LincolnDD

its been radio silence, nothing really out of MLB or MILB. In the past, everything was already decided by now. For example, even though the brewers were one of the 3 last teams to pick a triple a team last go around, they did announce San Antonio on September 18th two years ago. Yeah, in a "traditional" year, right now we'd be in that two week "affiliation shuffle" with a number of teams swapping. I always enjoyed following that, but sounds like we won't ever see that again. MLB controls whether or not September 30th is a soft or a hard deadline. If no deal by then, they can extend it if they want to keep negotiating, or they can just walk away and spin up their own development system (doubt they'll do that). But it sounds like we won't know what minor league teams will still be around (let alone their parent clubs) until the agreement is renewed. Like you said, radio silence. EDIT: An article in the Athletic today said ("per sources") that they won't have a deal before the deadline, and there still isn't a final cut list of teams. The article was primarily about an increased relationship between MLB and Independent Leagues, and some related speculation is MLB is working to make a landing spot in the Independent Leagues for some of the teams that will be cut (MLB would possibly pay the the league's entry fees, stuff like that). It also mentions that some MiLB teams believe MLB will use Independent League teams as leverage in the deal, i.e. if a current affiliated team states they don't like the deal, that MLB will come back and say they've got Independent teams that they can bring in to affiliated ball to replace the dissenting team if need be.

Thanks MT. Yeah, I really liked the effort from TalkingNats, but I think they had a few moves that didn't make as much sense to me. But I can speak to how challenging it can be to put the pieces together.

Ah, gotcha, thanks. The initial list seemed to be Beloit or QuadC, but I know the list has changed quite a bit. I'll have to try to reconfigure!

So: Carolina moves up to AA, Myrtle Beach drops to Low A. Cedar Rapids moves up to High A, Wisconsin drops to Low A: Brewers: Carolina (AA), Beloit (High A), Wisconsin (Low A). Twins: Change High A from Beloit to Cedar Rapids. Royals: Change Low A from Cedar Rapids to Peoria. Reds: Change Low A from Peoria to Ashville. Braves: Change Low A from Ashville to Myrtle Beach. I really wanted to get a AA league in the Midwest, using *some* of Beloit, West Michigan, Dayton, Lansing, South Bend, Kane County and Fort Wayne, and pulling in Akron, and maybe Erie and Altoona. Maybe I'll try again this weekend. I tried to work from Indianapolis (AAA), Fort Wayne/South Bend (AA), Beloit (High A) and Wisconsin (Low A) for the Brewers, and build out from there, but struggled some.

I gave it a go. Not perfect. Tried to keep it close to the original list of 42 cut, but "saved" Beloit, Erie (I've heard both are safe) and Jackson (moved to New Orleans) from the original cut list, and added Somerset, NJ. Cut Quad Cities, Tri-City, Hudson Valley and Down East to make room. I also tried to maintain as many current partners as possible. If you don't want to read the entire thing, my Brewers affiliates: Indianapolis (AAA), Myrtle Beach (AA), Wisconsin (High A) and Carolina (Low A). Because I couldn't get a AA team close to "home", I put one relatively close to Carolina. Biloxi becomes the Marlins' High A affiliate. AAA Pacific Coast League (10): Albuquerque (COL), El Paso (SDP), Las Vegas (ARI), Oklahoma City (LAD), Reno (OAK), Round Rock (TEX), Sacramento (SFG), Salt Lake City (LAA), Sugar Land (HOU), Tacoma (SEA). Mid America League (8): Columbus (CLE), Indianapolis (MIL), Iowa (CHC), Louisville (CIN), Nashville (STL), Omaha (KCR), St. Paul (MIN), Toledo (DET). International League (12): Buffalo (TOR), Charlotte (CWS), Durham (TBR), Gwinnett (ATL), Jacksonville (MIA), Lehigh Valley (PHI), Norfolk (BAL), Richmond (WSH), Rochester (PIT), Scranton/Wilkes-Barre (NYY), Syracuse (NYM), Worcester (BOS) AA Texas League (10): Amarillo (SDP), Arkansas (SEA), Corpus Christi (HOU), Frisco (TEX), Midland (OAK), NW Arkansas (KCR), San Antonio (ARI), Springfield (STL), Tulsa (LAD), Wichita (COL). South Atlantic League (10): Augusta (SFG), Bowling Green (CIN), Birmingham (CWS), Charleston (MIA), Columbia (MIN), Montgomery (TBR), Myrtle Beach (MIL), Rocket City (LAA), Rome (ATL), Tennessee (CHC). Eastern League (10): Aberdeen (BAL), Akron (CLE), Altoona (PIT), Erie (DET), Harrisburg (WSH), Hartford (NYM), New Hampshire (TOR), Portland (BOS), Reading (PHI), Trenton (NYY). High A California League (8): Fresno (COL), Inland Empire (LAA), Lake Elsinore (SDP), Modesto (SEA), Rancho Cucamonga (LAD), San Jose (SFG), Stockton (OAK), Visalia (ARI). Great Lakes League (6): Beloit (MIN), Dayton (CIN), Lansing (TOR), South Bend (CHC), West Michigan (DET), Wisconsin (MIL). Southern League (6): Biloxi (MIA), Greenville (BOS), Memphis (STL), Mississippi (ATL), New Orleans (HOU), Pensacola (TBR). Mid Atlantic League (10): Bowie (BAL), Brooklyn (NYM), Fredricksburg (WSH), Greensboro (TEX), Lakewood (PHI), Lynchburg (CLE), Somerset (NYY), West Virginia (PIT), Winston-Salem (CWS), Wilmington (KCR). Low A Northwest League (6): Boise (COL), Eugene (OAK), Everett (SEA), Hillsboro (ARI), Spokane (LAA), Vancouver (SFG). Midwest League (6): Cedar Rapids (KCR), Fort Wayne (SDP), Great Lakes (LAD), Kane County (CHC), Lake County (CLE), Peoria (CIN). Florida State League (10): Bradenton (PIT), Charlotte (TBR), Clearwater (PHI), Dunedin (TOR), Fort Myers (MIN), Jupiter (MIA), Lakeland (DET), Palm Beach (STL), St. Lucie (NYM), Tampa (NYY). Carolina League (8): Ashville (ATL), Carolina (MIL), Delmarva (BAL), Fayetteville (HOU), Hickory (TEX), Kannapolis (CWS), Pulaski (WSH), Salem (BOS).

I like the poster's efforts at TalkNats. Shows just how difficult it is to get the West Coast teams some close-ish affiliates. Some really odd fits as a result though (five AA teams in the state of Texas, but the Astros' affiliate would be in California?). I've tried to do this, too. It's not easy.

Yeah, ditto. And these teams usually have their schedules done by now and are planning all their events & promos for next season, so they're all anxious as well.

Im ok with Rumble Ponies. It's unique and you can work with it. For these "finalists" I can match up and do better Cheesballs - Cheese Curds Moo - Beloit Bovine Polka Pike - Beloit Strikers, Bass, Bobbers, so many more fishing options Sky Carp - Honkers, Gobblers Supper Clubbers - such a bad idea for a team name, maybe Food Trucks? Taco Trucks? Okay, sign me up for Food Trucks/Taco Trucks.

People always vocally hate these name changes, but the merchandise tends to sell like crazy. With these teams not making any money this year, you really can't blame them for the name rebrand. (also see the response from the owner, Quint Studer, to get an idea of why they're changing the name) As a former Binghamton resident, you get used to it. "Rumble Ponies" ain't too bad...

I kinda like 'Moo'. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Definitely fewer teams and levels, though we may see more leagues as a way to reduce travel (e.g. a third AAA league, three or four total Low-A leagues). Regarding Carolina, I have no idea if this changes anything, but one significant motivation for most teams purchasing affiliates in recent years was to avoid bad situations. The Brewers (and Boston, Houston and Texas) all bought Carolina League teams so they could avoid (or get out of) the California League. The Mets bought Syracuse because they were desperate to leave Vegas. The new system is supposed to avoid stuff like that happening going forward. Maybe the Brewers like being affiliate owners and will stick with it. But I'm not sure the relationship with Carolina is completely set in stone.

Yeah, that's why I used the White Sox as an example. Cleveland hit the geographic lottery by being on the fringes of both AA and Low A (and Short Season A), while also having a handful of AAA teams in their neighborhood, but they're the exception in the region. Under the current (soon to be old) system, they could make aggressive moves for Richmond at AA and one of the NC SAL teams (like Greensboro) to put Low A - AA in a fairly tight geographic window with Carolina, if they were willing to give up having a nearby Midwest affiliate. But that possibly is probably moot. Of course, if MLB really wants to regionalize org farm teams in close proximity to the parent and each other, they may as well just tear everything from AA on down and rebuild from scratch. There are plenty of teams stretching from Iowa (Cedar Rapids) to Ohio (Akron), from Bowling Green and Lexington on up, to spin up separate AA, High A and Low A leagues for teams in the Central division teams (probably six teams in each league, and MLB seems willing to do that).

This is an interesting line from a recent Baseball America article, and seems like a pretty significant challenge for the Brewers, whose current affiliates are pretty spread out. Doesn't seem possible to do this in the Midwest without significant shuffling of teams/levels. I guess the White Sox would be the model here, with three of the four top affiliates relatively close to each other in North Carolina, even if they're not particularly close to Illinois.

I've seen reports of a third AAA league, and also reports that they'd stick with two leagues, with most of the teams in the International League. Three leagues seems to make more sense if they really want to lessen travel. Trenton's park had some facility/field quality issues in recent years, though I've heard they've cleaned them up. But the park in Somerset is supposedly really nice.

Yeah, agree on all that. I've definitely been beating that "Jax to AAA" drum for a while. That one just makes too much sense. San Antonio, as of Feb/March, was atill looking at a spot for a new stadium. Sounds like they'll get there eventually, and at that point it's hard not to see one of the Texas teams moving in. But I'm not sure how that's going to work under the new system. No more waiting for the shuffle every two years, as agreements are supposed to be much longer going forward. Maybe one of the Texas teams bites the bullet and makes the preemptive move now, and puts up with the subpar stadium until the new one comes along. There was also some belief going back to when the new MiLB structure rumors came out the stadium issue would very likely lead to a demotion from AAA. Maybe that still happens, but if you're not bringing Sugar Land into affiliated ball, it probably makes more sense to keep that second AAA team in Texas. Or maybe one of the Texas teams wants Wichita? So much could happen. That's why I find this so interesting.

I listened to a Baseball America podcast yesterday, and JJ Cooper from BA said that if MLB and MiLB are able to come to some agreement, that there will be very few changes at the AAA and AA level (with significant change possible at High A and Low A). So I guess the chances of staying in Biloxi would be pretty solid. He also said part of MiLB's recent proposal to MLB was a whopping $35m entrance fee for any Independent team looking to join affiliated ball. MLB's initial proposal was $20m on a sliding scale (so joining AA cheaper than AAA, etc.). I think the last AAA team to sell was Syracuse, and that was for around $18m. I'm sure teams like Charlotte and Vegas are worth a lot more than Syracuse, but it's hard to imagine seeing that $35m worth it to most Indy league teams interested in joining affiliated ball, even if it meant a boost to a club's value. So maybe there are few or no changes at AAA, too, and the Brewers stick in San Antonio. I can't imagine the Orioles would willingly leave Norfolk for Rochester, though I'm sure the Nationals would be thrilled with that move and gladly move to Norfolk themselves.

Beloit would be interesting, and I would think that would be the preference of that club to affiliate with the Brewers. And with talk of promoting the Northwest League to Low-A, I could see the A's leaving Beloit for a West Coast affiliate. Baseball America's most recent article again brought up the idea of dropping the Florida State League down to Low-A (as a half-season league that would play the first half of the season). That would be twelve teams to replace at High-A. We played around with this before at the AA level, but maybe it's possible they use the reduction of High A teams in Florida as a way to carve out a new High-A league out of existing Midwest League teams. Wisconsin at Low-A and Beloit at High-A? I know the issue there is team ownership of the Mudcats, but how married are the Brewers to that team? I think the Brewers (and Astros and Red Sox and Rangers) all purchased teams in the Carolina League because they wanted to avoid ending up in the California League. With no more risk of affiliate shuffles every two years under the new plan, would the Brewers be willing to move on from Carolina? I know one benefit of Carolina is the better early season weather conditions, but one proposal in the new plan would be progressively shorter seasons as you drop down levels (so AAA would play a longer season than AA, and so forth), so that would be less of a factor.

Sounds like things aren't going too well in the negotiations, with the clock ticking (current agreement expires in less than two months). MLB could still walk away if they don't reach an agreement by the end of September. I hope they work things out (and I think they will), but it would be fascinating to things played out then. It would be a free-for-all.

Right. The Rochester in MN doesn't appear to have adequate facilities to host affiliated ball.

This is super interesting (at least to me): https://www.baseballamerica.com/stories/mlb-milb-expected-to-return-to-negotiating-table-soon/ Suggests High A and Low A leagues could swap levels (so Caroline League/Mudcats would be Low A and Midwest League/Rattlers would be High A). Also a suggestion that the Florida State League, after dropping to Low A, would split their season between the Florida sites and other cities, like those in the NY-Penn, which would save a lot of teams that would otherwise be contracted. That could also possibly lead to a similar scenario in Arizona at the complexes, with teams splitting time between Arizona and the Northwest League, as some of the teams in the NW League don't necessarily want the rumored promotion to full season.

Definitely a concern with Nashville. Same deal with Charlotte perhaps? And both cities have relatively new stadiums; I wonder how taxpayers would feel if they're asked to build another new park so soon after the AAA parks were opened.

I'd love to see Wichita, especially if there's a new AAA leave in the Midwest. Can't do better than the newest AAA stadium in the minors.

I think either Texas team would love to be in that market, but teams care more and more about player facilities than geography these days, especially the Astros (who are reportedly the "inspiration" for this whole process). And from what I understand, the stadium isn't in a great location; there's nothing around it (bars, restaurants, entertainment), so probably one of the reasons the attendance is meh. I know there were reports around the time of the relocation that, without a new stadium, the owners could move the team out again. Might bear watching.

This is all my interpretation based on what I've read, so I could be wrong! I've read up on this a lot, but I think this article sums it up pretty well: https://www.baseballamerica.com/stories/mlbs-proposed-120-milb-teams-for-2021-may-include-some-surprises/ It mentions MLB could just walk away from MiLB and create their own development league. In this case, they'd bring their choice of existing organizations with them, so no significant costs that are associated with spinning up new teams. It seems like more of a bargaining chip/threat (I think they made the same threat back in 1990), but something they could realistically do. It also mentions that MLB teams were asked to provide their preferred affiliate sites. That and the report that San Antonio could be demoted (Keith Law report back in April) is why I think San Antonio isn't a preference for the Brewers, or anyone else. I haven't been, but from what I understand the facilities there are subpar. The Rangers choosing Nashville over San Antonio back in the last shuffle was a red flag. I think the Rangers and Astros already have their preferred AA teams in Texas already, so I don't think the demotion would be done to give either Texas team a local AA affiliate, but to make room at AAA for another city by removing a team nobody really wants. San Antonio is a great market for sports, but if the Astros (Sugar Land?) and Rangers (Round Rock?) aren't options, it makes more sense to demote a team with no geographic partner so you can promote another regional team to one of the thirty AAA spots elsewhere (like St. Paul for the Twins, which has been rumored, or Jacksonville for the Marlins or Richmond for the Nationals, which I've speculated about).

It's not their choice. MLB will force these changes, and MLB has the power. MLB's argument is that they don't *need* Minor League Baseball as it currently exists. Once the contract expires in September, MLB can walk away if they want. Once things go back to normal (pre-pandemic), they can just keep all their minor leaguers from all levels at their Spring Training complexes the entire summer and just scrimmage against themselves or players from other MLB teams. Or, without that governing contract, they can just form a new minor league system and leave the current MiLB org out in the cold.