Jump to content

Trading draft picks


paulcoates

Recommended Posts

I know it is against the rules, but I am curious to know what the real reason against it? All the other sports do it.

This is my opinion, but I wonder if it is because MLB has like 60 rounds and if they started trading picks the draft would take about 5 years to complete...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is my opinion, but I wonder if it is because MLB has like 60 rounds and if they started trading picks the draft would take about 5 years to complete...

Also, the picks are never really set in stone until after the free agent signings. Its hard to trade a first round draft pick if you end up loosing yours because you signed a type a or b free agent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, the picks are never really set in stone until after the free agent signings. Its hard to trade a first round draft pick if you end up loosing yours because you signed a type a or b free agent.

Yeah... it's a shame that the powers-that-be cannot devise a method to allow for it. Perhaps keeping the trades to a maximum of 2 or 3 per team, and capping the rounds in which deals can be made (1-3?) would suffice.

Trading would bring a new and exciting element to the draft and would cause an even higher following from the intrigue alone. Would the Yankees or Red Sox try to move up to #2 overall this year and grab Alvarez? Perhaps we send Huff to the Brewers for a 2nd rounder in '09?... etc.

I'm all for it, with restrictions certainly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm just guessing... I assume it's because the draft is portrayed as an equalizer between rich and poor teams (although there is a more cynical take on it)... and if you let teams sell them (for either players or money), then it would be just another tool that enables rich teams to load up, thereby defeating that purpose...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is my opinion, but I wonder if it is because MLB has like 60 rounds and if they started trading picks the draft would take about 5 years to complete...

I think the remedy would be to allow trading during the first 5 rounds.

Josh

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm just guessing... I assume it's because the draft is portrayed as an equalizer between rich and poor teams (although there is a more cynical take on it)... and if you let teams sell them (for either players or money), then it would be just another tool that enables rich teams to load up, thereby defeating that purpose...

On the flip side, it would allow poor teams to require cheaper and longer term talent. That is the other side of the argument.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, the picks are never really set in stone until after the free agent signings. Its hard to trade a first round draft pick if you end up loosing yours because you signed a type a or b free agent.

Then make the team liable during the following years draft. Doesn't football do it this way?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the flip side, it would allow poor teams to require cheaper and longer term talent. That is the other side of the argument.

Why? You mean because they could trade expensive top-tier picks for cheaper young guys who wouldn't cost them as much to sign? If that's it, then you could be right. Or cheap cheezy owners could just take the money and run. Either way, I don't think megabuck signings existed when they made the rules about this (but I'm not sure).

The whole real point of the draft to begin with was to make players cheap to sign by preventing competition between teams for young talent. It was mainly about MLB being one unified monopoly rather than individual teams who competed against each other. So, I'm kinda surprised that they even let this Round-1 megabuck stuff happen. Why would they let that happen?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm a strong proponent of the adage, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." Considering how the Royals and Rays have built their farms up the last few years, I'm perfectly happy with the current drafting process.

The only thing that sucks for us is that the guy's who drafted for us in the past (before Jordan) were dumb and/or handicapped by the FO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm just guessing... I assume it's because the draft is portrayed as an equalizer between rich and poor teams (although there is a more cynical take on it)... and if you let teams sell them (for either players or money), then it would be just another tool that enables rich teams to load up, thereby defeating that purpose...

This is correct. It would allow the Yankees, for example, to trade their pick, typically near the bottom of the 1st round, for a historical cheap and bad team like Pittsburgh's or Kansas City's pick at the top of the round, say a #2 or #3. This would allow cheap ownership to move down and save money, and the rich teams like either New York, LA, or Chicago team or Boston to totally dominate the draft. It's enough that they can afford to sign any free agent they want, but trading draft picks would also allow them to cherry pick the best amateurs, as well. As it is, the Yanks have the highest paid shortstop (Jeter), third baseman (Rodriguez), right fielder (Abreu), catcher (Posada), left handed starter (Pettite) and reliever (Rivera) in the American League (several of them for all of the majors). Baseball shouldn't also let them have the best prospects as well. The draft is meant to spread talent throughout the league, not concentrate it.

Note: Brian Roberts is the highest paid second baseman in the AL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is correct. It would allow the Yankees, for example, to trade their pick, typically near the bottom of the 1st round, for a historical cheap and bad team like Pittsburgh's or Kansas City's pick at the top of the round, say a #2 or #3. This would allow cheap ownership to move down and save money, and the rich teams like either New York, LA, or Chicago team or Boston to totally dominate the draft. It's enough that they can afford to sign any free agent they want, but trading draft picks would also allow them to cherry pick the best amateurs, as well. As it is, the Yanks have the highest paid shortstop (Jeter), third baseman (Rodriguez), right fielder (Abreu), catcher (Posada), left handed starter (Pettite) and reliever (Rivera) in the American League (several of them for all of the majors). Baseball shouldn't also let them have the best prospects as well. The draft is meant to spread talent throughout the league, not concentrate it.

Note: Brian Roberts is the highest paid second baseman in the AL.

This makes sense, but it doesn't seem to work the way it is designed. When a drafted player can "hold out" for $$$ and re-enter the draft the next season, to me, that ruins the system. They need to make a player ineligible for the draft for like 2-3 years if they hold out and are not signed. The bad teams need to have some power over the players in the draft, otherwise what's the point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This makes sense, but it doesn't seem to work the way it is designed. When a drafted player can "hold out" for $$$ and re-enter the draft the next season, to me, that ruins the system. They need to make a player ineligible for the draft for like 2-3 years if they hold out and are not signed. The bad teams need to have some power over the players in the draft, otherwise what's the point.

Exactly. Right now small market teams run a risk when drafting the best players available in the first round, because they may night be able to sign them. (look how close we came to not signing Weiters) So sometimes the Royals, Pirates and Rays draft lesser talent guys just because they are easier to sign, allowing the better talent to fall to Boston, and New York.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is correct. It would allow the Yankees, for example, to trade their pick, typically near the bottom of the 1st round, for a historical cheap and bad team like Pittsburgh's or Kansas City's pick at the top of the round, say a #2 or #3. This would allow cheap ownership to move down and save money, and the rich teams like either New York, LA, or Chicago team or Boston to totally dominate the draft. It's enough that they can afford to sign any free agent they want, but trading draft picks would also allow them to cherry pick the best amateurs, as well. As it is, the Yanks have the highest paid shortstop (Jeter), third baseman (Rodriguez), right fielder (Abreu), catcher (Posada), left handed starter (Pettite) and reliever (Rivera) in the American League (several of them for all of the majors). Baseball shouldn't also let them have the best prospects as well. The draft is meant to spread talent throughout the league, not concentrate it.

Note: Brian Roberts is the highest paid second baseman in the AL.

I understand your point, however of the six players you listed, four are products of the Yankees' farm system, and the other two were acquired by trading away products of the Yankees' farm system. There's no basis for dinging the Yankees if the strength of their minor league system allows them to dominate. Every team seeks to achieve this.

What needs to be counterbalanced is the Yankees' ability to buy up guys like Giambi and Damon and Matsui and Mussina, etc.

As has been mentioned, baseball has attempted to position the draft as the great equalizer, by allowing small-market teams equal or greater access to the amateur talent that, if carefully selected and properly developed, can become the backbone for sustained excellence.

Of course right now this entire notion is being undermined by the rampant disregard for the slot recommendations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know it is against the rules, but I am curious to know what the real reason against it? All the other sports do it.

Just a thought here, but perhaps a salary cap in the NBA and NFL is the reason they allow trading draft picks... it provides the ultimate equalizer in how teams build their rosters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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



  • Posts

    • I have to think something is going on behind the scenes. They look like they have just quit. Hyperbole, I know, but I wonder if there is anxiety over new ownership wanting their own people in the FO? Before you all tear me apart, IT’S JUST AN OBSERVATION!
    • Some don’t like this quote from Hyde but this kind of goes back to what the hitting coaches are saying. The coaches (if we are to believe them) are preparing these guys but once they get in the box, things are changing. This is all mental with these guys. It is time for them to relax and start having fun again. They need a players only team meeting and get themselves loosened up.
    • I doubt it is normal, though I’m sure that well more than half the pitchers who pitch for any particular team were not drafted by that team.   Teams use so many pitchers these days, and there are so many pitchers who cycle around the league off the waiver wire.  
    • Couple of things about what Mike said: 1).   Grayson will not start during the regular season.    Time has run out to build him up.   That means Burnes, Eflin. Suarez, Kremer and Povich the rest of the way if they can stay healthy.   Maybe Grayson as an opener or a reliever in the playoffs. Coulombe  as early as Friday.  I am guess either Smith or Kimbrel go. Westy and  Urias  on rehab  in the next few days.   Getting these guys back could be a  big mental boost for the team.  What level of performance they will be able to produce coming off a layoff is another things.      I would think Mayo and Holliday are optioned. Mountcastle is swinging but his wrist is still sore.   Where that goes in anyones guess.   If he comes back Jimenez will not be needed. 2).  When Mike says this has been a winning team for that last two years and he believes they can get back to that,  to me he is not just talking about the team.     He is talking about himself.    This is the first time Mike has experienced things not going the way he planned to this degree.    Quite frankly his looks a little shell shocked.    The pitching having troubles with injuries is reality to him.  Pitchers get hurt.    But his offense going from 5 runs per game in the first half  to almost zero is shocking to him.   He did not see that coming.  Adley, and O'Hearn were supposed to step up when needed.   Instead they took a step back.  None of Holliday, Mayo, or Kjerstad being able to help in the 2nd half was not the way this was planned.    Here is hoping the Westy, Urias and Kjerstad can help real soon.  
    • This board is smart enough to realize that the grass isn't always greener. The only way I see Hyde on the hot seat is if we miss the playoffs completely, which still feels very unlikely. Even then, I doubt he'd be fired during the offseason, but maybe. But then what? I don't think you give Buck Britton a shot at this roster. He's doing his thing and doing it well at AAA helping to develop guys. Could bring back Buck Showalter or Joe Girrardi, those sound like fun names. Or better yet, I bet everyone here with a torch and a pitchfork has their own little crystal ball with a short list of candidates ready to catch lightning in a bottle. 
    • The 4-run deficit was surmountable if we had more than one player who can hit the damn ball.   Kimbrel giving up six runs in the 9th may turn out to be a blessing.    
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...