Jordan expects to spend more than 2009

[ChaosLex]

We SHOULD be spending a lot of money when the international market opens in July.

I'm not going to hold my breath though.

[hoosiers]

If Machado approaches $6M to sign, we'll spend about $3.5M more on just the first round pick. A second rounder will cost around $750k give or take. So, if we do everything the same AFTER the second round that we did last year, we'll be spending over $2.5M more than last year.

Not sure of JJ's definition of "a lot", but $2.5M is as good an estimate as any - which means we'll be going over slot by a little for several guys in the top 10, and should have $ for 2 $1M guys of the Ohlman/Coffey variety. Not bad.

If AM is in a good mood, perhaps we pick up a third such player to compensate for the lost second rounder - in which case we'd be about $3.5M ahead of last year.

[jerios55]

The problem with spending that much is two-fold.

1-I think MLB would try and stop a team from spending that much.

2-I think it would open the floodgates and you would see a half dozen teams spending in that realm next draft. I think there is a bit of a gentleman's agreement to not go to far with draftee spending.

The same MLB that let's the Yankees sign CC, Burnett and Tex in the same offseason when it already had the highest payroll?

Spend the money and see what they say. Make them change the rule...we all know it needs to be.

[Sports Guy]

Has any team ever done this? (Other than the Nats who spent $15 mm on one player last year.)

I'm not arguing that we shoudn't do this, I'm just curious how many teams ever have spent $15 mm on a draft even once. Is there a database that shows draft spending, by team and by year?

Pretty sure no one has...but the Orioles should be.

We should be spending at least 15-20 million a year in signings, both domestically and internationally.

[Can_of_corn]

The same MLB that let's the Yankees sign CC, Burnett and Tex in the same offseason when it already had the highest payroll?

Spend the money and see what they say. Make them change the rule...we all know it needs to be.

Apples and oranges. As I have stated before in this thread the players have a union to protect them, the draftees do not. MLB has been leaning on teams for years to keep bonuses down.

[Sports Guy]

Apples and oranges. As I have stated before in this thread the players have a union to protect them, the draftees do not. MLB has been leaning on teams for years to keep bonuses down.

Yep...and we should tell them to go pound sand.

Tell MLB to fix the money disparity in the AL East.

[hoosiers]

Apples and oranges. As I have stated before in this thread the players have a union to protect them, the draftees do not. MLB has been leaning on teams for years to keep bonuses down.

If MLB wants to put rules in place to limit bonuses that everyone followed, great.

Until then, talk is cheap as the NYY and BoSox and others have shown an ability to pay millions of dollars above slot recommendations. The Os need to keep up or lead this "arms race" absent real teeth behind MLB's recommendations.

[Can_of_corn]

For the record I am strongly in favor of the O's spending big on the draft, in case folks haven't seen my posts in other threads. In fact I think it is so obviously the move to make that I am trying to rationalize why no team does so.

[DrungoHazewood]

I don't know the ins and outs of the CBA and what is and is not collusion, but the fact that MLB is even allowed to publicize openly what they consider to be "slot" for a certain pick suggests that MLB has a certain amount of leeway here.

Draftees aren't part of the MLBPA. Minor leaguers aren't part of the MLBPA. The MLBPA doesn't pay a heck of a lot of attention to people who are just prospective union members. They certainly don't give up much of anything to benefit non-union members. I don't think collusion has anything to do with the draft, and that the player's association wouldn't even try to prove it unless Bud mandated and enforced tiny, slotted bonuses without the players' consent.

Pretty sure no one has...but the Orioles should be.

We should be spending at least 15-20 million a year in signings, both domestically and internationally.

Ok, I'll agree that they should be spending much more on international signings. But $20M on the draft is probably impossible unless you have the #1 overall and it's someone demanding upwards of $10M.

Let's say a normal team roughly in the O's situation does this:

#5 overall: $5M.

2nd round: $1.5M

3rd: $900k

4th: $600k

5th: $400k

6th: $250k

7th-20th: total of $1.5M

Unless I'm way off on my guesstimates, that would mean you'd have to spend $10M on over-slot guys, or more than most teams spend on their entire drafts. Most over-slots are 2nd or 3rd round talent that slips to the 10th or 15th. They might get $500k or 800k or something. There's no way on earth you sign 12 or 15 of those in one draft.