they are billionaires they can simply afford to sustain a huge financial hit in 2020 and just "absorb" multi-million dollar losses is misguided. It assumes two things: 1] Because of their net worth they have vaults sitting flush with liquid cash they can and are willing to pass out and lose for 2020. I'm no financial expert, not even close, but I know that's not how business works. 2] It also assumes absorbing huge losses for their ML franchises is OK for 2020 because all of their other businesses/corporations/investments are still sound and doing well. In what possible scenario could that be true? How many people are out of work, laid off, taking pay cuts, etc, right now due to this world wide pandemic? I dare say it's possible some readers/contributors here at TD could be facing a crisis or loss of income from a company they work for that is owned by someone who owns a MLB franchise. Let's assume for a moment that ML owners were actually willing to go beyond breaking even for this season and actually accept huge multi million dollar losses to have a season and pay the players as much as they possibly could. What does that do to the stability of the franchise? Who starts losing jobs? Taking it further, how many additional cutbacks and job losses are there in the other businesses owned and run by these owners to make up for said losses? Companies and businesses that are unrelated to baseball and already facing crunches and losses on their own? The mitigating factors here are far more reaching than just just the health of each franchise for 2020. I have always had a problem with professional athletes...not all of them assuredly...making absurd comments like: "I have to make as much as I can in my career while I can because my career window is so short", as if they can't invest or do anything else for the rest of their lives. It would take me 10 years to make what a MLB rookie makes in just a single full season, not even considering additional perks and the such. HOWEVER, I have seldom ever begrudged a professional athlete from making as much money as they can in their career. (There are situations where someone is greedy and nuts and we all know this, lol). Additionally, I've never begrudged an owner of a business, or sports franchise, to also earn a profit from their investment. (Now, it's different if they are just greedy, nasty, and looking to gouge people. I think that's fair). The players do make the game, not the owners. No players...no game...no entertainment...no league. And the players, not to mention managers, coaches, trainers, staff, etc, incure a risk by playing. That shouldn't be forgotten. And they deserve to be paid. But at some point, reality has to set in for both parties. Break even, make some money, get on with tomorrow and your career if feasible. Keep baseball mkving forward for yourselves, the sport, and for the public, your fans and supporters. HOPEFULLY, maybe even learn something from all of this in a collaborative effort for the future. Part of something is better than all of nothing.

Really like this post. Not 100% about a few owners holding the rest of the league hostage, but I could be convinced. The problems with baseball are two fold: 1] Marketing. Don't talk to me about pace of play and time frame until you first address marketing. The average baseball game is roughly 3hrs. So is the average NFL game. The NBA, with an 80+ game season has games that are around 2+ hours. The NFL is an EVENT because games are weekly vs daily. The NBA is almost exactly half a MLB season, not including long playoffs. Marketing for MLB will never be the same for baseball as these other two sports due to its length of season. But the culmative of games watched and attendance doesn't show an overall loss from numbers I have read before. Its just more spread out. But where are jersey sales, shoe contracts, etc, when it comes to MLB? But where is there any hype, any interest in something BIG? Yes, the occasional big market team facing another big market team, or cross city matchup. And with a marathon season, hype is hard to build up. I get it. But the NFL and NBA both hype up contests that MLB doesn't in regard to star players and matchups, which leads to my next point. 2] Competitive balance. If MLB owners are completely blind, then we are all cursed as baseball lovers. Think about KC for a moment. They stunk for years and then put together a really good team for 2yrs who managed to make the WS twice. And then they fell apart. They had to due to financial restraints. The Chiefs won the Super Bowl and have one of the most electric stars in all of the NFL. If their staff is smart, they can ride a tide of a talented roster and all pro QB for the next few years. The Royals are just hoping to rebuild on what they have over the next few years to compete again. The NFL has shown, repeatedly, that a smart FO can assemble a team to compete every few years. Or, in some cases, compete consistently for several years if you have a few key players in place. But MLB has consistently shown that the "have's" will be able to weather a poor season or two before rising again with greater finances. The MLB players union has fought any kind of cap for decades now. And it makes financial sence for them to some degree. But to some degree, the owners have to find a medium of total revenue sharing, even without a true cap, so that there is a more level playing field for the entire ML system. For the good of the entire league and it's future health. Today and tomorrow.

I would also doubt many players opt out after missing out so much time and money this year, especially with the possibility of a work stoppage when the next collective bargaining session begins. After the 2021 season if memory serves. And with that potential dark cloud hanging over things, and with all the lost revenue from this year, I'm also thinking FA will be looked at very differently next year in regard to years and dollars. Let's use Odorizzi as an example. He's about $18M this season with the QO, but prorated now to whatever degree ends up happening. He was never going to get $25M if he goes the FA route next year. But he might have received $18-20M per, or just slightly north. But now? Considering he likes being a Twin and has been open to an extension, he might be much more inclined to stay "home" with the Twins for 3yrs and around $15-16M per. There is no way this doesn't end up affecting the market next offseason.

I will re-iterate something I've posted in other threads. If the MLB plan to play in AZ and/or FL is scrapped, why can't they have a shortened Cactus and Grapefruit season for milb? That's how ST is run, with enough space and fields for everyone to work out and play games. IF a ML team needs to play in their ST facility, at least to begin the season, there should still be room on the additional fields for the milb games. If safety issues lessen then the various teams can move to their normal stadiums to continue the season, shortened though it may be. Those cities would then be able to enjoy at least some of the game and limited incomes they would produce. Really, the only difficult part would be adjusting the remaining schedule for those teams. But you're telling me they couldn't find someone smart enough to set up 2 schedules? One for AZ/FL affiliates and then say a week break, and plan the last month plus of the season when/if the teams return to their host cities. Players play and develop. They are available for promotion. With luck, host city affiliates get to bring in at least a little $ and the fans have something to enjoy.

Despite being a life long Twins fan, my viewing of baseball on TV was regulated mostly to Cubs, Braves and Mets games in my youth as my cable provider carried stations with these teams. I always found it frustrating and disappointing to watch pitchers flail at the plate. And I always have laughed at the "strategy" of inserting a PH in the 6th or 7th inning with a possible rally. That's not intelligent strategy, it's putting in a better hitter. Even in the AL that is done. I read an article, many, many years ago that discussed the differences in the AL vs NL game. The NL had the reputation as being a more defense minded league who played more to speed and situational hitting. (Things I enjoyed and still do). The jist of the article is the NL teams largely played in larger parks than their AL counterparts, and also had more turf fields vs grass. Thus they adapted their game as such. Everything from ballparks to hitting approaches have changed over the years. The entire bunting, SB and situational hitting format of years past has changed. Its time for a universal DH. Let pitchers pitch. Players aren't expected to pitch, so why must pitchers be mandated to hit? I've always felt AL teams in NL parks were at a disadvantage. While the arguement can easily be made that NL teams, at this time, are not necessarily equipped with a quality DH option, they are still replacing a generally poor hitter with a better one. Further, they may have a poor defender playing a position for his bat, but can let him DH in favor of a better fielder taking his spot against an AL opponent. It's time to make this a universal change.

IMO, HS players will only be included in the first 2-3 rounds. The money just won't be there to play with for overslot signings unless a team can pull of a magic trick of financial logistics somewhere. So the problem you have are a plethora of college players who may or may not be welcomed back to their schools for another season. There is the real possibility the sport could be dropped at some schools, or put on hiatus for a season for the school to rebound financially. I can't speak for other schools, but Wisconsin has already stated they will not allow an extra year for spring athletes. I fully appreciate financial concerns and questions about a milb season and how it will be played, if at all. (Though I've also stated I think a form of Cactus and Grapefruit league games could provide a limited season solution). While projectjng players at this point would be difficult as guys rise and fall with another season under their belt, scouting of these players has already been ongoing. You can't cut off your nose to spite your face. With all the uncertainty involved, I'd really like to see 10 rounds and maybe bump the signing bonus closer to $40-50K, maybe with an adjusted total cap so more affluent teams couldn't just take advantage of the situation. I'm afraid there could be a number of college players, for various reasons, who either hang it up, or try their luck at an independent league, and then suddenly there is an unfair and uncontrolled free-for-all in 2021 for their signature.