Draft Setup

[paul253]

Is MLB ever going to fix the current draft system??? It is absolutly absurd. According to Baseball America, the World Champion Boston Red Sox get 5 picks (3 first rounders and 2 supplamental picks) before the Brewers get their second pick. Thats ridiculous. Drafting is such a fine art and many many many first rounders go nowhere. Boston, however, and Oakland in the past, has 5 shots before round 2 even begins to get it right, while we have 1. Also, in every other sport you can trade draft picks, but not baseball. can someone explain that? I say do away with all supplamental picks. Keep the system with type a free agents where the team that loses the player get the others team first rounder, but forget the type b and c and all that. Are the defending AL central Champion Twins so hurt by the loss of Henry Blanco that the only fair thing is to give them an extra pick at the end of round 2??? give me a break.

[squarepusher]

It's actually built to help a team like the Brewers that can't afford to re-sign their free agents. Yeah, this year is screwy because the Red Sox lost some guys, and the Brewers decided to be buyers.

 

I'm all for allowing the trading of draft picks, as I think it would bring some more excitement to the draft, but I think the FA compensation system is fair, despite it being rough on the Crew this year.

[paul253]

its built to help them who cant afford to resign free agents....but the trade deadline more or less nullifies that. Teams like Milwaukee either lose free agents , offering them arbitration and hoping they dont accept to get a draft pick, or trade them to a team like Boston, who then uses them for 2 months, loses them, and in turn they still get all comp picks. When is the last time teams like Milwaukee, Pittsburgh, Kansas City, or Tampa Bay has ever gotten a compensation pick? It doesnt happen...rather teams like Boston, NY and Oakland get them all. The Yankees actually improved their draft position 12 picks by losing Lieber and gaining Pavano.

[squarepusher]

Oakland's an anomally, since their whole organization is built off losing players via FA and using the compensation system to continuously retool.

 

[ When is the last time teams like Milwaukee, Pittsburgh, Kansas City, or Tampa Bay has ever gotten a compensation pick? ]

 

The Royals had 3 compensation picks last year. But you're right, Milwaukee, Pittsburgh, and TB are light on compensation picks. This isn't the "system's" fault though, it's the GM's decision on trading players for prospects instead of allowing them to walk.

[colbyjack]

As I pointed out in the draft compensation thread, I agree that the free agent draft compensation system is flawed. Teams can sign 4 high profile free agents and lose two and still double the amount of picks they would have had. I really feel that MLB needs to constitute some kind of program that factors in free agents lost vs. free agents signed, at least when it comes to supplemental picks.

 

Basically, if the Red Sox sign Renteria, Wells & Clement, yet they lose Martinez, Cabrera & Lowe, I personally think they shouldn't be awarded any sandwich picks.

 

Plus, teams don't even offer a lot of free agents arbitration anymore in fear that one, they'll accept it, and two, they know other teams won't sign these free agents for what they're looking for so teams can't even get comp picks for them.

 

It's one thing for a team like the A's, Twins or Astros to get comp picks after losing players without really signing anyone else.

 

In the past, I have proposed that supplemental picks, should they continue to be awarded, should be based on whether or not the team finishes within the best or worst 15 teams. Looking at the comp list, there could be as many as 21 sandwich picks between the first and second rounds. That's a lot of picks for teams that pick early in the 2nd round have to wait for until they have their next chance to draft a talented amateur free agent. I would propose any team being awarded a comp pick that finished with one of the best 15 records the year before receives those comp picks after the 2nd round instead of the first. Teams that are among the worst 15 teams still receive their sandwich picks after round 1.

 

I also have a problem with the elias rankings. How Damian Miller and Jose Hernandez can be ranked as type A free agents is beyond me. Wasn't Royce Clayton a type B FA this offseason? Every year you look at some of the rankings and you scratch your head. Of course, Clayton wasn't offered arby, so compensation wasn't even an issue, but again, that whole system needs to be fixed IMO.

 

I wouldn't even get into trading picks. I think it's a lot more complicated in baseball. Too many teams just don't care as much about the draft as they do in other sports. I know some people have argued in the past that that is their problem, but I wouldn't allow teams to trade draft picks until their is some kind of bonus structure implemented with draft pick slots, and I don't see that happening anytime soon. If teams aren't happy about the money needed to sign a projected player in their slot, they reach for a more signable player, and in my mind, that adds to the dynamics.

 

The biggest problem with the draft is not enough people care about it. During the negotiations for the most recent CBA there were supposed to be a few radical changes to the draft structure. Those changes never happened, and in fact the commitee that was appointed to address such problem rarely met, and took over a year to determine a few other minor rule changes, such as teams drafting in reverse order of standings only and not alternating between leagues.

 

And Brian's right, Oakland is one team that uses the draft/free agent compensation process perfectly. You don't see them going out & signing a bunch of FAs after they lost 2-3 of their own. The smaller teams like the D-Rays, Royals, Brewers etc., again as noted, would much rather trade their free agents to be for prospects that are a little more proven. If the Brewers wouldn't have been so determined to get close to big-league prospects for Richie Sexson, we may be the ones looking at having the first pick in the sandwich round and the 3rd pick in the 2nd round. What would you rather have, Spivey, Overbay, Capuano & de la Rosa, or two high picks in next June's draft? It's a no-brainer to me, I'd rather have the players, as exciting as extra draft picks are.

[CarolinaTommy]

I hypothesize, but cannot yet substantiate on, that a early round draft picks are overvalued in regard to how much money is spent on them.

 

First round draft picks in baseball simply do not have very good returns, and putting 2 million into a guy that has a 50/50 shot at merely making the major league level seems a bit "iffy" to me.

 

It is strange how the player compensation thing works out, too. I'd go on about how I don't like it; how teams that were unable to sign free agents (likely b/c they did not have the money) are perhaps PENALIZED by being forced to select (not necessarily sign) a draft prospect that costs more money than he is worth!

 

I think there are a lot of issues with the amateur draft as it is now. It might not be a horrible idea to abolish the thing and sign amateur players as free agents, but capping how much money teams can spend on them per year.

[paul253]

I think the easiest thing to do is make it like all other sports and just forget the stupid compensation picks. I know NFL uses them a little, but they are like 5th and 6th rounders, nothing too high profile. If they did this, the Brewers 2nd pick would be about 40 spots higher (since they have no 2nd round pick). I know MLB drafting is kinda of like a best guess, but 40 additional players is a lot to choose from. Another thing that would help a ton is a minimum amount draftees can sign for, like in the NBA, but until MLB even thinks about considering doing something about their financial structure, that'll never happen. Until then, I guess, we are going to have to hope and pray our 1 pick in the top 60 is a good one