Click here to view the transcript of today’s chat with MLBTR’s Anthony Franco.
Headlines
Navigation
MLBTR INFO
Connect
MLB Trade Rumors is not affiliated with Major League Baseball, MLB or MLB.com
hide arrows
scroll to topBy Anthony Franco | at
Click here to view the transcript of today’s chat with MLBTR’s Anthony Franco.
MLB Trade Rumors is not affiliated with Major League Baseball, MLB or MLB.com
hide arrows scroll to top
When asking about a return for a top hitter or pitcher; look at recent trade for Lindor and Betts. Teams didn’t give up their hot prospects!. Just saying.
Yep, waaaay too many repetitive questions in these chats about trade return speculation.
MLBTR even provides the free Transaction Tracker from the Tools menu. Just choose “trade” and select dates around previous deadlines and look at what notable players changed teams. Then look at what the returns were. Easy peasy.
In regards of those two trades you mentioned. You have to also take into consideration, that both the Mets and Dodgers also took on bad contracts, that the other teams were looking to dump.
@angelsfan4life Yep, bad contracts. Hey, speaking of bad contracts, you survived the Pulois years. Congratulations! With that in your rearview mirror, where r u with the Ohtani situation?
They also traded Lindor and Betts when they had just a single year of control left. They eventually extended both to long-term deals, but the Indians and Red Sox traded them both knowing their value was limited due to that. The last trade I can think of where multiple high-end prospects were dealt was the Chris Sale trade. Yoan Moncada was considered a top 3 prospect at the time and Michael Kopech was at least in the top 15.
These chats are getting weaker and weaker every time. Almost seems like the guy running it has little or no interest in making it interesting.
Someone asked about the A’s/Rays stadium situations which was brought up in the Laureano thread. The question was will we still be hearing about this 5 years from now and Anthony believes they will be resolved by then. If those situations do in fact resolve and lets say they stay in Oakland/Tampa Bay respectively then expansion will almost certainly be on the horizon after.
Lets say Las Vegas is awarded a franchise (consensus pick if nothing else) and Nashville gets the other team (Nashville Baseball project actually works). We would have a team in each league rounding out the leagues to 4, 4 team divisions. I would put Las Vegas in the AL and Nashville in the NL. I would align the divisions as:
AL East
Baltimore
Boston
New York
Toronto
Central
Chicago
Cleveland
Detroit
Minnesota
South
Houston
Kansas City
Tampa Bay
Texas
West
Las Vegas
Los Angeles
Oakland
Seattle
NL East
New York
Philadelphia
Pittsburgh
Washington
Central
Chicago
Cincinnati
Milwaukee
St.Louis
South
Arizona
Atlanta
Miami
Nashville
West
Colorado
Los Angeles
San Diego
San Francisco
Obviously a little liberty had to be taken putting KC/Az in southern divisions.
Two playoff teams from each division. 2nd place teams play a one game playoff. Top two best records for division winners get first round bi’s while the 3rd and 4th best records play a best of 5 against the remaining “wild card” teams. Thoughts? Suggestions?
AZ in the same division with Miami, Atlanta, and Nashville is tough for travel. The distance, is almost 2,400 miles to Miami, over 1,800 miles to Atlanta, and over 1,600 miles to Nashville, That’s a lot of travel miles for the D’backs. Even worse is the 3 hour time difference to all 3. That’s a killer.
I know there will be fewer inter-division games starting next season. But I’m sure AZ would strongly object to that alignment, and justifiably so.
True. And as i said it was a bit of a liberty. But realistically the only other team that could be placed there is the Cardinals and i doubt MLB would seperate the Cubs and Cardinals from being in the same division.
But it is fun to speculate
AZ would stay West…Colorado would move to the Central and a closer Central team Pitt would move East… that would make more sense
Rsox;
Speculation is fun, but…..
The Southern Divisions you put out will not work due to some of those teams being in different time zones. One hour difference is bad, but can be worked around a bit. But a 2-3 hour time difference messes up TV viewing – which MLB found out when they tried to put the Cubs in a division in which their fans would not be able to watch away games and still get enough sleep to go to work the next day (Cubs sued MLB and won). This will be especially unpopular with local fans when unlike the NBA or NFL where teams play one game and move on, MLB teams play 2-4 game series against their division opponents.
Cutting games down from 19 apiece for every team in your division to 13 and adding games against every other team is not going to be popular with local fans when they realize that they can’t watch their team play live.
My guess is that the traditional AL /NL configuration will be thrown out, which also presents problems. Then there’s the fact that MLB teams are already so watered down due to past expansion that a guy with a minor injury playing at 75% is put on a IL list and a healthy guy is brought up from the minors because he’ll be a more productive player for a few games. Fans are already lost with the 3-5 times a week roster changes, which MLB is trying to limit. I’ve read professional scouts state that somewhere between 30-40% of players that play at some point in the majors each year have no business being at that level. The dilution of skilled players has manifested itself this year as you see such a disparity in the pennant races – there may be 6-7 teams with outrageous winning percentages, while the majority of teams are around .500 at best, but their fans take solace in the fact that they can get a expanded wild card playoff spot. In short, MLB is already a watered down product with fans unable to keep track of who’s on their team each day.