Maybe It Is Time For MLB Contraction

Posted By on January 25, 2020

I was going to respond to the MiLB contraction topic, but I was not going to add anything meaningful to what was already discussed. Suffice to say that I do not believe that the contraction plan has much of anything to do with enhancing player development. I think it has more to do with once again bending to the whims of the financially challenged organizations, in yet another cost saving program designed to create parity, but continues to fail at that endeavor.

In the never ending search for parity, MLB has limited the ability of those organizations with financial clout by imposing restrictions on draft bonus pools, CBT thresholds, and international bonus pools. The Dodgers, Yankees, Red Sox, have gone along to get along but continued to search for ways to use their financial strength to improve their organization in other ways. To the dismay of many on this site and others, the Dodgers have chosen to forego long term multi-$100MM FA contracts but have instead plowed millions back into the organization for sustainability at the top of the standings. I acknowledge that the Dodgers could realistically do both, and were prepared to do so this winter, but NYY was the team of choice for the one difference maker the Dodgers were willing to spend on.

Now many organizations who cannot INVEST the millions required to establish and maintain a quality MiLB affiliate program with advanced data driven analytics to develop their future 26-man roster, have gone after those who have invested. Once again these lesser financed organizations want to limit the Dodgers and Yankees and others from establishing multiple affiliates with all of the benefits others cannot afford. The Dodger affiliate complexes are generally first class and well equipped. The organization invests millions in the facilities and providing exceptional instruction to the coaches as well as the players. This has been one area where the Dodgers have excelled, and others want to limit their advantage. Not for a minute do I excuse LAD from not increasing the pay for their minor leaguers. They should also be in the forefront of establishing fair compensation, and they can do this without contracting their affiliates. The Dodgers currently have 9 affiliates and are poised to lose two; Ogden and one of their AZL affiliates. I fully expect the Dodgers to continue to invest in this area until they are limited again.

I recognize that MLB and other professional sport organizations (NFL, NBA, and NHL) are oligarchies and need the financially challenged teams to compete. With their CBT thresholds and resultant luxury tax, 50% of the tax is to be redistributed to the lesser financed organizations in a revenue sharing process that is intended to help these financially challenged teams. There are other more lavish revenue redistribution programs again hitting the haves to give to the have nots. However, these teams are not using the funds to acquire some of the more pricey FA, but instead retain the revenues without spending or investing. Before the Dodgers, NYY, BoSox, Philadelphia, Cubs…agree to contraction or any other parity driven proposal, they need to insist on a salary floor. The punishment needs to include their inability to receive future luxury tax benefits or any revenue sharing program until they show a willingness to compete. And that floor needs to be high enough to ensure compliance.

According to Baseball Reference, in 2018 MLB’s revenue sharing gave each team $118 million from combined local sources and an estimated $91 million from the national pot, and using CBA’s 48% figure against $7.3B local revenue across MLB, we get similar number for 2019.

The straightforward narrative of cheapness might be misunderstood, but it is difficult to see how the opposite narrative might be true. The Pirates, who play in a stadium financed by public money, not being able to make money off $200 million-plus in revenue sharing while only spending $72 million on their major league roster seems to be an intractable mathematical problem.

Perhaps there needs to be a contraction of MLB teams who do not spend their revenue sharing dollars for the MLB roster to improve their competitiveness or put back into player development, and with an audit as to how these funds are spent.

We know that AF has not spent dollars on pricey FA’s, but instead has been very supportive with huge investments in the player development arena. The Dodgers are waaaaaaay out front in using advance analytics driven data to draft and develop their players, and once again the lesser teams are complaining. The Dodgers have gone all in on player development programs. This year they find themselves once again having one of the top five MiLB affiliate organizations. Depending on the publication, they either have 5 top 100 prospects or 7. This is remarkable while recognizing where they have drafted for more than a decade. The Dodgers have not drafted in the top 10 since Clayton Kershaw at #7 in 2006. Since then:

2007 – 20th pick
2008 – 15th pick
2009 – 36th pick (no 1st round – settled into the #16 slot by the 4th round)
2010 – 28th pick
2011 – 16th pick
2012 – 18th pick
2013 – 18th pick
2014 – 22nd pick
2015 – 24th pick
2016 – 20th pick
2017 – 23rd pick
2018 – 30th pick
2019 – 25th pick

While the Dodgers may not have paid for the top FA’s, they have decided to reinvest their profits into the player development programs. Agree or disagree, but that has kept the LAD organization at the top for the last seven years, and they certainly look to continue for at least seven more.

Maybe it is time to move financially challenged organizations out of their existing location to one where they might be more profitable. Miami has won two WS championships and they still cannot get a decent following. Tampa has always had an attendance problem. Maybe instead of expansion of ML teams which is a ruse to get more revenues into the owners hands that will not spend it, and perhaps give serious consideration to MLB contraction. I want to stop punishing teams like the Dodgers and Yankees until teams like Pittsburgh, Miami, and Tampa start to invest to improve their competitiveness. If MLB will not install a salary floor, then do away with any CBT threshold and let the teams spend what they can.

2020 Marketing Slogan

This article has 36 Comments

  2. Great points, AC.

    I’m tired of hearing about parity. Get rid of the CBT. Oakland plays in a terrible stadium and the A’s pretty much always put a very good and highly competitive team on the field. Moving into a new stadium will no doubt improve their chances, but the A’s are good because of the baseball operation’s department. Tampa is another successful “small market” team. There are different ways to create success.

    The fact that some teams aren’t successful has more to do with how they operate and the fact that they don’t reinvest money into their rosters or player development, which has consequences. MLB should have a floor in terms of of what team’s must spend on payroll. The union obviously wants that and no doubt wants the CBT to go away. They should settle for nothing less.

    The talk of MLB expansion is actually quite funny when you consider the situation in Tampa, Miami and Oakland. The A’s are moving toward a new stadium which will no doubt improve their per game attendance (20,521). But what do you do with Miami, which drew just a little over 10,000 per game? They play in a new stadium. Then there is Tampa, a playoff team, which drew only 14,552 per game. Maybe MLB shouldn’t be in Florida. Baltimore, Pittsburg, Kansas City and Detroit are other organizations having trouble breaking the 20,000 mark.

    Where would MLB expand? Portland, Nashville, San Antonio, Las Vegas, Montreal?
    Just seems like they need to focus on either moving Tampa or Miami to some city that might be more baseball friendly. Then find a way to make traditional existing franchises better attractions. When teams like Miami trade their star players, why should people go watch?

    MLB is expected to near or hit $11 billion in revenue this year so there are really no excuses for contracting minor league teams in places like Ogden and Lancaster. It’s plain and simple, stupid and a potential public relations disaster. If Rob Manfred pursues it, he should be replaced. Saying it’s about better facilities doesn’t work when you look at Jethawks Stadium. These minor league teams are important to communities, providing family oriented and affordable entertainment venues that promote baseball, especially to young fans.

    Yes, the Dodgers should absolutely increase pay for minor league players and they can certainly afford. It’s embarrassing they haven’t already done it. If Toronto can do it every other MLB team can do it.

  3. Many of us began our baseball fandom in the 50’s with an 8 team American and 8 team National League and there were teams like KC that were never competitive. MLB has grown from those 16 teams to 30. In 1950 the US population was 161,325,798 and in 2017 it was 323,148,586. The population has grown faster than MLB but money and people have not grown equally in each MLB city.

    I would love for the Rays to move to Portland, OR. Any team that is competitive but doesn’t have fan support should be able to void a contract.

  4. I am old school and don’t like revenue sharing, the DH, or guaranteed contracts. I have been a Dodger fan since 8 years old in 1951. I liked when the Dodgers had multiple farm teams that all came to spring training together at Dodger town in Vero Beach. St. Paul and Montreal in AAA were both Dodger farm teams at the same time. The Dodgers had their own airplane. When they moved to LA, Dodger stadium was not built with public money. Baseball is one of the few places you can be let go and still continue to be paid. Why should the Dodgers subsidize teams that are not making ends meet? Sounds like socialism.

  5. But the Dodgers aren’t entertainment of and by themselves. They rely on a competitive opponent and league. It would get a bit boring with an eight team super league. Oakland and Tampa have proven it can be done with a small market team

    1. Very true. MLB is an oligarchy and needs a certain number of teams to play to make the season and future seasons enjoyable, and yes profitable. Does MLB need 30 teams? Did they expand when they might have thought otherwise? Owners needing revenues needed expansion to line their pockets.

      But talk of contraction is irrelevant. MLBPA will never allow MLB to contract. The title is purely rhetorical. MLB needs to allow more freedom to teams to leave their existing locations and look for opportunities where they may have a better chance to succeed. Maybe MLB should generate a fund to help alleviate lease costs for failing franchises looking to relocate. Maybe MLB should seriously discuss change in ownership if the owners shows zero signs of trying to improve their product on the field. That can be shown through FA signings or through player development. But the onus needs to be on the smaller market teams to show they want to improve rather than not spending their shared revenue proceeds on an MLB improved product. A healthy salary floor will help in that regards with repercussions if they do not meet the minimum, just as their are repercussions for those exceeding the CBT threshold. Do something to improve MLB rather than looking for ways to save dollars by contracting MiLB.

  6. I agree with most of that.

    I think MLB should move the Marlins to Pittsburgh and buy out the awful Pittsburgh Ownership. Then, move the Rays to Portland or Charlotte or Las Vegas (make it an indoor stadium) based upon which area has the best demographics.

    Then start up an AAAA league in the minor league cities with the most attendance. This is just a rough idea, but I do believe there are lots of players who could play in the “Low Majors” especially ones at the end of their careers. Maybe play 4 or 5 games a week. Maybe Montreal is one of those cities.

    Just a hair-brained idea.

    1. I’m not understanding your “move the Marlins to Pittsburgh” comment. What do they do with the team they already have aside from removing the ownership?

        1. Why not just remove the ownership of the team that’s there, replace it with better ownership, and move the Marlins somewhere else that can support a team. Maybe you could bring the Marlins to Indy. The player’s union will never agree to let MLB reduce the number of teams below 30.

          1. The league would have issues with the new stadium that was just built with taxpayer’s money. I don’t see them paying off that debt. I’m sure there must be a lease that would need to be dealt with too.

          2. I don’t think INDY could support a MLB team. Chicago is 2 hours away, Cincy is 90 min away and it 4 hours to St Louis. All 3 teams would oppose it.

        2. I have had this idea for a long time to have a league right below MLB that uses the DH and technology MLB could use in the future. There are lots of players who are at the end of their careers or just have never had a break who could play there. Maybe there is a $20 million salary cap or some such thing. They could be affiliated with a major league team or even independent. Indianapolis, Nashville, Charlotte, Spokane, Albeuquacky, Des Moines, Austin and maybe Miami and other cities like that could be part of that AAAA group.

  8. Question for our Fab 5. Is there a statistic that tracks a pitcher’s swing and miss rate outside the zone? That was a huge part of Ryu’s success last year. Have to believe he ranked at the top of that list. I think that stat would show that a pitcher has great stuff!

    2. Try Fangraphs for the pitcher you want to track. Loads of stats including:

      O-Swing% (Outside the Zone Swing Percentage): Swings at pitches outside the zone divided by pitches outside the zone.

      Z-Swing% (Inside the Zone Swing Percentage): Swings at pitches inside the zone divided by pitches inside the zone.

      Swing% (Swing Percentage): Swings divided by total pitches.

      O-Contact% (Outside the Zone Contact Percentage): Contact made outside the zone divided by swings outside the zone.

      Z-Contact% (Inside the Zone Contact Percentage): Contact made inside the zone divided by swings inside the zone.

        1. Yes, wife and I go almost every year to Camelback. Take in a few games, but most days go over to the fields and watch players working out. We really like going to the back fields and watching the “youngsters” going through their paces and games

          1. Great. Please keep us posted on what looks good to you during you and your wife’s trip especially the young pitchers if you can. Thanks.

  9. It wasn’t that long ago there was a contraction plan and I was all for it but it’s not going to happen. I believe the Twins were one of the teams targeted. Instead they got a new stadium and are spending some money. MLB will expand again and water down the game again once they solve Oakland and Tampa.

    1. Oakland seems like a match with Vegas.
      Tampa Bay to Oregon.
      Let Miami split games between Miami and Tampa Bay–A tale of two cities. The MarRays.

      1. I’d like to see the Expos return to Montreal. Move Tampa. Works geographically with AL East teams. That city would support them. The strike was really what doomed that franchise.

  10. AC, is Rick Honeycutt still involved with the Dodgers and if not what do you think might happen to him?

    1. To the best of my knowledge he is in some capacity as a consultant. What that means, I am not sure. But Honey’s strengths do not coincide with how the Dodgers are now instructing their pitchers. Honey’s expertise is watching film and discerning what change the pitcher needs to correct. I am not sure what Mark Prior’s strengths are, but he is more analytic driven and I know Rob Hill will work with the Dodger instructors (and pitchers) to improve their spin rate and velocity. That is where the Dodgers are headed and that is not Rick Honeycutt’s game.

      1. I have heard that Honey will not be with the Dodgers this year…

        (Not a really close source)

        1. Thank you AC and Mark. I guess he has a different, but not too modern approach, to pitching these days with all the analytics etc. He was a great contributor to their pitching ability in past years though and hope they can keep him on in some kind of capacity.

      2. I agree AC, that Honey’s strengths are not necessarily in the direction to which the Dodgers are going, pitching wise. I am very excited about the prospects of having both Prior and Rob Hill take more of an upfront position in what the team is doing with its pitchers.
        Hopefully Honeycutt won’t just be put out to pasture but Hill-Prior might bring some fixes to Kenley and Kelly that we wouldn’t have seen otherwise. It will also be interesting to see what they can do with Nelson and Wood who both claim to be totally healthy. Time will tell.

  11. Oakland has finally reached an agreement with both the city and the county and is moving ahead on new stadium.

  12. The Dodgers have 5 of the Top 100 prospects.:

    Dodgers’ Top 100 Prospects
    2. Gavin Lux, SS/2B (ETA: 2020)
    23. Dustin May, RHP (2020)
    44. Jeter Downs, SS (2021)
    67. Josiah Gray, RHP (2020)
    73. Keibert Ruiz, C (2021)

    From MLB Pipeline.

    Tony Gonsolin has a chip on his shoulder.

    Downs up to #44. Wow!

    1. Is that comment about Gonsolin meant in a good way? He showed up at FanFest yesterday with shorter hair (probably didn’t want to compete with May’s look) and a good beard. Not that we’re taking a vote, but I think the new Gonso is a much better look.

      1. “Tony Gonsolin…chip on his shoulder” seems positive to me. From what I have seen of him pitching at the ML level, I was very impressed with the quality of his pitches, and attacking the strike zone. I like this up and coming group of young pitchers (Gonsolin will soon be 26) and more are on the way.

Comments are closed.