Jump to content

Is the draft broken?


Recommended Posts

I know in the NFL its not only about who you lose, but who you pickup. However, it seems to me that the supplemental round is completely crazy. Say a team like Boston, lose a couple of Type A free agents, yet they go out and sign a couple of even better Type A's.

Am I wrong, or do they still get the extra picks?

So, in the end they have more talent in the major league roster at the end of the day and more talent in their minor league system at the end of the day?

And teams like the Orioles, who basically have a near impossible task of getting a Type A, much less losing one, basically get the shaft. So, the weaker team remains the weaker team at both the Major league and Minor league level.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes.

MLB needs to (1) go to HARD slotting, (2) allow trading of draft picks, and (3) not give compensatory picks to top 1/2 payroll teams using 5-year average and not take away compensatory picks from bottom 1/2 payroll teams using 5-year average.

The bottom 1/2 payroll teams need to form a 'block' and start demanding this stuff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agree this is in some ways as big of problem as the big money clubs spending on FA if not bigger. It allows the richer clubs to get richer in the draft by having many more picks regardless of their record. Also really a bad move to surrender picks for FA unless you are getting a star player.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is broken, and for a couple different reasons. The supplemental picks reward the rich as much as the poor it is designed to protect, and I don't think it was well thought out when it happened. I guess the assumption was that the big teams weren't going to ever let players leave as a FA in order to get a supplemental pick, but it's gotten to where those teams can let guys walk, and sign younger guys to replace them so they upgrade AND gain an extra pick.

The hard cap would eliminate the posturing on the part of the players, either they take the deal or they don't. I think they should also have a closer signing date to the draft if there is a hard cap. They know from day 1 what they are going to get, having a couple weeks to either sign or not will allow players to start sooner or allow teams to reallocate that money to later picks/international signings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes.

MLB needs to (1) go to HARD slotting, (2) allow trading of draft picks, and (3) not give compensatory picks to top 1/2 payroll teams using 5-year average and not take away compensatory picks from bottom 1/2 payroll teams using 5-year average.

The bottom 1/2 payroll teams need to form a 'block' and start demanding this stuff.

I guess hard slotting would prevent big spenders from going out and drafting questionable signers to big deals in the late rounds.

Absolutely believe they should allow trading of draft picks

I don't know if it should be top payroll or top record, but I think I would go with top record

It is very frustrating to see the Red Sox get all of these extra picks, and for what? Spending more money at the major league level? Baffling to me.

I assume that the only way this could change is if there were a lockout? I assume all of this is in the collective bargaining agreement?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is broken, and for a couple different reasons. The supplemental picks reward the rich as much as the poor it is designed to protect, and I don't think it was well thought out when it happened. I guess the assumption was that the big teams weren't going to ever let players leave as a FA in order to get a supplemental pick, but it's gotten to where those teams can let guys walk, and sign younger guys to replace them so they upgrade AND gain an extra pick.

The hard cap would eliminate the posturing on the part of the players, either they take the deal or they don't. I think they should also have a closer signing date to the draft if there is a hard cap. They know from day 1 what they are going to get, having a couple weeks to either sign or not will allow players to start sooner or allow teams to reallocate that money to later picks/international signings.

well, that and not to mention that the guys that they either overpay for or get in their supplemental rounds end up getting traded for a superstar at the major league level. And then if/when that superstar walks, they get even more picks.

An ugly cycle

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, I hate to say it, but MLB needs to lock the players out once and for all and get this thing back to center. Right now, its swung too far to the players. As an O's fan with no hope, I'd go without baseball for two years to get a competitive playing field among teams and let the chips fall where they may.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well, that and not to mention that the guys that they either overpay for or get in their supplemental rounds end up getting traded for a superstar at the major league level. And then if/when that superstar walks, they get even more picks.

An ugly cycle

I think this part is actually an easy fix that won't take a lockout. Imposing a cap on the draft is a good compromise to a hard cap on the ML teams that I'm sure the owners would love. Capping these guys and fixing supplemental picks helps the players too, because like in the NFL at some point these rookies start taking money away from the vets. I know there have been serious talks about this stuff this year and I'm pretty sure it gets done for 2011 or 2012.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think this part is actually an easy fix that won't take a lockout. Imposing a cap on the draft is a good compromise to a hard cap on the ML teams that I'm sure the owners would love. Capping these guys and fixing supplemental picks helps the players too, because like in the NFL at some point these rookies start taking money away from the vets. I know there have been serious talks about this stuff this year and I'm pretty sure it gets done for 2011 or 2012.

The players union would vehemently oppose this I would imagine

If you have a hard cap, and lose a bunch of Type A's, wouldn't that just render the late round picks vitually unsignable? For example Toronto just had 3 or 4 supp picks. That is gonna cost them money to sign them that wouldn't then have to sign to guys later in the draft (presumably)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think this part is actually an easy fix that won't take a lockout. Imposing a cap on the draft is a good compromise to a hard cap on the ML teams that I'm sure the owners would love. Capping these guys and fixing supplemental picks helps the players too, because like in the NFL at some point these rookies start taking money away from the vets. I know there have been serious talks about this stuff this year and I'm pretty sure it gets done for 2011 or 2012.

Is this "internet talking" aka a ground swell? or is this coming from the players union or owners or commssioners office?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Get rid of the compensation rounds. I think that's the best way to do it.

If you lose a FA, you get nothing.

It would cause teams to lock up or trade their players instead of losing them to FA for draft picks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Get rid of the compensation rounds. I think that's the best way to do it.

If you lose a FA, you get nothing.

It would cause teams to lock up or trade their players instead of losing them to FA for draft picks.

how long has the Supplemental rounds been around for anyway?

I still dont think this would prevent guys from saying they want $20 mill tosign only to have the Red Sox draft them and give them a couple mill. In a way some guys can dictate where they go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The players union would vehemently oppose this I would imagine

If you have a hard cap, and lose a bunch of Type A's, wouldn't that just render the late round picks vitually unsignable? For example Toronto just had 3 or 4 supp picks. That is gonna cost them money to sign them that wouldn't then have to sign to guys later in the draft (presumably)

It actually eliminates those late signs, because a guy has a draft value when he's taken, he has no say in things, which is why guys fall. You won't see anyone taken in the 15th round and offered $1mil to sign, that value will be determined. You might see teams spend more in international places after the draft, but prospects will start shooting for the highest possible draft spot, regardless of team if they really want that money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is this "internet talking" aka a ground swell? or is this coming from the players union or owners or commssioners office?

From scouts and some agents. I've seen guys like Law comment on it here and there, but most of the talking has been done at the Winter Meetings last year and here and there behind the scenes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Get rid of the compensation rounds. I think that's the best way to do it.

If you lose a FA, you get nothing.

It would cause teams to lock up or trade their players instead of losing them to FA for draft picks.

Yeah but then what about those small market teams that can't afford to sign that franchise guy that comes up for FA? That is what it was designed for. Maybe a clause that says teams over a certain payroll amount do not get a supplemental pick?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...