Why won’t MLBPA agree to International Draft?

[JosephC]

Another question is why do the owners want it:

 

 

"The International Draft would give MLB cover from anti-trust lawsuits, because collective bargaining agreements are an exemption from anti-trust law. MLB is desperate to protect its Anti-Trust Exemption and would do anything to keep these lawsuits out of the scrutiny of the

courts. By putting an International Draft into the CBA, it gets the cases dismissed before they are addressed on the merits.

But, maybe, just maybe Congress will take it away and solve this problem. Just don't count on it to happen."

 

Whatever......

 

I've been around long enough to have seen dozens (probably hundreds) of politicians drop the anti-trust exemption threat on the NFL, NBA and MLB and everyone knows that is nothing but poo falling out of their mouths. I can even remember at least one congressional committee being formed (think it was in regards to the NFL), and after the big grand-standing announcement, I don't think the public heard another peep about it.

 

Freedman's tweet seems pretty stupid to me. They will not have an international amateur signing system or draft that is not in the CBA. The old system was in the CBA. If they have a draft it will be in the CBA. If they stick with the old system, that will roll from the old CBA into the new CBA. Does Freedman really believe the owners would try to just implement it without putting it in the CBA? Has there been any suggestion of this from a credible source? The entire concept seems completely ridiculous.

[KeithStone53151]

[Or, maybe whatever corrupt agent/trainer that helped get them a big signing bonus as a 16 year old is in their ear telling them to adamantly oppose it.

 

It's very reasonable to think that the "advisors" are the ones who greatly oppose this.

 

The numbers I've seen indicate that the top 600 bonuses in the last normal period prior to covid totaled 163.9 million. That number was unlikely to balloon because we are working under a pool system where each team has a cap. In the first draft of a new draft system, the bonuses for the top 600 picks would be 180.5 million.

 

Thanks for throwing the numbers out there. I feel like all that needs to be agreed to right now are total dollars. Literally every other aspect can be figured out in the coming months.

 

My guess is the players counter at 200 million for bonuses and then the posturing continues and 100 million of revenue is lost while negotiating over this remaining 20 million. I really wish this was in blue but it seems to likely given the level of incompetence we are seeing.

[Axman59]

take it for what its worth

 

seems like they just punted the football

 

That's good news.

 

It's annoying that coming up with this took more than an hour. This really should have taken like 5 minutes, yet MLB and players punted away a weeks worth of revenue and made it take a full day.

 

If they get a deal done today I guarantee they will play 162.

[homer]

Another question is why do the owners want it:

 

 

"The International Draft would give MLB cover from anti-trust lawsuits, because collective bargaining agreements are an exemption from anti-trust law. MLB is desperate to protect its Anti-Trust Exemption and would do anything to keep these lawsuits out of the scrutiny of the

courts. By putting an International Draft into the CBA, it gets the cases dismissed before they are addressed on the merits.

But, maybe, just maybe Congress will take it away and solve this problem. Just don't count on it to happen."

 

Whatever......

 

I've been around long enough to have seen dozens (probably hundreds) of politicians drop the anti-trust exemption threat on the NFL, NBA and MLB and everyone knows that is nothing but poo falling out of their mouths. I can even remember at least one congressional committee being formed (think it was in regards to the NFL), and after the big grand-standing announcement, I don't think the public heard another peep about it.

 

Freedman's tweet seems pretty stupid to me. They will not have an international amateur signing system or draft that is not in the CBA. The old system was in the CBA. If they have a draft it will be in the CBA. If they stick with the old system, that will roll from the old CBA into the new CBA. Does Freedman really believe the owners would try to just implement it without putting it in the CBA? Has there been any suggestion of this from a credible source? The entire concept seems completely ridiculous.

 

Baseball is the only sport with anti-trust exemption

 

"The NBA, NFL and NHL are subject to antitrust laws. The NCAA was informed on Monday in a unanimous 9-0 ruling that it is also subject to Federal antitrust laws.

 

But baseball stands out as the exception. Ever since “Federal Baseball Club of Baltimore, Inc. v. National League of Professional Baseball Clubs” in 1922, baseball has been seen as exempt from many of the provisions of Federal antitrust laws"

[edfunderburk]

What was decided on this issue in the agreement today?

[Thurston Fluff]

I doubt the players want to dilute the draft as much as an international draft would. If I'm a draft prospect the fewer options teams have the higher I'm drafted.

[SeaBass]

What was decided on this issue in the agreement today?

Per the Passan tweet that is linked in responses above:

 

Jeff Passan

@JeffPassan

MLB and the MLBPA agreed that they have until July 25 to reach a deal on an international draft that would start in 2024, a source tells ESPN. If a deal is reached, the qualifying offer will vanish. If no deal, the QO will return and the international system will remain the same.

 

My prediction is the status quo will remain (no int'l draft) because no matter how badly players want the QO to go away it only affects a handful of players each year and the potential prospects from the DR and similar countries prefer the way things are now. We'll see.

[CheeseheadInQC]

I wonder if what David Ortiz was talking about when he said that it would take some time to implement is that the whole system needs to transition to a different model, setting something in place where the opportunities for the youth and teen players don't disappear simply because the people providing them can no longer use them (or at least use them as profitably) to generate illicit income.

 

I guess I am not sure where the perception comes from that 1) this is going to lead to reduced spending given that the hard caps already prevent big market teams from throwing money around the way they used to and 2) this would be an automatic win for the Brewers.

 

It seems like it would be a slight loss for the brand-name teams who might get an all-else-being-equal edge from being the Yankees or Red Sox or Dodgers, and the Brewers I guess would benefit slightly, just like every other team, from that. But really it seems like it would most hurt the teams with the kind of relationships (on the up-and-up or otherwise) that give them the edge on signings. It would probably help the Brewers in the DR, but it might hurt them a bit in Venezuela.

[rickh150]

The universal draft levels the playing field for the league. The Yankees and Dodgers have too many edges on the system already. Also, money isn't "wasted" on 16 year old kids who might develop into major league players in 7 years. Put an age limit on it and get serious about paying money to players that are developed and are ready physically and emotionally to play on minor league teams in the states tomorrow. Latin America has no seat at the table for this discussion and should have no seat at the table.