Worst Farm System in Baseball

[LittleHurt05]

And the Royals ended up with Mike Moustakas. Not bad, no?

 

So all is well in the world then. The Royals took their second choice, but it potentially worked out anyway. Porcello went 29th, how about all the other teams that didn't take him because of $$$$$?

[iamshack]

But back when they drafted him they were not a top 10 payroll team. They have a high payroll because they're built to win now.

They were 14th in '06 and 9th in '07...

[LittleHurt05]

Yes. But it's not like the Royals ended up having to draft a soft tossing college arm because they couldn't afford Porcello. My point is, Porcello put a price tag on himself, the Royals felt he wasn't worth the money and risk. Everybody still won. So why should we restrict players by what they can and cannot make.

 

Especially the White Sox, who picked Aaron Poreda 27th, while Porcello went 29th. If it wasn't for Porcello's asking price, do the Sox make the same pick?

[iamshack]

Yes. But it's not like the Royals ended up having to draft a soft tossing college arm because they couldn't afford Porcello. My point is, Porcello put a price tag on himself, the Royals felt he wasn't worth the money and risk. Everybody still won. So why should we restrict players by what they can and cannot make.

The point is that the Royals would still be able to make that pick in a hard slot system. They lose nothing.

 

The only way the small market teams lose anything is if they are spending more in the later rounds by taking on signability risks and actually realizing success via that strategy.

[Milkman delivers]

I don't want to get involved in this argument, as it seems that it's being taken care of extremely well already, but I can't believe that the logic isn't getting through to a couple of posters.

[Paint it Black]

So all is well in the world then. The Royals took their second choice, but it potentially worked out anyway. Porcello went 29th, how about all the other teams that didn't take him because of $$$$$?

So they didn't feel he was worth the risk. What's to say they would have taken Porcello anyways? And again, the draft was viewed much different in the early 2000's than it is now. Teams see the value in the draft now and spend the money in it. The fact of the matter is the White Sox are the team that spends the least in the draft and never produce any impact talent.

 

I guess I just don't understand why, if you want to restrict the draft, then do you restrict free agency in the name of "competative balance"? I'm probbably opening the flood gates but the only thing worse than a hard slot is salary caps and floors.

[Balta1701]

I'm sure I can find more, but here is one that immediately popped in my head.

2004, Padres take Matt Bush first overall in no small part because of signability concerns, Justin Verlander goes 2nd to the Tigers, Jared Weaver falls to 12th because of signability concerns, Boras negoatiates for a full year before getting a deal done.

 

Add Jared Weaver to the 2007 Padres.

[Paint it Black]

They were 14th in '06 and 9th in '07...

They acquired Cabrera and paid him in between those seasons so it makes sense.

[Paint it Black]

2004, Padres take Matt Bush first overall in no small part because of signability concerns, Justin Verlander goes 2nd to the Tigers, Jared Weaver falls to 12th because of signability concerns, Boras negoatiates for a full year before getting a deal done.

 

Add Jared Weaver to the 2007 Padres.

Well one of the reasons the Padres also took Bush because he was a local kid. And doesn't this just speak to my point of "draft the best talent and pay them" instead of "restrict their pay because it's not fair."

 

 

[iamshack]

I don't want to get involved in this argument, as it seems that it's being taken care of extremely well already, but I can't believe that the logic isn't getting through to a couple of posters.

I'm curious to know which side you come down on...

[iamshack]

2004, Padres take Matt Bush first overall in no small part because of signability concerns, Justin Verlander goes 2nd to the Tigers, Jared Weaver falls to 12th because of signability concerns, Boras negoatiates for a full year before getting a deal done.

 

Add Jared Weaver to the 2007 Padres.

Why couldn't they have just taken Verlander?

 

There is a distinction to be made here between not signing a guy because he is just a tremendous pain in the ass, and not drafting a guy because he wants a decent payday.

 

A lot of teams are going to avoid the former, for many reasons beyond just $. Far fewer teams will avoid the latter.

[witesoxfan]

I have a few problems with hard slotting.

 

At what point do you stop the slotting process? Do you have a hard slot through the first 10 rounds perhaps and then set a maximum salary and signing bonus that players can sign for beyond that? The NFL has gone to a hard slot and, as far as I was aware, there were no real holdouts from anyone and the NFL only had a month or so to negotiate contracts whereas in years past, they've had 4 months to do so and still have had holdouts. But there are only 7 rounds in the NFL, compared to 50 in baseball. On top of that, you can only enter the NFL and NBA drafts once (EDIT: correction, you can enter the NBA draft multiple times, but you have a set date to pull out by and if you sign with an agent, you can not go back to college), whereas in the MLB, you can enter the draft 3 times (and there may be exceptions to the rules where you can enter more than that, though I'm not perfectly clear on the rules). So what happens if you draft Bob Pole 1st overall as a junior in college and he simply doesn't want to sign for the hard slot? That's a pretty impossible situation for that team.

 

Drawing from that, how are you going to prevent a player from simply turning down the hard slot money? You could simply have said player be assigned to that team for the rest of his career or for a year or whatever, but if he doesn't want to play with that team for that money, he's not going to. And then he's just going to re-enter the draft the following season and small-market teams will avoid him like the plague, but then he's going to get less money while having a year wasted in his development as a player.

 

And, seriously, how many times are you going to be able to enter the draft? You almost have to limit it to once, but then you will get fewer high schoolers involved, which means less development from a team standpoint and more from whatever college said player attends, which may not be what MLB teams want. That's not to say college players don't develop into superstars...the greatest player in White Sox history went to Auburn...just that there are teams that prefer to develop their own players.

 

On top of all of that, the MLB draft is still an absolute crapshoot, even more than the NBA and NFL. In both of those, you have a failure of a draft if you don't develop a superstar or like 50% starters or extremely valuable role players within those. If you got any of that in an MLB draft - one superstar or even 25% of your draft becoming valuable role players - you are already having an incredible draft and if those role players turn into good starters, one of the best drafts of the past 5-10 years. I don't see any way that hard slotting is somehow going to improve the 50+% bust rate of 1st round picks while very possibly not significantly cutting 1st round costs (except in the case of a Stephen Strasburg type).

 

There is also the argument that some teams would rather build their team in the middle rounds as opposed to the higher rounds because it is cheaper and they have enough faith in their developmental system that they can afford to. The best pitching prospect in the game right now was drafted in the 8th round and one of the best hitting prospects was a 20th round draft pick, and for years Brian Sabean would sign guys before there were even offered arbitration, signifying to the former team that they could offer arbitration freely because he did not want his first round pick (the best example I can think of with regards to this is Ray Durham, and I recall reading several articles at the time citing the exact thing I just said).

 

And, in the end, player compensation through Type A and B statuses will either be eliminated or significantly reduced because you will have to allow for the trading of draft picks...I don't see any way you can do this without having the ability to trade draft picks, just as in the NBA and NFL.

 

 

I see far too many problems with hard slotting right now to allow it. The best bet is to simply go with the soft slot and hard luxury tax for the time being and if the need arises 5-10 years from now to tackle it then.

Edited November 1, 2011 by witesoxfan

[bmags]

I have a few problems with hard slotting.

 

At what point do you stop the slotting process? Do you have a hard slot through the first 10 rounds perhaps and then set a maximum salary and signing bonus that players can sign for beyond that? The NFL has gone to a hard slot and, as far as I was aware, there were no real holdouts from anyone and the NFL only had a month or so to negotiate contracts whereas in years past, they've had 4 months to do so and still have had holdouts. But there are only 7 rounds in the NFL, compared to 50 in baseball. On top of that, you can only enter the NFL and NBA drafts once (EDIT: correction, you can enter the NBA draft multiple times, but you have a set date to pull out by and if you sign with an agent, you can not go back to college), whereas in the MLB, you can enter the draft 3 times (and there may be exceptions to the rules where you can enter more than that, though I'm not perfectly clear on the rules). So what happens if you draft Bob Pole 1st overall as a junior in college and he simply doesn't want to sign for the hard slot? That's a pretty impossible situation for that team.

 

Drawing from that, how are you going to prevent a player from simply turning down the hard slot money? You could simply have said player be assigned to that team for the rest of his career or for a year or whatever, but if he doesn't want to play with that team for that money, he's not going to. And then he's just going to re-enter the draft the following season and small-market teams will avoid him like the plague, but then he's going to get less money while having a year wasted in his development as a player.

 

And, seriously, how many times are you going to be able to enter the draft? You almost have to limit it to once, but then you will get fewer high schoolers involved, which means less development from a team standpoint and more from whatever college said player attends, which may not be what MLB teams want. That's not to say college players don't develop into superstars...the greatest player in White Sox history went to Auburn...just that there are teams that prefer to develop their own players.

 

On top of all of that, the MLB draft is still an absolute crapshoot, even more than the NBA and NFL. In both of those, you have a failure of a draft if you don't develop a superstar or like 50% starters or extremely valuable role players within those. If you got any of that in an MLB draft - one superstar or even 25% of your draft becoming valuable role players - you are already having an incredible draft and if those role players turn into good starters, one of the best drafts of the past 5-10 years. I don't see any way that hard slotting is somehow going to improve the 50+% bust rate of 1st round picks while very possibly not significantly cutting 1st round costs (except in the case of a Stephen Strasburg type).

 

There is also the argument that some teams would rather build their team in the middle rounds as opposed to the higher rounds because it is cheaper and they have enough faith in their developmental system that they can afford to. The best pitching prospect in the game right now was drafted in the 8th round and one of the best hitting prospects was a 20th round draft pick, and for years Brian Sabean would sign guys before there were even offered arbitration, signifying to the former team that they could offer arbitration freely because he did not want his first round pick (the best example I can think of with regards to this is Ray Durham, and I recall reading several articles at the time citing the exact thing I just said).

 

And, in the end, player compensation through Type A and B statuses will either be eliminated or significantly reduced because you will have to allow for the trading of draft picks...I don't see any way you can do this without having the ability to trade draft picks, just as in the NBA and NFL.

 

 

I see far too many problems with hard slotting right now to allow it. The best bet is to simply go with the soft slot and hard luxury tax for the time being and if the need arises 5-10 years from now to tackle it then.

 

What if you created a total draft budget, for all teams, with a hard luxury tax on any salary on the draft over that budget. That would allow teams to spend a little more to get that high schooler to sign, but it would come at the expense of some later picks, whom may be drafted based on signability.

 

[iamshack]

I have a few problems with hard slotting.

 

At what point do you stop the slotting process? Do you have a hard slot through the first 10 rounds perhaps and then set a maximum salary and signing bonus that players can sign for beyond that? The NFL has gone to a hard slot and, as far as I was aware, there were no real holdouts from anyone and the NFL only had a month or so to negotiate contracts whereas in years past, they've had 4 months to do so and still have had holdouts. But there are only 7 rounds in the NFL, compared to 50 in baseball. On top of that, you can only enter the NFL and NBA drafts once (EDIT: correction, you can enter the NBA draft multiple times, but you have a set date to pull out by and if you sign with an agent, you can not go back to college), whereas in the MLB, you can enter the draft 3 times (and there may be exceptions to the rules where you can enter more than that, though I'm not perfectly clear on the rules). So what happens if you draft Bob Pole 1st overall as a junior in college and he simply doesn't want to sign for the hard slot? That's a pretty impossible situation for that team.

 

Drawing from that, how are you going to prevent a player from simply turning down the hard slot money? You could simply have said player be assigned to that team for the rest of his career or for a year or whatever, but if he doesn't want to play with that team for that money, he's not going to. And then he's just going to re-enter the draft the following season and small-market teams will avoid him like the plague, but then he's going to get less money while having a year wasted in his development as a player.

 

And, seriously, how many times are you going to be able to enter the draft? You almost have to limit it to once, but then you will get fewer high schoolers involved, which means less development from a team standpoint and more from whatever college said player attends, which may not be what MLB teams want. That's not to say college players don't develop into superstars...the greatest player in White Sox history went to Auburn...just that there are teams that prefer to develop their own players.

 

On top of all of that, the MLB draft is still an absolute crapshoot, even more than the NBA and NFL. In both of those, you have a failure of a draft if you don't develop a superstar or like 50% starters or extremely valuable role players within those. If you got any of that in an MLB draft - one superstar or even 25% of your draft becoming valuable role players - you are already having an incredible draft and if those role players turn into good starters, one of the best drafts of the past 5-10 years. I don't see any way that hard slotting is somehow going to improve the 50+% bust rate of 1st round picks while very possibly not significantly cutting 1st round costs (except in the case of a Stephen Strasburg type).

 

There is also the argument that some teams would rather build their team in the middle rounds as opposed to the higher rounds because it is cheaper and they have enough faith in their developmental system that they can afford to. The best pitching prospect in the game right now was drafted in the 8th round and one of the best hitting prospects was a 20th round draft pick, and for years Brian Sabean would sign guys before there were even offered arbitration, signifying to the former team that they could offer arbitration freely because he did not want his first round pick (the best example I can think of with regards to this is Ray Durham, and I recall reading several articles at the time citing the exact thing I just said).

 

And, in the end, player compensation through Type A and B statuses will either be eliminated or significantly reduced because you will have to allow for the trading of draft picks...I don't see any way you can do this without having the ability to trade draft picks, just as in the NBA and NFL.

 

 

I see far too many problems with hard slotting right now to allow it. The best bet is to simply go with the soft slot and hard luxury tax for the time being and if the need arises 5-10 years from now to tackle it then.

Tell me why a player is going to refuse to sign in a hard slot? If the compensation system is set already, why is he going to refuse to sign if he knows he's most likely not going to make significantly more money by waiting an entire year? And if he does, why is this any different than it currently is now?

 

There will still be signability concerns with a hard slot, but they will be reduced due to a set compensation system. The more of a risk the player is to sign, the less money he will make as more teams pass on him. If he decides not to sign, he has to wait a year and risk injury or a performance decline.

 

I'm not sure I see how the downsides of a hard slot are going to be any greater than those with a soft slot.

[Chicago White Sox]

The problem with the current system is that anyone can take advantage of it. So yes, the Pirates can throw a ton of money at the draft, but so can the Cubs. The difference is that the Cubs have more dollars to play with. The Cubs can outspend the Pirates on draft bonuses, with the hit being a much smaller portion of their total budget. How do the Pirates come out ahead in this system? With hard slotting, the Cubs would have no way to cheat the system and would be penalized for good performance with poor draft position. Their talent inflow would be crippled, while bad teams would be able to take the best players available at more reasonable costs. This would allow them to use this money to try and improve their major league team. How do the Pirates not have a better chance against the Cubs long-run with hard slotting?

[Balta1701]

1. If a player is drafted #1 overall and does not want to sign for the hard slot money...then that player will never enter the league. There is no price at which that player would be willing to enter the league if he did not want to sign for hard slot money. So long kid. Keep the rule where a player not signing means that a team keeps their pick the next year if it happens in the first 2 rounds.

 

2. Enter the draft as many times as you want. Who cares if a player enters several times and then goes back to school trying to earn a higher draft pick and a college degree?

[iamshack]

1. If a player is drafted #1 overall and does not want to sign for the hard slot money...then that player will never enter the league. There is no price at which that player would be willing to enter the league if he did not want to sign for hard slot money. So long kid. Keep the rule where a player not signing means that a team keeps their pick the next year if it happens in the first 2 rounds.

 

2. Enter the draft as many times as you want. Who cares if a player enters several times and then goes back to school trying to earn a higher draft pick and a college degree?

Exactly. There is little to no upside to refuse to sign unless one thinks he can improve his position in future drafts, which is no different than it is now.

[Balta1701]

Exactly. There is little to no upside to refuse to sign unless one thinks he can improve his position in future drafts, which is no different than it is now.

Except now a person can refuse to sign and hold the Yankees/Red Sox/Tigers/Angels over the head of the team negotiating with that player.

[southsider2k5]

2004, Padres take Matt Bush first overall in no small part because of signability concerns, Justin Verlander goes 2nd to the Tigers, Jared Weaver falls to 12th because of signability concerns, Boras negoatiates for a full year before getting a deal done.

 

Add Jared Weaver to the 2007 Padres.

 

The biggest one I can think of is Mauer over Prior. History shows how that turned out, but at the time it was like not picking Harper or Strausberg.

[southsider2k5]

What if you created a total draft budget, for all teams, with a hard luxury tax on any salary on the draft over that budget. That would allow teams to spend a little more to get that high schooler to sign, but it would come at the expense of some later picks, whom may be drafted based on signability.

 

Creating a hard budget number would work for me as well. It wouldn't be ideal, but I could handle it as a compromise.

[iamshack]

Except now a person can refuse to sign and hold the Yankees/Red Sox/Tigers/Angels over the head of the team negotiating with that player.

How? Those teams can only pay him less since they are in a later drafting position.

[southsider2k5]

Tell me why a player is going to refuse to sign in a hard slot? If the compensation system is set already, why is he going to refuse to sign if he knows he's most likely not going to make significantly more money by waiting an entire year? And if he does, why is this any different than it currently is now?

 

There will still be signability concerns with a hard slot, but they will be reduced due to a set compensation system. The more of a risk the player is to sign, the less money he will make as more teams pass on him. If he decides not to sign, he has to wait a year and risk injury or a performance decline.

 

I'm not sure I see how the downsides of a hard slot are going to be any greater than those with a soft slot.

 

I think we have seen baseball as the sport that has the most people refusing to sign deals, by far. The NBA with its hard slotting is the least. I can't think of the last guy who refused to sign an NBA deal.

[Kyyle23]

I think we have seen baseball as the sport that has the most people refusing to sign deals, by far. The NBA with its hard slotting is the least. I can't think of the last guy who refused to sign an NBA deal.

 

Ricky Rubio

[southsider2k5]

Ricky Rubio

 

Didn't he sign this year though?

[Kyyle23]

Didn't he sign this year though?

 

He did. But he refused the initial buyout and went back to Spain for a year. And it wasnt a hard slotting issue, it was Rubio feeling he wasnt ready