June 19th, 2020: Expanded Postseason, Undrafted Free Agents, Old Timers' Day, Mailbag

Some of you may know Jay Gordon, who handled the technical side of RAB for years. Jay's wife Betsy ran RAB's Facebook account and was our social media guru for a while. Their dog Rico is having some health problems and they've set up a Go Fund Me to help with the costs. Rico is part of the RAB family and any help is appreciated. Thanks.

***

Y'all ready for MLB and the MLBPA to reach a return to play agreement today? It's going to happen today. I know this because today is when it would be most inconvenient to me. I've had an all-day Last of Us 2 marathon planned for weeks, so of course I'll have to work and won't get to enjoy it. Life is pain. Let's get to today's thoughts.

1. 16-team postseason. As part of the ongoing return to play negotiations, MLB proposed a 16-team postseason field in 2020 and 2021. Their primary motivation is money, obviously. More postseason games equals more revenue -- the players typically do not receive any postseason television money (the player postseason pools are based on gate receipts), but they've reportedly requested a 50-50 split of additional television revenue generated by extra postseason games as part of their latest proposal -- and it's basically all profit for the owners. Of course MLB wants more postseason games. I have a few thoughts on a potential 16-team postseason field, which might not even happen (the MLBPA must sign off on an expanded postseason and it's hard to see them doing that should commissioner Rob Manfred unilaterally schedule the season).

It will become permanent

Make no mistake, an expanded postseason field in 2020 and 2021 will lead to a permanent change. Historically, MLB only expands the postseason, it has never taken games away, and it's not about to start now. The current Collective Bargaining Agreement expires in Dec. 2021 and after expanded postseasons in 2020 and 2021, MLB will make it permanent with the next CBA. This is not a bold prediction or a hot take. You can take this to the bank. It'll happen. If it doesn't, Kabak will eat his hat.

Expanded postseason in 2020? Cool

I am totally cool with an expanded postseason field this year. 14 teams, 16 teams, whatever. This season will be unlike any other season in history -- there's no reason to pretend it'll be anything close to normal -- so embrace the chaos and let's try to make it as fun as possible. Also, an expanded postseason field is only fair following a 50-ish game season. Baseball is a marathon sport, not a sprint, and 50-ish games isn't always enough for the contenders to separate themselves from the pretenders. Last year's Nationals are a perfect example. They were 19-31 and 8.5 games out of a postseason spot after 50 games. With such a short regular season, an expanded postseason weeds out some of the randomness and more deserving clubs will have a chance at a title. (More deserving as in there will be more teams that deserve to be in the postseason in the postseason.)

Expanded postseason in 2021 and beyond? Not cool

With a normal 162-game season, I am strongly against an expanded postseason. The long season reveals the pretenders and only the very best teams get a chance to play for the World Series. It should be difficult to qualify for the postseason! The postseason should be exclusive. A 16-team postseason field -- 16 teams! -- puts more than half the league in the tournament and cheapens the accomplishment, and lessens the importance of the regular season. I also believe it would hurt the product on the field. Make it easier to get into the postseason and teams (i.e. owners) will not try harder. They'll go full Rays and run tiny payrolls because it will be that much easier to qualify for the postseason and still make that extra revenue. Teams have already shown they're willing to be noncompetitive as long as they're profitable. Imagine what happens when it's even easier to get postseason money? No to a permanently expanded postseason for many reasons. Unfortunately, it'll happen at some point, if not now then down the line. It is inevitable. 

Not the same boring format, please

A 16-team postseason field sets MLB up for a nice 1 vs. 8, 2 vs. 7, 3 vs. 6, 4 vs. 5 bracket in each league. Easy peasy. It's also boring. This season is an opportunity to try new and creative things. If it works, great. MLB can stick with it. If not, then go back to what works. I propose a double-elimination three-day mini-tournament rather than a straight best-of-three series for the first round (MLB proposed a best-of-three Wild Card round under the 14-team proposal). Here's my plan:

DAY ONE
Game 1: No. 1 seed vs. No. 4 seed
Game 2: No. 2 seed vs. No. 3 seed

DAY TWO
Game 3: Game 1 winner vs. Game 2 winner (winner advances to LDS)
Game 4: Game 1 loser vs. Game 2 loser (loser eliminated)

DAY THREE
Game 5: Game 3 loser vs. Game 4 winner (winner advances to LDS)

Sixteen teams gives you four four-team double-elimination mini-tournaments with eight winners. From there you have a standard best-of-five LDS, best-of-seven LCS, and best-of-seven World Series. Drop the four teams into a hub city for three days -- they could play it in the No. 1 seed's park, but since they have to play five games in three days on one field, maybe a neutral site with a roof works better -- and let's play. The upside: it's something new and fun. Baseball could use a little of that. The downside: MLB gets only 20 games in the first round (five per mini-tournament). With a standard best-of-three Wild Card round, there could be as many as 24 games in the first round. But! But there could also be as few as 16 games in the first round with a best-of-three series. It is my understanding MLB prioritizes guaranteed games over the maximum possible number of games, so maybe this isn't much of a problem at all. Just trying to come up with something more interesting than a regular ol' best-of-three. A short little mini-tournament in which you play different teams rather than the same opponent is a fun little idea, at least to me.

2. New undrafted free agents. Earlier this week I looked at the four players the Yankees signed as undrafted free agents soon after the signing period opened Sunday. They've since signed two more undrafted free agents and they are significant additions. Significant relative to the typical undrafted free agent, I should say. Let's break them down.

OF Elijah Dunham, Indiana

Baseball America (subs. req'd) ranked Dunham as the 186th best prospect in the draft class -- that puts him in the 4th to 6th round range -- and he is the second highest ranked player to sign as an undrafted free agent this far (the Royals signed the No. 174 prospect). The Pirates selected Dunham in the 40th round as a draft-eligible sophomore last year, and in 15 games prior to the shutdown this spring he authored a .390/.493/.559 batting line with 11 walks and eight strikeouts. He's a career .312/.429/.496 hitter with the Hoosiers. Here's a snippet of Baseball America's scouting report (not much video out there):

Dunham has shown a strong knack for hitting in his collegiate career, with an innate ability to find the barrel with a short, compact swing. While there is some stiffness in Dunham’s operation that might need to be loosened up at the next level, there aren’t a ton of holes to speak of. He hits for average and power and has also shown solid ability to work the count and manage the strike zone ... Dunham isn’t the toolsiest player and is close to maxed out physically, but teams can have some confidence in his balanced offensive profile in a corner outfield spot. 

Dunham is an older college junior (he turned 22 last month) and he said that factored into his decision to sign. "The main reason for me -- being an older kid -- the numbers just didn’t really add up for 23-year-olds getting drafted. The probability of making the MLB is lower than a 22-year-old getting into a pro system. Their chance to make it to the MLB is a lot higher than waiting another year," he told Chad Lindskog. Dunham is a lefty hitter and he's limited to first base and left field, so he'll have to hit to advance through the system. It cost nothing to add him though, and who knows, maybe the Yankees have a plan to help Dunham unlock some power a la Dom Thompson-Williams two years ago. Hard to argue with the college performance.

RHP Connor Pellerin, Tulane

Kiley McDaniel says Pellerin was a "late cut" from his top 250 draft prospects while Baseball America (subs. req'd) ranked him as the 360th best prospect in the draft class. That makes Pellerin something like an 8th to 12th round talent. Not a high pick but not a roster filler type either. Here's a piece of Baseball America's scouting report:

Pellerin has the arsenal to be a power reliever with a 93-96 mph fastball and a high-spin rate slider. But until he learns how to command them, he is too inconsistent to fill a high-leverage role.

Pellerin had a 5.67 ERA with 94 strikeouts and 75 walks in 74.2 career innings with Tulane. Hit 14 batters and uncorked 15 wild pitches too. Last summer Pellerin struck out 24 and did not allow an earned run in 13 innings in the Cape Cod League. He also walked 13, so yeah, control is an issue. This isn't a command problem. Pellerin lacks basic strike-throwing ability. Here's some video. The delivery looks a little Edwin Diaz-y. Pellerin is a college junior and, in a normal draft, he likely signs for something close to the maximum $125,000 bonus after the 10th round. Instead, he gets $20,000 (presumably). What a dumb system. For the Yankees, it's a low cost gamble on a pitcher with high-end stuff. Every once in a while one of these zero control guys figures it out and has an impact at the MLB level (see: Betances, Dellin). If things click for Pellerin, great. If not, then on to the next lottery ticket arm.

3. Old Timers' Day. The Yankees aren't going to have Old Timers' Day this summer, right? Assuming we get a season, of course, and things do seem to be trending in that direction despite MLB's ongoing stall tactics. Old Timers' Day was originally scheduled for Aug. 9th this year, which is unusually late. The last five Old Timers' Day dates:

• 2015: June 20th
• 2016: June 12th
• 2017: June 25th
• 2018: June 17th
• 2019: June 23rd

You have to go back to 2010 for the last Old Timers' Day held outside June (it was July 17th that year). I wonder what the late date this year was all about? It's the 20th anniversary of the 2000 World Series team, so maybe Aug. 9th was the best day to get as many members of that team together as possible? Dunno. Anyway, the Yankees invited Phil Hughes to Old Timers' Day this year -- he's 33! -- and CC Sabathia said he also received an invite on his podcast not too long ago. Not sure about Hughes, but Sabathia said he's going to wait at least a year to attend Old Timers' Day (that was pre-pandemic). Whenever he shows up, it'll be a blast. Anyway, an Old Timers' Day in the middle of a pandemic is a straight up bad idea. Many old timers are, well, old, and thus more at risk of serious complications from COVID-19. It's an unnecessary risk. Also, the stadium might be empty, and where's the fun in that? Speaking from experience, Old Timers' Day is way more fun in person than on television -- it makes for a long day at the ballpark, but it's a good time -- and if Yankee Stadium is even 25% or 50% full (unlikely but not impossible), it won't be the same. Flying a bunch of old timers in from all across the country to parade them in front of an empty (or close to empty) ballpark seems like a waste of time and just a bad idea in general. It's sad, but skipping Old Timers' Day this year is the obvious move. I imagine it'll be tempting to hold it anyway given the late date, but I dunno, I don't see any way the reward is worth the risk at this point. It's a bummer, Old Timers' Day is a lot of fun, but this is an event best canceled this year. It'll make next year's Old Timers' Day that much more fun.

4. Remembering a random Yankee: Humberto Sanchez. Our next random Yankee was born in the Dominican Republic and grew up not far from Yankee Stadium in the South Bronx. We've already covered Juan Acevedo, Dean Anna, Erick Almonte, Oscar Azocar, Colter Bean, Billy Butler, Cesar Cabral, Brandon Claussen, Colin Curtis, Robert Eenhoorn, Kevin Elster, Sal Fasano, Greg Golson, Nick Green, Aaron Guiel, Eric Hinske, Rick Honeycutt, Brandon Knight, Matt Luke, Melky Mesa, Blake Parker, Chris Parmelee, Edwar Ramirez, Mark Reynolds, Zelous Wheeler, DeWayne Wise, and Kerry Wood. The Tigers selected Sanchez in the 31st round of the 2001 draft but it wasn't until 2006 that he started to put it together. That season Sanchez, then 23, pitched to a 2.63 ERA (2.71 FIP) with 25.9% strikeouts and 9.4% walks in 123 innings at Double-A and Triple-A. As a result, Baseball America (subs. req'd) ranked him as the 57th best prospect in the game the following spring, one spot behind eventual 10-year big leaguer John Danks. The Yankees were overloaded with veteran corner outfielders at the time -- they'd picked up Bobby Abreu at the 2006 deadline and still had Gary Sheffield and Hideki Matsui -- and thin on pitching, so they sent Sheffield to the Tigers for Sanchez and two other young arms (Anthony Claggett and Kevin Whelan) on Nov. 10th, 2006. "We're happy we're adding three quality arms to our system. Hopefully we can use it to our advantage and give us more depth and flexibility. Sanchez obviously has a lot of potential. He has a lot of ability and we're planning on him going to Spring Training and hopefully take a lot of steps forward. We look at him as a long-term asset that hopefully we can cash in as early as '07," Brian Cashman told the Associated Press after the trade. Sanchez never did appear in a Spring Training game in 2007. He came down with elbow trouble early in camp and had Tommy John surgery soon thereafter, and missed the entire 2007 season. It wasn't until June 2008 that he returned to game action. Sanchez made a dozen rookie ball rehab appearances, two High-A appearances, and one Double-A appearance that year. He finished with a 3.68 ERA and 19 strikeouts in 14.2 carefully monitored minor league innings. Despite the limited rehab work, the Yankees gave Sanchez a Sept. call-up in 2008. He was already on the 40-man roster and the Yankees still saw him as part of the future, and he'd just spent the previous 18 months rehabbing. The call-up was a reward for getting through the rehab. Sanchez tossed a 1-2-3 inning in his MLB debut on Sept. 18th, 2008. Here's video. (Sanchez's debut inning was also Francisco Cervelli's debut inning.) Seven days later Sanchez allowed a run on one hit and two walks in an inning. It was his final big league appearance. Injuries dogged Sanchez early in 2009 -- he's also a big dude (listed at 6-foot-6 and 270 lbs.) who had conditioning problems throughout his career -- and the Yankees released him on April 25th to clear 40-man roster space for Mark Melancon. Sanchez cleared waivers and returned to the Yankees on a minor league deal six days later. He managed a 3.53 ERA (4.03 FIP) in 35.2 minor league innings around the injuries that year. Sanchez became a minor league free agent at the end of 2009 and there was no minor league deal this time. He was gone for good. Sanchez spent 2010 with the La New Bears of the Chinese Professional Baseball League and 2011 and 2012 with the independent Camden Riversharks before calling it a career. He's still in baseball though. Sanchez has been the Red Sox's Dominican Summer League pitching coach since 2018. His Yankees career consisted of one run in two innings. (The three pitchers acquired in the Sheffield trade combined for 12 runs in 6.1 innings in pinstripes. Egads.)

5. Rapid fire thoughts. Aaron Hicks is in Tampa and taking full batting practice. I know this because he posted video of himself taking batting practice at George M. Steinbrenner Field. Hicks had been at home in Arizona earlier in the shutdown. He is eight months out from Tommy John surgery now and this is around when we would have expected him to return to the lineup based on the Didi Gregorius timetable last year. Hicks taking full batting practice now suggests he will be a full participant whenever Spring Training 2.0 begins, and on the Opening Day roster. Good news. Very good news ... Didn't I say MLB will try to put ads on uniforms to recoup revenue lost during the shutdown? Ken Davidoff and Joel Sherman report MLB proposed selling ads on jerseys as part of their latest return to play proposal. They've been after this for a while now. The Yankees (and Red Sox) had ads on their sleeves and batting helmets during the London Series ...

... and it was fine. Didn't change how I enjoyed the game. The NBA started putting ads on jerseys years ago and they're not intrusive at all. MLB will do something similar. I suspect purists will hate it, but it doesn't bother me. Just know ads on jerseys are inevitable. MLB won't leave that revenue on the table forever. The New Era logo on the side of caps and the Nike swoosh on the chest are just the beginning ... According to Jon Heyman, MLB's latest return to play proposal includes $33M in salary advance forgiveness. Players have to pay back their portion of the $170M advance they received earlier this year, but because the season will be so short, guys with a $925,000 or so full season salary received more through the advance than they will through prorated pay. They would have had to pay MLB to play, which is ridiculous. The $33M in forgiveness takes care of that. Imagine MLB sending Gleyber Torres a bill for salary overpayment? Score one for common sense ... Sign-stealing update: Brendan Kuty says Judge Jed Rakoff ruled MLB's letter to Brian Cashman will remain sealed until the appeal is heard, which was the expected outcome. "Although the MLB defendants had earlier argued that the letter was wholly in accord with the Commissioner’s public statement, and now argued that release of the letter would harm the Yankees’s reputation, these mutually inconsistent arguments, as well as other arguments offered by the MLB defendants and the Yankees, were unpersuasive," the judge wrote. My goodness, what a boring sentence. Anyway, that's that. The can has been kicked down the road.

Mailbag Questions of the Week

Alex asks: In ten or twenty years, what element of today's game will look wildly "old school" based on growing analytical development, better research, better stats, etc.? I presume improved defensive metrics and catching metrics are an easy answer, so let's move past that. Anything else stand out as the likely area of "Oh man, I can't believe managers were batting their best hitter 4th rather than 2nd"?

The acceptance of strikeouts. I think we're heading for a strikeout inflection point in the not too distant future. Pitchers throw harder than ever and breaking balls are so outrageously nasty -- we're at the point now where breaking balls are literally designed in a lab -- that I do not see the league average strikeout rate declining anytime soon. It'll keep going up.

Because of that I expect teams to shift their offensive strategy. There will always be a place for guys like Aaron Judge and Giancarlo Stanton because they have so much power, but Jackie Bradley Jr. (career 25.5% strikeouts)? Willy Adames (27.3%)? The okay but not great hitters who strike out a ton may be phased out, or at least de-emphasized.

We can better measure contact quality now (exit velocity, launch angle and direction, etc.), and teams can compensate for shoddy defense with positioning. Strikeouts are not good, we all know that, but teams will live with them as long as the player does other things well. I think that will soon change and more contact (both quantity and quality) will be prioritized simply because it will be harder to come by.

Beyond that, things like lineup construction and bullpen usage will continue to evolve. I wonder whether we'll see more Chad Greens rather than a parade of one-inning guys. It's a difficult job, but with starters throwing fewer innings, there will be a need for multi-inning relievers. More back-end starters could be pushed into that role early in their careers.

Brian asks: We’ve long heard implementing a salary cap/revenue share is the players line of demarcation. Before this dispute, I was completely unaware that owners reaped the full benefit of the playoff tv deal. Why are players opposed to a 50-50 revenue split? Isn’t the current system (in regular times) worse financially than the NBA which splits revenue inclusive of tv rights? This seems like a terrible deal for the players, am I missing something?

The other three major North American sports leagues all have a revenue split and a salary cap. NHL players get 50% of revenue, NBA players get 49-51% depending on projections, and NFL players get 48%. Not coincidentally, those leagues have all had a work stoppage within the last decade (the NHL had two, including losing the entire 2004-05 season to a lockout).

The MLBPA doesn't want a 50-50 revenue split because it's a hard salary cap. It sets an upper limit on what players can earn, which the MLBPA has staunchly opposed since the day the union was formed. It's true the luxury tax acts as a salary cap, but the solution isn't ceding more ground with an actual salary cap. It's fighting to take back ground on the luxury tax.

Also, the MLBPA does not trust MLB. At all. A revenue sharing split requires agreeing on what constitutes revenue, first and foremost, and that's not easy. In the NHL, hockey related revenue does not include money made through team investments. Under a similar plan, the team-owed developments around the ballparks in Atlanta and St. Louis would be excluded.

A fair revenue split is impossible unless every MLB team completely opens its books and that's not happening. The MLBPA is worried -- justifiably -- teams will move money around to make it appear they have less revenue than they really do, which is something they do already. MLB claims only $250M in operating income each year. Less than $10M per team? Come on.

The players should push for a share of postseason television money -- player postseason pools are based on gate revenue only -- but that's not going to be possible without major concessions, like a hard salary cap. There's a reason owners push for the 50-50 split and not players. They know it'll be more profitable for them and easier to game the system.

(Send your questions for Friday's mailbag to RABmailbag at gmail dot com.)