Skip to main content

Replies sorted oldest to newest

Interesting stuff.

Another example of MLB mopery.

All they have to do to save money is give some of the "stars", $19 million instead of $20 million a year and they could save an entire minor league "program".

My offer still stands for MLB.

Give me two accountants and about 6 months; subpoena power with some teeth in it; and, we'll (baseball mans)find that all of the MLB clubs are making money hand over fist!
Why does MLB need short season teams to develop talent? Afterall they spend $40M a year in 28 development camps in the DR. Why should they care about the small town part-time jobs of ticket vendors etc. in smalltown America? Why shouldn't Americas game be developed in Venezuala (gov't hates us but are willing to send their sons to play here and get rich here). Afterall aren't players from outside of our country better than our kids? They do get the benefit of professional training on a full-time basis from the age of 16 while the kids here go to HS so they must be better...

MLB execs were absent the day they taught marketing, ethics, and loyalty at school.
Last edited by njbbdad
I have had thoughts on the draft and the minor league teams for years, but I don't pull much weight. Smile I have always hated complex baseball (Az and Fla Rookie leagues). They don't even resemble pro baseball. They play in the middle of the day with no fans and under sweltering heat. They don't travel, and they don't get to experience what minor league baseball is all about.

The two leagues are weak and in my opinion should never have been formed in the first place. Part of learning how to play is the travel, playing under lights and playing in front of fans who yell at you.

Most of the High School kids today are not ready for pro ball and should go to school for a few years. The HS kids who are ready can go out and compete in the NYP, Pioneer or Northwest leagues which are not being folded. About 90% of the kids who are in the Rookie leagues will be back in short season ball next year anyway.

The kids who are drafted and signed next year will be sent to the short season leagues that are underway. They then will go to the Instructional League in the fall which will be expanded to about 7 weeks instead of the 2-3 weeks they play right now.The Instructional League is very important to a players development, and there are about 10 coaches for each team.

IMO, baseball should add a full season "A" team to each club which would mean 3 "A" teams per club instead of the 2 they now have, but that won't happen. College players can then go right into a full season "A" team and jump start their career.

As far as dumping the two Rookie Leagues......it is long overdue.
When I signed, we had two short season clubs.....one in the Pioneer and one in the Northwest. We had 5 full season "A" clubs and it gave the players who were drafted down the line a chance to get 400 AB's, or 150 IP. It gave them a chance to develop their skills against veteran competition.
Last edited by bbscout
BBScout,
Thanks, some questions for you.
As you said, most of the HS players are not ready for pro ball.
If this year 19 out of the 30 first rounders were from college, would that number increase or decrease.
Would a scout be less willing to recommend a HS player than a college player because he may not be ready to compete on the higher level.
TPM, There is no problem with 1st round HS players. I can only speak for myself, but when I recommend a HS player, he must have two things....1. a lot of talent and 2. be very mature for his age. I try not to turn in any players who would need to go to the AZ or Fla Rookie Leagues. It does not always work out, but I try hard for it not to happen.
From the perspective of having covered the NY-P League for a lot of years, and having seen a lot of Eastern League and International League as well, I read with great interest.

Short-season A used to be largely for draft picks out of college, especially pitchers. The high-school draftees that played in tne NY-P were mostly physical tweeners, second- and third-year guys who otherwise should have been in full-season A but needed to grow (more than mature).

In the last few years, the fundamentals of the draft have changed; it has gotten older. But with the elimnation of the rookie leagues, will the draft now suddenly get younger again, the thinking being the independent leagues are the perfect vehicle to watch (college) players who would be on a shorter string anyway?

This, of course, would mean players might as well ride the college thing for as long as they can, because the money won't for the most part be there anyway.

How might this change independent teams and the way they get players?
BBscout, I agree with most of what you say. The only redeeming quality with complex baseball is the fact that it is held at teams spring training facilities where they rehab players and it provides rehab starts. My son wanted to throw at gcl after his rehab was comlete and they told him that it was not worth rushing back for that level of competition. He is taking bull pens and waiting for instructs where he can compete with A, AA, and AAA players and learn something.

Maturity is a big factor. My son has commented on how well he was prepared compared to others who are totaly lost. We moved around a lot and he always had to compete for a spot in a new school or city. He felt that helped a lot with his ability to adjust and be independent.
Last edited by Bighit15
Thanks for your post BBscout, very good as ever.

In my opinion eleminating RL, shortening SS will be good for some kids that in today sistem are signed just to fill spots for the real prospect to play. These kids that everybody in the organization know they don't have any future in baseball, are losing big time to prepare for life in other activities. It is sad to see these kids after they are released after 2 or 3 years believing they were prospects and dreaming with the Big Leagues.
Last edited by Racab
Racab

Yes, there are plenty of players who you can tell are there only to fill out a roster. But there are always some who you are sure are those types who somehow make it.

When Kelly Stinnett first played in the NY-P, many years ago, he was not much more than a bullpen catcher who got a few at-bats and was hitting something like .160. But he kept working. He's been kicking around the major leagues for how many years now?

The odds are unbelievably long. But I imagine more than 90 percent of the kids on D-I rosters today would tell you they'd give their (your phrase here) for the chance.
Racab,
I don't think 2 or 3 years as an organizational player is a handicap to success later in life any more than a few years in the service is. The players who get even the slimmest shot at playing pro ball have accomplished something and it is in most cases time well spent. Baseball comes to an end for everyone and it is always sad when it ends but well worth it until then.
Oldvaman and CADad:

I agree that there are exceptions, and perhaps 2 or 3 years are not too much lost time in the life, compared with the chance to be a professional player. But those 2 or 3 years, some times become 10, making relatively low salaries. I was refering to the big majority, no to the exceptions that of course are a very low porcentage.
Last edited by Racab
Racab,
You make some interesting and extremely pertinent observations, IMO. But I am a parent of one of those drafted as a "filler". This year he has played his way into the lineup, is now well over 400 at bats, and has led his "A" league team in hitting most of the season. He very much knows he is playing everyday to prove he could be a prospect not a "filler." Since the team tells you nothing, you don't know where you ever stand in their plans, if anywhere.
IMO, these have been 2 of the best years of his life. He is learning to deal with making decisions while seeking to excel in situations of high intensity and high competition. He is maturing enourmously as a person, becoming more outgoing, outspoken and confident. Minor league baseball is a very tough life and there are major lessons that can be learned. Whether mine is a "filler" or is a prospect hopefully has a few more years. He already has his college degree and these years have allowed him to realize baseball will be his life, even when he stops playing.
infieldad

I am also father of one of the "fillers". I don't know how that may change my opinion about them. I am glad that your son has his degree already, and may be that condition takes him out of my point. My point refer specially to kids signed out of HS. Usually when a player is signed from college, skip short season baseball, and like your son, has the opportunity to complete or almost complete an education. Obviously, your son didn't lost any time at all. Anyways, congratulation for your son success, and I hope he gets there where he has dreamed and for what he has worked so hard.
Last edited by Racab
Racab, the points you make and concerns you express for "filler" type players who sign out of high school are appropriate. There is a thread in the TX forum on a high school player(not a filler) who signed a contract, reported to the Pioneer League team, found the environment not to his expectations and quit. He is now trying to get DI eligibility back which, IMO, in very unlikely to be granted by the NCAA and is faced with the professional club taking the position he is their "property" since he signed a valid contract. Recently we talked with the parents of a player who was drafted out of high school, signed and is still a backup/filler in A ball after 5 years. Now he is getting married and the parents are concerned he will end up in the worst of situations with no degree, out of baseball, and not in a position to get his degree because of family committments. Having the college degree is not a guarantee of success when drafted but it is a benefit that eliminates/mitigates some issues.

Add Reply

Post
.
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×