Free Agent Draft Pick Compensation Modified (title updated)

[Tedward]

It appears that it is according to this snippet from the Associated Press regarding the new labor deal.

 

The minimum salary increases, from $327,000 this year to $380,000 next season, and amateur draft pick compensation for some free agents who sign with new teams, will be eliminated.

 

I imagine that the "some free agents" is in regards to FA's that are classifed as Type A, B, or C FA's, but the report from the AP is a bit vague.

 

The Cubs better sign Aramis to a new deal now, because it appears now that they won't even get draft picks if he leaves. This is also disapointing now, because it appears they won't even get compensation for Pierre either, who also will probably be testing the FA waters.

[CubColtPacer]

It appears that it is according to this snippet from the Associated Press regarding the new labor deal.

 

The minimum salary increases, from $327,000 this year to $380,000 next season, and amateur draft pick compensation for some free agents who sign with new teams, will be eliminated.

 

I imagine that the "some free agents" is in regards to FA's that are classifed as Type A, B, or C FA's, but the report from the AP is a bit vague.

 

The Cubs better sign Aramis to a new deal now, because it appears now that they won't even get draft picks if he leaves. This is also disapointing now, because it appears they won't even get compensation for Pierre either, who also will probably be testing the FA waters.

 

At this point, this is probably a fine thing for the Cubs for it to go away right now. It saves us from having to even run the risk of offering Pierre arbitration in a year that it sounds like the Cubs will be big free agent spenders-so they would probably lose more than they would gain.

[UK1679666180]

While it was never something that deterred big spending teams from accumulating high priced FAs, it was a nice compensation for those teams unable to retain them.

 

I'm disappointed to see it go.

 

Did the new CBA mention anything about a worldwide draft or has that concept been completely thrown out?

[Tedward]

While it was never something that deterred big spending teams from accumulating high priced FAs, it was a nice compensation for those teams unable to retain them.

 

I'm disappointed to see it go.

 

Did the new CBA mention anything about a worldwide draft or has that concept been completely thrown out?

 

It's posted over on ESPN.com now. There isn't any mention of a world wide draft in the article.

[UK1679666180]

While it was never something that deterred big spending teams from accumulating high priced FAs, it was a nice compensation for those teams unable to retain them.

 

I'm disappointed to see it go.

 

Did the new CBA mention anything about a worldwide draft or has that concept been completely thrown out?

 

It's posted over on ESPN.com now. There isn't any mention of a world wide draft in the article.

 

Good, I'm glad that concept has been taken off the table.

[RichHillIsABeast]

While it was never something that deterred big spending teams from accumulating high priced FAs, it was a nice compensation for those teams unable to retain them.

 

I'm disappointed to see it go.

 

Did the new CBA mention anything about a worldwide draft or has that concept been completely thrown out?

 

It's funny that they go as far as revenue sharing and then stiff the small market teams by eliminating compensation picks.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

Did the new CBA mention anything about a worldwide draft or has that concept been completely thrown out?

 

Jim Callis was talking about it in a recent BA chat and said it was probably not going to happen any time soon since it would be such a logistical nightmare.

Edited October 25, 2006 by CaliforniaRaisin

[mg420]

from mlb.com:

 

"Type C Major League free agents will no longer carry draft pick compensation for the club that loses the player, beginning this year, while Type A and Type B free agents will continue to carry compensation. Next year the Type A and Type B pools shrink. Right now, Pool A is the top 30 percent at their position, but in succeeding with decrease to 20 percent. Pool B is the top 50 percent, but it will decrease from 21 percent to 40 percent. "

 

more details at:

 

http://mlb.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/news/article.jsp?ymd=20061024&content_id=1722211&vkey=news_mlb&fext=.jsp&c_id=mlb

[RichHillIsABeast]

That's good. Losing draft pick compensation for Type A's would have sucked for the small market teams, especially with the new unwillingness of the bigger payroll teams to fork over quality prospects at the trade deadline (Zito, Soriano, etc).

[BigbadB]

from mlb.com:

 

"Type C Major League free agents will no longer carry draft pick compensation for the club that loses the player, beginning this year, while Type A and Type B free agents will continue to carry compensation. Next year the Type A and Type B pools shrink. Right now, Pool A is the top 30 percent at their position, but in succeeding with decrease to 20 percent. Pool B is the top 50 percent, but it will decrease from 21 percent to 40 percent. "

 

more details at:

 

http://mlb.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/news/article.jsp?ymd=20061024&content_id=1722211&vkey=news_mlb&fext=.jsp&c_id=mlb

 

So, we should still receive compensation for Pierre. I won't mention Aramis, because I'm expecting Hendry to give him whatever he wants to stay.

[Rob]

from mlb.com:

 

"Type C Major League free agents will no longer carry draft pick compensation for the club that loses the player, beginning this year, while Type A and Type B free agents will continue to carry compensation. Next year the Type A and Type B pools shrink. Right now, Pool A is the top 30 percent at their position, but in succeeding with decrease to 20 percent. Pool B is the top 50 percent, but it will decrease from 21 percent to 40 percent. "

 

more details at:

 

http://mlb.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/news/article.jsp?ymd=20061024&content_id=1722211&vkey=news_mlb&fext=.jsp&c_id=mlb

 

So, we should still receive compensation for Pierre. I won't mention Aramis, because I'm expecting Hendry to give him whatever he wants to stay.

 

Yes, we should... though it's less likely he's a Type A free agent anymore.

[BigbadB]

Depends on what they use to grade CFers. Defensively, he is probably top 30%. Stealing bases, he's probably top 30%. Durability, he's probably top 30%. Slugging, well.......

 

Is it top 30% of the free agent class, or is it top 30% of all CFers?

[Guest]

Depends on what they use to grade CFers. Defensively, he is probably top 30%. Stealing bases, he's probably top 30%. Durability, he's probably top 30%. Slugging, well.......

 

Is it top 30% of the free agent class, or is it top 30% of all CFers?

 

all cfers.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

My guess is the Cubs will still lose more picks this year than we gain.

[Guest]

My guess is the Cubs will still lose more picks this year than we gain.

 

fortunately, the 1st round is protected.

[fiver]

My guess is the Cubs will still lose more picks this year than we gain.

 

fortunately, the 1st round is protected.

 

If the same rules apply, then, yes, the Cubs first round pick is protected....but only because the '06 Cubs were so very, very bad.

[biittner77]

I'm wondering which side wanted to end FA comp picks. It seems to me it can only help the players by encouraging teams to offer arbitration. On the flip side, I've never heard of any team that didn't sign a player because they didn't want to give up draft picks.

[CoolHandLuke]

My guess is the Cubs will still lose more picks this year than we gain.

 

fortunately, the 1st round is protected.

 

If the same rules apply, then, yes, the Cubs first round pick is protected....but only because the '06 Cubs were so very, very bad.

 

Their pick would have been protected even if there were 14 worse teams though.

[BigbadB]

They should give 2 picks to the team that finishes dead last in the worst division in baseball. :oops: 8-[

[goonys evil twin]

So the answer to the question in the title is no, correct? There has been a slight modification to the compensation, but losing a star will still get you picks.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

So the answer to the question in the title is no, correct? There has been a slight modification to the compensation, but losing a star will still get you picks.

 

That appears to be correct. They are eliminating class C compensation, and reducing the numbers for class A and class B, but there will still be compensation for losing class A and B players.

[CoolHandLuke]

no more draft and follows :cry:

 

uniform signing date of August 15

 

compensation for unsigned first and second rounders is a pick one spot lower (an unsigned 5 would be a 6) in the next years draft.

 

compensation for an unsigned third rounder is a 3/4 sandwich pick in the next years draft.

 

http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/draft/news/262720.html

 

 

also from the article:

These changes will take effect next offseason, allowing clubs which lose free agents this winter the same compensation they had always expected. Teams must still offer players salary arbitration to receive draft-pick compensation, though the deadline for that offer was moved up from Dec. 7 to Dec. 1.

 

Also the length of time before a player must be protected on the 40 man roster or subject to the rule 5 draft increased by one year.

 

signed age 19 or above: from three years to four

signed age 18 or below: from 4 years to five

 

this goes into affect this offseason, so some guys which we had originally thought needed to be protected now have another year before they will be exposed to the rule 5.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

Reading this article about how the new agreement affects the Rangers, it seems to be stating that teams will not lose picks for signing a Type B FA, but that the team losing the type B FA gets a sandwich pick. It looks like the only way a team gives up a pick is if the team signs a type A FA.

 

"Type B" free-agent compensation becomes indirect as opposed to direct. A club signing one of the Rangers' free agents would not forfeit a draft pick, but the Rangers would receive a "sandwich pick" between the first and second round. The number of sandwich picks should increase significantly.

 

[CaliforniaRaisin]

So the answer to the question in the title is no, correct? There has been a slight modification to the compensation, but losing a star will still get you picks.

 

Depends on if you think Henry Blanco is a star or not.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

Reading this article about how the new agreement affects the Rangers, it seems to be stating that teams will not lose picks for signing a Type B FA, but that the team losing the type B FA gets a sandwich pick. It looks like the only way a team gives up a pick is if the team signs a type A FA.

 

"Type B" free-agent compensation becomes indirect as opposed to direct. A club signing one of the Rangers' free agents would not forfeit a draft pick, but the Rangers would receive a "sandwich pick" between the first and second round. The number of sandwich picks should increase significantly.

 

 

And this article confirms it.

 

In the previous agreement, free agents were classified as Type A (elite players such as Giambi, Tejada and Zito), Type B and Type C. Under the new system, no compensation is granted for Type C free agents. The compensation for a Type B is a sandwich pick between the first two rounds, meaning the team that signs the free agent doesn't forfeit a pick. Type A free agents are now the top 20 percent of players at their positions; it used to be the top 30 percent.

 

 

So, if you lose a type A, the compensation is the same and the signing team loses a fist or second round pick.

 

If you lose a type B, you receive a sandwich pick between the first and second round, but the signing team does not forfeit a pick.

 

However, this offseason is under the old rules. So, this year the Cubs likely will lose some picks that they will not lose in the future.