Orioles 11th in total Draft pool Allotment

[Stotle]

I figure that makes up for the difference in revenues inherent in having a large market to tap into. If competitive balance is really a goal then why allow large market teams to spend $100M+ on salaries that small markets can't afford and $millions more on infrastructure and facilities and marketing the like, while the bone they throw to teams like the Royals and Orioles is that they can now draft up to $5M worth of amateur players more than the Yanks? Team A gets to spend three or four times as much on payroll, but Team B gets to actually sign their slightly higher draft picks, so it's all even!

And we haven't even talked about the international cap, which mostly takes money out of the signing equation. Which will probably drive more players to successful organizations, which are predominately the rich teams. Fortunately that won't effect the Orioles since they didn't sign international players anyway.

I understand. The CBA didn't fix and address all disparity so the draft changes are bad or irrelevant. Also, there are a number of teams that have done well on the international front without shelling out tons of money. I think pure spend is less of a factor than you believe it to be -- well behind comfort with an organization, relationships built between trainers/buscons and scouts, etc.

It's like you are just flying from your hip on a lot of this. Very un-Drungo...

It'll be a number of years before the full effects are determined, and I'm sure there will be more than a few unintended side effects.

This might be the case, but you haven't shown any analysis to get you from A to here. Just your gut.

[Fan4Life]

This might be the case, but you haven't shown any analysis to get you from A to here. Just your gut.

Are the $$$'s allotted to each round hard, or suggested? In that you can exceed it but you'll be penalized by some means. The same question for the total expenditure. Can rich teams ignore it and just pay the fine?

[Stotle]

Are the $$$'s allotted to each round hard, or suggested? In that you can exceed it but you'll be penalized by some means. The same question for the total expenditure. Can rich teams ignore it and just pay the fine?

I believe the breakdown is:

• Over 5% of alottment = 75% on overage
• Over 6-10% of alottment = 75% tax on overage and loss of 1st Rd pick next year
• Over 11-15% of alottment = 100% tax on overage and loss of 1st and 2nd Rd pick next year
• Over 15% of alottment = 100% tax on overage and loss of next two 1st Rd picks

If that's not exactly it, it's close.

[Can_of_corn]

I believe the breakdown is:

• Over 5% of alottment = 75% on overage
• Over 6-10% of alottment = 75% tax on overage and loss of 1st Rd pick next year
• Over 11-15% of alottment = 100% tax on overage and loss of 1st and 2nd Rd pick next year
• Over 15% of alottment = 100% tax on overage and loss of next two 1st Rd picks

If that's not exactly it, it's close.

With that breakdown I expect a lot of teams to flirt with the 5% over. The extra cost should run under half a million. I don't see teams being willing to give up draft picks however.

[Stotle]

With that breakdown I expect a lot of teams to flirt with the 5% over. The extra cost should run under half a million. I don't see teams being willing to give up draft picks however.

Agreed. The 5% cushion will allow for essentially one or two traditional mid-tier overslots.

[Oriolidae85]

I figure that makes up for the difference in revenues inherent in having a large market to tap into. If competitive balance is really a goal then why allow large market teams to spend $100M+ on salaries that small markets can't afford and $millions more on infrastructure and facilities and marketing the like, while the bone they throw to teams like the Royals and Orioles is that they can now draft up to $5M worth of amateur players more than the Yanks? Team A gets to spend three or four times as much on payroll, but Team B gets to actually sign their slightly higher draft picks, so it's all even!

And we haven't even talked about the international cap, which mostly takes money out of the signing equation. Which will probably drive more players to successful organizations, which are predominately the rich teams. Fortunately that won't effect the Orioles since they didn't sign international players anyway.



It'll be a number of years before the full effects are determined, and I'm sure there will be more than a few unintended side effects.

That could be true for certain top players, but the counter argument could suggest it balances out. If you want to play MLB, which team gives you the greater chance of your dream coming true? The Orioles or the Yankees?

What are the chances you get traded by the Yankees (Montero) or Red Sox (Hanley Ramirez) before playing with the big league club that signed your first contract? I agree with you for the most part, but the O's could forgo other signings and max out on one or two prospects. IIRC, the new CBA allows teams to trade portions of their international draft spending to other teams. The O's could take advantage of this...and I hope they do with their new focus in the IM.

[Oriolidae85]

One item in the new CBA that intrigues me is how the FA compensation shrinks the supplemental round (potentially). In 2012, the O's 2nd round pick really is a 3rd rounder.... when factoring in the supplemental picks.

Was looking into this a bit and found the Orioles actually gamed the system for the 1999 draft (much like the Jays, Rays and Sox did in 2010 off season). Check out their 1999 sup picks and first round! Hope the Jays/Rays/Sox are partying like its 1999 (with their 2011 draft), cause the O's really only landed one impact team player with their 7 1st round picks.

Brian Roberts is all the O's got back in that round (for the loss of Alomar, Davis, Palmeiro and Mills).