Possible changes to the CBA, regarding the draft

[davell]

I read today that the possible changes to the draft include fixed slotting(which we've heard before) or possibly allowing smaller market teams MORE of an overall budget for the draft than major market teams. No idea how this would work or what constitutes small vs. large market teams either. The possibility of a "world draft" will be brought up again too.

 

I don't like the idea of hard slotting, because that means you're almost definitely losing guys like Zach Lee last year or guys like Bradley and Starling this year to football.

 

I don't like the small vs. large market thing at all, but I could get on board with an overall team budget for a draft based on previous year's record, maybe some sort of formula that calculates the previous year's spending as well somehow, along with comp picks weighted to where if a team loses a player. They aren't technically getting punished for it, if they were good last year and also takes into account any potential money left over from the previous year's budget.

 

I don't think a world draft is truly a possibility, but I guess I'd be up for hearing how anyone thinks this could work?

[Outshined_One]

After reading up on how including Puerto Rico in the MLB Draft pretty much ruined baseball there, I'm solidly against a world draft. There would be all sorts of free rider problems, plus teams wouldn't want to invest in international facilities in places like the Dominican Republic if players they scout, teach, and develop end up signing elsewhere. I can buy into it more for having it include countries that have the infrastructure needed to develop baseball players on their own. Canada is a pretty good example of this, as its schools have churned out numerous quality players over the years while still maintaining a high level of interest in baseball. I don't see that argument working so well for places like Venezuela and the Dominican Republic.

 

I think you're pretty much on the money with hard slotting, especially in early rounds. Yeah, bonuses are out of control and blah blah blah, but a hard slot would do a number on the talent from the HS ranks since a lot more kids would be inclined to choose other sports over baseball if they can't get drafted and paid accordingly. I say let teams throw as much money as they want at these players; if the players bust, oh well, that's a risk inherent in the system. If teams keep screwing up and throwing money at busts, that's their own fault.

 

I really don't get how baseball would do a small market versus large market draft budget setup and make it work. How would they deal with a large market team with a small payroll? Wouldn't this just cause large market teams to divert their resources to the international market, effectively crowding out the small market teams? How would this work if a big market team was picking in the top 3? Would that team only be allowed to draft and sign the #1 overall player?

 

There are well-documented issues with the international market and with the MLB Draft. Reforms are needed, especially in places like the Dominican Republic where there are clear issues with bonus skimming, fraudulent identities, and PEDs. There also are some competitive imbalances in the MLB Draft as far as spending goes. However, these measures would do more harm than good for MLB and baseball as a whole.

[UK1679666180]

I would keep everything the same, except I would bring back the DFEs. Hard slotting would eliminate most of the HS kids minus the top 3 rounds, throw international into the mix and it becomes a free for all.

[davearm2]

After reading up on how including Puerto Rico in the MLB Draft pretty much ruined baseball there, I'm solidly against a world draft. There would be all sorts of free rider problems, plus teams wouldn't want to invest in international facilities in places like the Dominican Republic if players they scout, teach, and develop end up signing elsewhere.

Just spitballing here, but imagine if each of the 30 teams paid an equal amount into a common pool, and that money was used by a newly-created "International Development" program run by MLB itself. This program would build first-class facilities throughout Latin America (or buy existing facilities from the individual clubs), and hire coaching staffs specifically for teaching and developing these young aspiring Latin kids.

 

Meanwhile the teams themselves would send their scouts to these MLB-owned and operated facilities to evaluate players much the same way they send their people to NCAA games or HS games.

 

Seems like a much better system than the one there is now, in which it's every-man-for-himself, and (I would imagine) there is lots of duplication of effort and investment. I mean, there's no logical reason why each club should have its own facility in a particular country. On the surface it makes no sense, and there seems an obvious opportunity to collaborate and centralize the system.

 

Done right, it would improve, not ruin baseball in these places.