Trov

For the first year, it may be a good deal for local games, mainly because MLB would be scrambling to not lose fans. However, as pointed out, when you take away an local providers, keeping in mind only about half the teams use Balley, some have private networks like Yankees, doubt they will agree to give up their local money to not have blackouts for Yankee games. This is a much bigger deal than many fans have really thought about it. There was a post on here over the winter, well before this whole Bally thing, that Padres get so much more money from local TV deal than the Twins do. I am sure MLB would love to end all local broadcast deals, and only have national and their TV rights. If you think they would offer the same low price for every game, when they exclusive control, you are lying to yourself. Look at NFL, they charge hundreds to watch out of market games, and only offer 18 weeks of games, with 6 games a week being able to be watched not on their exclusive streaming. MLB has so much more. As one commenter said, they offer it cheaper because all they are doing is piggy backing off the broadcasts already done via local. If Bally fully goes under, and MLB stripes those broadcasts, there are so many questions left to be answered. One, how would money be doled out for those teams? If Padres made much more on a local deal, do you think they would agree to split the money even with say the Twins, or Rays, who no one attends games? No they will demand they keep getting those same local TV right money, or be allowed to sell their rights as they did before to someone else. What about broadcasters? Do you think MLB will pay for a home broadcast team for each team to follow around? Doubtful. It will most likely have to come from the team if they want, else there will be just a 1 team per game like a national broadcast. Personally, I like the homer broadcast aspect of sports. The teams will not give up the money from TV broadcasts unless they have to. Manfred said the last option was to have games on streaming, not the first option. He did say they do want to get away from the blackouts, but with that goes away local rights. I cannot see the teams with private networks giving up their money. I cannot see teams in big markets giving up their fatter contracts, to share money with lower market teams. Do not be surprised if they have different viewing packages, one being a pay per view option. I can say with great confidence the price will go up either way. Right now people pay for the service because they want to see out of market games, or watch them when traveling. There are cord cutters looking to save money to watch without cable, which is why Bally going under anyways, because they are not getting as much money from advertising as they expected. However, there are still plenty of non cord cutters that will not buy the package if they have an option to watch local as well at current price.

The rule does not hurt the Twins. The title suggest the rule is better for some teams versus others, like the Twins. The rule is the same across the board and affects everyone the same. Just because the Twins have been worse in those games does not mean it hurts them. I think the team plans to never play them, and will use all their good pitchers in tie games, hoping there will be no extra inning game, then they use a lessor pen guy to pitch.

In regards to pitch clock, report was the overall game time has been cut down by average 23 min in spring games. As pointed out, that is dead time of nothing happening other than having to listen to the broadcast team filling dead air, or if you are watching in person, the guys walking around doing nothing. I was so happy they put in the pitch clock, it will make games easier to watch. I loved watching games pitched by Silva and Buehrle. Buehrle never needed a pitch clock, he would get ball throw ball in like 5 seconds it seemed like. His games were always under 3 hours. Silva his games were fast mainly because he always threw strikes and guys put ball in play. I once watched a 78 pitch complete game by him, it was crazy.

Last I heard is if Bally does not pay the teams, MLB expects the teams to opt out, and then they said at worst MLB will stream the games. To my knowledge they cannot plan to do that, until Twins opt out of contract for breech. Also, not sure if bankruptcy court could block the opt out. Normally, once it is filed, creditors, that being Twins, cannot seek to be paid, but not sure if contract allows for opt out under same situation. MLB seems to think they will be able to though.

I have talked a few times about his overall value. I agree he should not be graded as an OF, as he will not be playing much out there. Sure he could transition there should his pitching ever drop off, but as long as he is still pitching as a top pitcher you do not take him off there. I have long said though he is one I would be willing to sign to a long term deal as a pitcher, because he has the fall back of hitting should he ever losing the pitching level. Normally, I say stay away from deals beyond 4 years for a pitcher due to their completely falling off cliffs, but none of them could just stop pitching and be only a hitter like Ohtani could.

Most players drafted, or signed are either SS or CF, if they are not college players. Only pitchers or catchers out of HS are really put into a position. Some college guys start to get more put into a position of 1b or corner OF, but that is because they are bat first guys. Look at a guy like Cuddy, who was drafted out high school as a SS, or Sano who was signed as a SS. Neither were expected to stick there in majors. Cuddy moved to 3rd then was decent OF. Really, I would say no team likes to lock a guy into a position, because then they may get put behind someone and you decide to trade someone or let someone walk because and settle for a lessor player at a different position. Also, if a guy can play CF, they better be able to play either corner.

No way is Steer a better prospect that Lewis. Steer may be a solid player, but his upside is not better than Lewis. First, Lewis can play SS better than Steer. Lewis has more speed, and better hit tool than Steer. I really feel the ranking is based on Lewis missing so much time. I was fine with Steer getting sent out because we have guys like Lewis and Lee ahead of him in infield depth charts. I do think Steer will have a solid few years. If you just look at what the 2 did last year at both AAA and MLB level. Lewis had half the at bats but in that very short sample lit it up. Steer had OPS+ of 72, Lewis OPS+ 145. Yes, both very short sample, but clearly a difference. If you look at their time in AAA, Lewis had OPS of 940, Steer had OPS of 830 in St. Paul, and 842 in Louisville. I just would point out, the prospect rankings are very speculative overall, and being ranked high really means nothing about what they will do at MLB overall. Many guys end up high on prospect lists, then fall off, or start off and fly up the lists. They are so fluid.

So everyone is just agreeing Burns is an ace, but if you look at his numbers last year, and specifically his second half numbers maybe, just maybe his luster is wearing off. I am not saying I would pass on him, but I think some may be overvaluing him a little. He would not be the first ace that burns out after age 27 season. I will agree Burns had a very good 2020, and a crazy good 2021. However, last year his walks were back up from his 2021 season, his k/9 were down to career low, to 10.8. His HR were up a ton, giving up 23 compared to the 7 the year before. His ERA was close to his FIP right around 3.00, much higher than the 2021 season. If you look at the second half it was worse than his first half. Maybe it was injury, maybe it was fatigue as he pitched more games and innings than any season prior. However, take a look at Tim Lincecum, both started at age 23, both had ace type numbers over their first 5 seasons. Burns 2021 was better than anything Lincecum did, but Lincecum overall numbers over those years where about the same, if not better. Burns had more K/9 and less walks per 9 We do need to keep in mind Burns did not start full time until 2020, and really 2021 where he tore it up. Then year 28 and it all fell apart for Lincecum. I am not saying Burns will fall apart, but other than a great 2021 and a very good 2020(9 starts only) are we really saying this guy is a top ace? I mean in 5 seasons he has 74 starts, and if you remove the 2021 season his numbers are not ace like. They are very good, but let me point you to Phil Hughes 2014 season. It was not quite Burns 2021, but not a ton off overall. Hughes threw 209 innings, had a FIP of 2.65 with a much lower K rate of only 8.0, but much better walk to k rate of 11.63. Hughes never came close to those numbers any other season. Again, not saying they are the same. My point is, we have 1.5 very good to great seasons out of 5. 1 good season where he faded down stretch. You want your ace to pick it up on second half in in playoffs. He did fine in his 1 playoff start in 2021, going 6 allowing 0 but walking 3 with 6 strikeouts. Maybe Burns is not 2021 guy, but closer to 2022 guy, who is good, but are you willing to give up the farm for? Really Pablo Lopez, was not much worse overall last year compared to Burns. Some did not want to give up Arraez straight up for Lopez, but is willing to give up everything for Burns.

I get why the team tried to change him, but sometimes changing what works just messes everything up. If something is going well, trying to make better is not always the best path. Sometimes it does make it better, but not always.

To me the only debate would be Mauer versus Oliva. I would give Joe the slight nod as he did it at catcher, at least is prime years. Oliva had the better personality, Joe is so bland. They both played part of 15 seasons, bur really Oliva played 11 as 3 seasons were 10 games or less, and the 4th was 6. Joe played like 13.5, as he had 30 game season rookie year, and a 80 game season. Joe put up slightly better numbers. Oliva also played with other greats, Killer and Carew, Joe played with some greats too, but none that are HOF, still salty about Santana snub. Neither brought home a WS. I would not object to either above the other, but I would say Joe gets my vote. He also had to deal with new defense data late in his career with a ton of shifting.

Really the question would be does either side want to have that much of a gamble. I fully expect Lewis to come back, but we only saw a very SSS to judge on. Even if he is healthy, he could just not become what we hope or even close. Twins gamble is not only on his health but that he really is MLB guy. Lewis would be gambling he becomes a superstar and have bought out one of his top dollar years. Personally, I think the dollars suggested are way too low for Lewis. One salaries are going up. Two, he is going to be 24 this year, a 7 year deal takes him to 31, and only mega stars will get huge deals by then. Sure, if he is good to great, he could still get a 4 year deal at that point. I get it is only 1 year of FA being bought out, but the overall price is low I think. Maybe if you threw in a lot of incentive based bonuses along the way, like extra mil for All-star game, extra for MVP or other awards. Personally, I am a huge fan of those types of contracts. Then players do not feel like they are getting underpaid, but teams are not overpaying if production drops off. Kind of similar to Buck's contract.

This is clearly a depth for infield that can hit lefties move. He will likely play mostly just against lefties, depending on injuries. Depending on injuries and how season plays out, he could be a DFA after Lewis comes back. It surprised me when I saw it, but more I think about it there is some sense in it.

This FO and coaching staff has never been high on Gordon. I do not agree this is taking Gordon playing time though. He is mainly coming in to hit against lefties and play 1B. He will play 1B against lefties and be injury replacement should AK not be healthy. Gordon is basically an OF now with some 2nd or SS, but will not play much against lefties, if at all. Really, what this move does is takes Garlick out of the running for coming back to MLB roster absent injuries.

Have you looked at the home road splits for Stanton? Also, after the all star break he was terrible. Sure, he was hot the first half, but even if money was equal, I would not take Stanton over Miranda because Stanton you cannot count on anymore.

I am sure there will be a team that has, or will offer a minor league contract. My guess he was, or is, holding out for better. He is still young enough that if he can get more contact, he will still have a chance to have a solid career hitting HR. However, he is 30 now, or will be most of the season. If he is willing to take minor league deal there will be a team willing to offer it I am sure, unless there is concern with his clubhouse chemistry. Do not forget he was in news for some sexual harassment claims in the past.

I fully agree the players should look into it, similar to NBA and NFL then the players and owners can work together to grow the game. However, it has been how many decades and the two sides still fight for every dollar for themselves. They are both always trying to win the CBA and not figuring out what might be best for both sides. The players do not trust the owners, and in last CBA there were talks about wanting to pull in non-baseball revenue into the talks. Like some reports were players were claiming they should get money from property owned by the owners around the stadium. The players almost always fight against everything the league does. Maybe if they could actually stop making the process a fight, but think about what is good for the game is good for both. I am not blaming just the players, as the owners have been terrible to their players for years, and were making tons of money and barely paying the players their fare share.

I do not understand why people keep wanting Martin to increase his power so much? I get we are in the hit HR world for value, but there still should be some value in a guy that can get on base at high level, steal bases, and can get hits at a high level. We loved Arraez for that, but still wished he hit with a little more power, but still loved his ability to get hits. Martin has the speed to turn singles into doubles, and walks into stolen bases, unlike Arraez. I am still bullish on Martin, just do not look to make him something he is not. The more you try to tinker with guys sometimes the results are the opposite of what you are seeking, then people will say see we knew he would be a bust, but you take away what made them great. It is like in football, when you have a running QB and tell them, we need you to be a pocket passer to stay healthy, but if you take away what makes them great, their ability to run, you have a sub par player. For Martin, if you sacrifice some on-base percentage for hopeful increased power, you take away what makes him great, in hopes of improving something he may not be great at. It is not like he is Jason Tyner or something, he can hit some HR.

This is one of the few times I would agree the anti shift rule will benefit a player. Buck hits the ball so hard, when you take away that 3rd guy defending on that side of the infield it will greatly limit the range on that side. Hopefully there will be more balls hit through the left side now.

The only way it will affect their averages is if it changes their mindsets. Both have stated the shifts effected their head a bit. Gallo actually may see a little increase, more than Kepler would, because he was facing 4 man outfields more than anyone. We never talked a ton about it, Polanco faced them some, but Gallo faced them a lot. When you have been trained to hit fly balls and try to hit "gaps" and teams took away gaps, it would mess with heads. I mean some defenses against Gallo had the 1st baseman way off the line, the 2nd baseman deep in right, and one other guy on infield to right of second. There was not 1 guy on left of 2nd. Gallo had no idea how to hit the ball there to get the free hit, and hell if you bunt it hard enough you could have a double. If they can clear their heads of the shift affecting them, then that is only way it will help. As far as infield shifts went, I have long said the new rule will do very little to help get more hits. Middle infielders will still play up the middle just behind the bag basically, and the corner guys will still play well off the line, depending on runners. The other middle infield guy will still play as deep as they can and close to where they think the ball will be hit. I could see maybe 5 to 10 balls that will be hits now, that the infield shift would have taken away.

I would love to see the MLB streaming for all local games. The main question I would have is would TV still have home guys or for all the teams that were connected to Bally get brought into MLB broadcasting and have neutral single broadcast team? Personally, I like the homer team style, but if all games were being broadcasted by MLB it would make little sense to waste money on two broadcast teams.

Players will never agree to a cap. They have stood on that since FA became a thing. I have long said if they were looking out for the mid level players, they would agree to a cap with a floor, but the union is really not looking out for the mid level guys. The minimum guys will always get the minimum. The top paid guys will always make huge amounts. With the floor the mid-level guys and vets will get more contracts. Right now, teams save money with paying minimum guys or cheap cost controlled guys. They are not as good as the vets maybe, but the vets are demanding much more money. The teams would rather scrap the mid tier guys and either go big, or cheap. The only way you could go to a floor though is by having full sharing of media money and build the cap like in all other sports directly to the money being brought into the league. Then the floor is a share of that and the cap is a share of that. The issue is baseball has never done it that way, and unlikely to make that shift anytime soon.

I would say the most improved is actually Cleveland. We added a starter, that could be best in the rotation, but took away the batting champ to do it. Gallo is a lottery ticket that if he can get to what he was in Texas we will love it. Really, we are just hoping we have health this year. The new catcher may be the best upgrade for us. Cleveland really did not lose anything and added Bell. He, like Gallo, is a bit of a lottery ticket. When he is on, he carries teams. He is bad on defense so most likely will see most time at DH, but if he is hitting like he has shown, he will help carry that team. The only reason I say Cleveland is most improved at this point, is they only really added and did not have to subtract to do it. I still think we will be fine as I think our prospects can fill holes left, and hopefully health is a little more on our side.

I would rather have him pitch the way he does in games in practice. Do not try to do more in either. For those who want him to take it easy and not throw like we would expect in games, you will just increase the chance he will get injured in games. I mean think about it, if in PB he is topping out at say 98, because he is taking it easy, when he does try to ramp it up in games, he arm will then be doing something it has not for awhile and make it more likely to get injured. Most injures happen when you push your muscles too far to quick. If his arm is ramped up to throw 102, so be it. I am no doctor, and I could be wrong, but pretty sure the Twins have medical staffs and would have that convo with him if they felt it would increase his injury to throw like that right now.

The 140M is across all Diamond Sports Group, Bally North payment would be much less. The new owner could do what Diamond did, just borrow it, and then when cannot pay bills later go bankrupt.

It was talked about a few weeks ago that Diamond Sports, the parent company for Balley broadcasting, is set to go bankrupt and not pay their bills at the end of this month. Many people just brushed it under the rug thinking some other broadcasting company would step in. However, it may not be that simple. Came across this article yesterday. https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/35668388/rob-manfred-mlb-ready-diamond-sports-group-pay-teams This basically states if Bally fails to pay the teams their money for broadcasting rights, the MLB will step in to broadcast games for the 14 teams that use Bally as a broadcast company. There is still a lot to work out if this happens. One question I would have is would you need to pay for the MLB streaming if you already have a cable company that you planned to watch on? Will we have our same broadcasters, or will they be blocked because of contracts? If a local company tries to step in will that trump MLB streaming? What if Bally pays some teams, like the Twins who are owed much less? I do not know the contracts, article seems to suggest failing to pay is an out for teams, but will that get blocked for legal reasons with bankruptcy court at all? Being this looks to be on the verge, although, Manfred has said do not worry we got you, I am concerned on what this will look like. It really should be a bigger story for people, but maybe people are just we will worry when time to worry.