Edman85

FYI, a lot of those restrictions are no longer in place as of 2019. See here https://www.thecubreporter.com/arizona-fall-league-az-instructional-league

David Stearns stepping down in Milwaukee and James Click's contract expiring in Houston. Reading between the lines, I wouldn't be stunned if Click was brought in as GM.

Development is less assigning players to levels, more teaching them the right things. Avila/Littlefield/Chadd appeared to be stuck in their ways. I recommend reading the MVP Machine. Ironically, I believe there was a picture of that book in Avila's office, but it shows what teams like the Dodgers and Astros were doing way before the Tigers played catch-up.

A few things: I haven't had the time to go through and evaluate the Rays drafts 2016-Pres as I would like to (apportioning value to traded draft picks, etc.). The Tigers have been drafting high since 2016, so they should have gotten more in that time. The Rays have, however, been getting competitive balance picks, that the Tigers didn't start getting until 2020. The rule of thumb I've observed looking at drafts is it takes 7 or so years to judge them, unless the players have flamed out. Most of Metzler's Rays drafts are before that threshold. Compare with caution, especially with the Rays "low and slow" development philosophy. Yes, there is some player development failure to blame for the drafts not pumping out much talent. Putting Dave Littlefield in charge of that was Al Avila's greatest failure.

Not sure Metzler would have been involved on that one at all, unless he was pushing for the extra pick.

Well then it must be true... 😃

Yes. This is a Chadd backfill. Teams average about 5 AGM's.

I met Metzler 10 or so years ago when Baseball Prospectus held and event and Q+A with members of the Rays front office at the Trop. Nothing more to add, but this is an upgrade on Chadd.

They also still think we care about their college drinking stories.

Worth pointing out the new CBA makes arb salaries fully guaranteed.

Maybe hirings/firings... Releases, no. If you release a player you are restricted in bringing them back next year. This is different from outrighting a player for them to hit free agency or non-tendering a player. A player straight up released can't be re-signed and put on the active roster until May 15. The only player movement you will see between now and the end of the world series are waiver claims and international free agents. Maybe they try to slip some guys through waivers this week, but there's really no point. Just wait until after the Series, especially with the new guy in charge still getting up to speed.

No. Maybe a GM or Scouting Director hire, but no free agents have hit free agency, and trades are still closed until after the World Series.

Because they may not be worthy of 40 man roster spots, but you still want to try to get them in the fold. It is something teams have done a lot of lately. Get a player on waivers and pass then through yourself later. Palacios has more than 6 years in the minors under his belt and would be free agent eligible if outrighted, but Papierski wouldnt.

Get the analytics staff, player dev staff, and new hitting coach together. If they are confident that Candelario can be fixed, hang onto him. If not, bye.

Papierski is way near the top of the chopping block. Don't be thrown by him (and Palacios) being a Harris acquisition. The whole point of claiming guys like that is to bring them in and try to slip them through waivers later.

After reading Lords of the Realm a couple years ago, it's pretty clear where these guard rails came from. The Mariners and Orioles had owners in the late 80's go belly up. It was a common thing. Less of an issue now with revenue sharing making that very difficult. Still, we have had some situations like the Rangers under Tom Hicks, McCourt and the Dodgers, and the Wilpons getting Madoff'ed. There are some other things in the section on the Debt Service Rule that ties the league's hand from restricting spending on players. But, let's say the Tigers wanted to go all in and blow through the international slot budget in the 2012-16 range when that was allowed, I think any such deals could have been quashed. Also, that rule has been eased up a bit the past couple years as it is known some teams had reduced cashflow in 2020-21. The commissioner also has some latitude and I don't think they flex often.

The ads running during the playoff games on Fox make my blood boil.

I wanted to follow up to yesterday... Here's the things in the CBA that the commissioner has the flexibility to do to teams that are in violation of the debt service rule. Basically, a team with outstanding debt has to bring in a percentage of that number, net, every year. It is an attempt to avoid insolvent owners running a team into the ground Any team with outstanding debt that is operating in the red is definitely in violation. (a) Require the Club to submit, for the Commissioner’s review and approval, a written plan for achieving compliance with the Debt Service Rule (the “Compliance Plan”). Each Compliance Plan shall identify the fiscal year during which the Club proposes to achieve compliance and the specific steps the Club intends to take to bring the Club into compliance with the Debt Service Rule; (b) Require the Club to consult with the Commissioner prior to entering into any contract with a term of more than five (5) years (except that this Section 4(b) shall not apply to any Uniform Player’s Contract with a Major League Player); (c) Prohibit the Club from incurring any additional Club Debt (as defined in this Rule) without the approval of the Commissioner; (d) Require the Club to reduce some or all of its outstanding debt by raising additional equity on whatever terms the Commissioner deems appropriate; (e) Prohibit the Club from making any capital expenditures without the approval of the Commissioner; (f) Require the Club to perform or refrain from any other action that the Commissioner deems necessary in order to ensure that the Club brings its Total Club Debt into compliance with the Debt Service Rule; (g) Retention by the Commissioner of all or any portion of the Club’s share of: (i) the Central Fund, and/or (ii) gate receipts from the Wild Card Game, Division Series, League Championship Series and World Series, so that such retained funds may be held in escrow and used as directed by the Commissioner to reduce the Club’s outstanding debt, subject to the Club’s existing obligations to players and subject to contractual obligations to third parties made by the Club in good faith before the Club had notice of the proposed adoption of the Debt Service Rule; (h) Reservation by the Commissioner of the power to approve a Club’s general and administrative expenditures, including, without limitation, the power to approve and/or limit individual line items in a Club’s annual budget; (i) Limit, or suspend, the Club’s ability to obtain additional financing under the Major League Baseball industry credit facility and/or any other line of credit or financing arrangement obtained on behalf of that Club or on behalf of all Clubs by the Office of the Commissioner; (j) Suspend the benefit of the Major League Rules, such as selection rights available to the Club under Major League Rule 5, except that any suspension of the Club’s rights under Major League Rule 4 shall not affect the assignment of the selection rights that the Club would lose or gain in connection with a player signing as provided in any collectively bargained agreement then in effect between the Clubs and the Players Association; (k) Deny the Club’s right to be represented at Major League meetings and/or deny representation on Major League Committees; (l) Suspend individual executive or ownership personnel of the Club; (m) Impose monetary sanctions against individual executive or ownership personnel of the Club; (n) Any other measures or sanctions which the Commissioner has the power to impose on a Club or Club owner pursuant to the Major League Constitution; (o) Any sanction which the Major League Clubs may impose upon another Club or Club owner under the Major League Constitution, if the imposition of such a sanction is duly authorized by the vote of the Major League Clubs in the manner required by the Major League Constitution; and/or (p) Require ownership to guarantee the Club’s debt service for the next three years, without recourse to the Club. Subject to liquidity concerns that the Commissioner may have, mandatory debt reduction (see subparagraphs (c) and (d) above) shall be the preferred Remedial Measure

Luis Castillo and Josh Lester are the no-brainers. I would have said Hutchison or Sanchez a couple weeks ago. Papierski or Palacios could get slipped through here, maybe Luis Garcia. Funkhouser, Rony Garcia, Elvin Rodriguez also come to mind as guys to try to pass through waivers.

1. Nine spots will need to be cleared. Definite free agents, Norris and Barnhart, make two. Schoop and Chafin could opt out and make it five. Guys like Lester and Castillo are no-brainers. Others let go would be free agent eligible. This is the last time you can outright them without some additional red tape. 2. I wouldn't be surprised if the Tigers were active here claiming other teams' cast offs, necessitating additional moves.

That's beside the point. The commissioner gets to flex in ways we may not see publicly when teams are operating in the red.

Those days are gone. Those teams were bleeding money.

That and the 12 year commitment if all of those things snowball. Also, worth pointing out AAV math (for luxury tax purposes) for pre-arb extensions and how that has changed for traded players in the new CBA. Pre-arb extensions typically have the same escalation as normal contracts where money increases until year 6 and maxes out after that. This drives the AAV way down for the back end of those contracts. Now teams that acquire players get the AAV from the time of the trade to the end of the deal. Tatis's AAV number right now is about $24.3M. If he is traded this offseason, it is about $27.8M. Also, reading between the lines on how Harris has talked about a development culture, I have a feeling soft factors like work ethic will be emphasized a lot by this front office (and could see that rubbing people here the wrong way).

Nope... All kinds of risk there.

It's hard to quantify given the gray area and how some of these things don't get updated, but if you include... Baseball Ops Analysts R+D Analysts Player Dev Analysts/Technology Programmers Software Developers Biomechanists I've got the Tigers around 21 I saw the White Sox were about 7. The Red Sox at 32... I was going alphabetical by city, so those were the outliers. I count the Dodgers at 32, Rays at about 50. Braves around 20. Padres at about 15. Giants about 24. The Guardians don't list everybody on their website.