MLB Finally Adding Worldwide Draft??

[Jake]

Very interested in hearing the fans' argument against worldwide draft.

[Quin]

Because then Paint it Black can't complain about the Sox not spending big bucks on foreign players

[Paint it Black]

It is a great idea to balance the flow of international talent to the teams that can't spend with the Yankees of the world.

 

Except this isn't true, unless you want to argue that Cespedes, Chapman, and Sano were all signed by big markets. Further, the Rangers are probably the biggest player internationally, and I would hardly call them a big market franchise (nor would I argue they're small, but you get my point). Most international talent isn't being gobbled by the NY/BOS/LA's of the baseball world.

 

An international draft is just another way for the owners to hold onto more cash and pay international talent less than they are worth. If you want to side with the poor multi-millionaire owners, be my guest. I'd rather see the players make more money. There is a financial incentive for all of these kids in Latin America, and to reduce that hurts the sport. It's one of the reasons why kids in states are now playing Football and Basketball because the shot and quick money when you're young (nevermind full scholarhips to college vs college baseball players only getting partial shares).

 

 

Because then Paint it Black can't complain about the Sox not spending big bucks on foreign players

 

At least we're at step one of admitting them you have a problem. And lets define "big bucks" here. A few million on high ceiling talent is "big bucks" yet spending 4 times that on average players in the free agent market is apparently good business.

[Quin]

Except this isn't true, unless you want to argue that Cespedes, Chapman, and Sano were all signed by big markets. Further, the Rangers are probably the biggest player internationally, and I would hardly call them a big market franchise (nor would I argue they're small, but you get my point). Most international talent isn't being gobbled by the NY/BOS/LA's of the baseball world.

 

An international draft is just another way for the owners to hold onto more cash and pay international talent less than they are worth. If you want to side with the poor multi-millionaire owners, be my guest. I'd rather see the players make more money. There is a financial incentive for all of these kids in Latin America, and to reduce that hurts the sport. It's one of the reasons why kids in states are now playing Football and Basketball because the shot and quick money when you're young (nevermind full scholarhips to college vs college baseball players only getting partial shares).

 

 

 

 

At least we're at step one of admitting them you have a problem. And lets define "big bucks" here. A few million on high ceiling talent is "big bucks" yet spending 4 times that on average players in the free agent market is apparently good business.

 

So you're mad that they won't shell out guaranteed money to guys who may never see the major leagues?

 

So if Viciedo had completely busted, never made the MLB roster, and pocketed $10M, you'd be OK with that?

[witesoxfan]

Yoenis Cespedes signed for $36 mill. Soler got $30 million (from the Cubs). Contreras got $32 million on his initial contract (from the Yankees). Several 16 year olds received upwards of $6-7 million. These aren't small investments and they are incredibly risky.

 

Also, the idea Texas as a small market team is flat out wrong. They're spending $122.5 mill on their MLB roster alone this year. Cincinnati is at $99.1 mill.

 

Oakland was one small market team, but they've shown a willingness to spend internationally in the past. Tampa Bay, Cleveland, and San Diego are three quick examples of small payroll teams that will benefit from this. There are inevitably other examples as well.

 

Beyond that, if there is a competitive balance to amateur free agents within the US and Canada, why shouldn't there be the same balance for amateur international free agents? Hell, the NBA requires Europeans who want to come over to go through the draft process even if they played professionally. It simply doesn't make sense to allow the possibility of a monopoly on a single market, which is exactly what the previous rules allowed.

 

Personally, it sounds more like you have a problem with a spending cap than you do a worldwide draft. Baseball has been and really is still the one sport where you can allocate a lot of money to a 2nd or 3rd or 10th round pick (although I'm not as famiilar with hockey's rules). Nowadays, you just can't spend as much.

[Quin]

Yoenis Cespedes signed for $36 mill. Soler got $30 million (from the Cubs). Contreras got $32 million on his initial contract (from the Yankees). Several 16 year olds received upwards of $6-7 million. These aren't small investments and they are incredibly risky.

 

Also, the idea Texas as a small market team is flat out wrong. They're spending $122.5 mill on their MLB roster alone this year. Cincinnati is at $99.1 mill.

 

Oakland was one small market team, but they've shown a willingness to spend internationally in the past. Tampa Bay, Cleveland, and San Diego are three quick examples of small payroll teams that will benefit from this. There are inevitably other examples as well.

 

Beyond that, if there is a competitive balance to amateur free agents within the US and Canada, why shouldn't there be the same balance for amateur international free agents? Hell, the NBA requires Europeans who want to come over to go through the draft process even if they played professionally. It simply doesn't make sense to allow the possibility of a monopoly on a single market, which is exactly what the previous rules allowed.

 

Personally, it sounds more like you have a problem with a spending cap than you do a worldwide draft. Baseball has been and really is still the one sport where you can allocate a lot of money to a 2nd or 3rd or 10th round pick (although I'm not as famiilar with hockey's rules). Nowadays, you just can't spend as much.

 

 

Also, don't forget Chapman.

Edited April 8, 2013 by Quinarvy

[southsider2k5]

Except this isn't true, unless you want to argue that Cespedes, Chapman, and Sano were all signed by big markets. Further, the Rangers are probably the biggest player internationally, and I would hardly call them a big market franchise (nor would I argue they're small, but you get my point). Most international talent isn't being gobbled by the NY/BOS/LA's of the baseball world.

 

An international draft is just another way for the owners to hold onto more cash and pay international talent less than they are worth. If you want to side with the poor multi-millionaire owners, be my guest. I'd rather see the players make more money. There is a financial incentive for all of these kids in Latin America, and to reduce that hurts the sport. It's one of the reasons why kids in states are now playing Football and Basketball because the shot and quick money when you're young (nevermind full scholarhips to college vs college baseball players only getting partial shares).

 

 

 

 

At least we're at step one of admitting them you have a problem. And lets define "big bucks" here. A few million on high ceiling talent is "big bucks" yet spending 4 times that on average players in the free agent market is apparently good business.

 

All of those players went to the highest bidders, not the teams with the biggest needs. It doesn't make any sense to have a draft system that is set up to put the worst teams back on top, but then sabatogue it based on where you were born. Its not about money, its about balance in the game.

[Jake]

Also, the free market does what it does -- it helps the top dog and hurts the lowest on the ladder. The current system exploits young Latin Americans in particular with just a few getting huge payouts. This democratizes the process to an extent and will hopefully give more young ballplayers a shot to play in the USA. My hope is this will lead to the end of the camps run by individual teams in South America and the Caribbean where young people slave away for years hoping for a tiny bonus while forsaking their education, health, etc.

 

With the recent death of a young man in an MLB camp, I hope MLB is looking for ways to forage for talent without employing so many cost saving measures that they can't even provide medical care to the kids they put out on the field every day in hopes of a few thousand bucks.

[Paint it Black]

So you're mad that they won't shell out guaranteed money to guys who may never see the major leagues?

 

So if Viciedo had completely busted, never made the MLB roster, and pocketed $10M, you'd be OK with that?

I don't see how that risk is any different than paying a free agent that same amount of money. Their future isn't guaranteed just like a free agent's.

 

 

Oakland was one small market team, but they've shown a willingness to spend internationally in the past. Tampa Bay, Cleveland, and San Diego are three quick examples of small payroll teams that will benefit from this. There are inevitably other examples as well.

 

Beyond that, if there is a competitive balance to amateur free agents within the US and Canada, why shouldn't there be the same balance for amateur international free agents? Hell, the NBA requires Europeans who want to come over to go through the draft process even if they played professionally. It simply doesn't make sense to allow the possibility of a monopoly on a single market, which is exactly what the previous rules allowed.

 

Personally, it sounds more like you have a problem with a spending cap than you do a worldwide draft. Baseball has been and really is still the one sport where you can allocate a lot of money to a 2nd or 3rd or 10th round pick (although I'm not as famiilar with hockey's rules). Nowadays, you just can't spend as much.

 

I never argued Texas a small market club, but I think it's foolish to argue they're a large market club too. Fruther, I completly disagree that small market teams will benefit from an international draft. Currently, clubs like the ones you mentioned can get high celing talent on the cheap when compared to the free agent market. Lumping an international draft in with the draft cap (yes I also hate that too) kills smalls market teams even more (let alone the draft cap puts them at a competative disadvantage once again) simply because the international market and the draft are really the only places these clubs can compete for talent at a fair level.

 

The NBA also requires kids to go to college for a year. Further, their sport is different on so many levels. Not as deep of a minor league system, only 2 draft rounds, and obviously smaller rosters. MLB can barely police their age investigations for the J2 signing day as it is, why should we think they can do if for a draft? I don't think you can compare the two

leagues at all.

 

 

All of those players went to the highest bidders, not the teams with the biggest needs. It doesn't make any sense to have a draft system that is set up to put the worst teams back on top, but then sabatogue it based on where you were born. Its not about money, its about balance in the game.

 

No major league team is using their high round picks on need. This isn't the NFL. Obviously, the Reds felt a need in pitching and went out to spend the money on Chapman. What's the problem here? The small market team won the top talent by spending the cash they wanted to. The new draft system only punishes small market teams for spening money to improve their club. It's that simple. The current draft system does not allow for the best talent to go to the worst teams (See: Appel and Houston because Houston had more high rounds picks last year they they were going to have to pay without hitting the cap)

[Paint it Black]

Also, the free market does what it does -- it helps the top dog and hurts the lowest on the ladder. The current system exploits young Latin Americans in particular with just a few getting huge payouts. This democratizes the process to an extent and will hopefully give more young ballplayers a shot to play in the USA. My hope is this will lead to the end of the camps run by individual teams in South America and the Caribbean where young people slave away for years hoping for a tiny bonus while forsaking their education, health, etc.

 

With the recent death of a young man in an MLB camp, I hope MLB is looking for ways to forage for talent without employing so many cost saving measures that they can't even provide medical care to the kids they put out on the field every day in hopes of a few thousand bucks.

 

That's not happening. In fact, I would argue the buscon's provide such services like medical care and education.

 

[southsider2k5]

I don't see how that risk is any different than paying a free agent that same amount of money. Their future isn't guaranteed just like a free agent's.

 

 

 

 

I never argued Texas a small market club, but I think it's foolish to argue they're a large market club too. Fruther, I completly disagree that small market teams will benefit from an international draft. Currently, clubs like the ones you mentioned can get high celing talent on the cheap when compared to the free agent market. Lumping an international draft in with the draft cap (yes I also hate that too) kills smalls market teams even more (let alone the draft cap puts them at a competative disadvantage once again) simply because the international market and the draft are really the only places these clubs can compete for talent at a fair level.

 

The NBA also requires kids to go to college for a year. Further, their sport is different on so many levels. Not as deep of a minor league system, only 2 draft rounds, and obviously smaller rosters. MLB can barely police their age investigations for the J2 signing day as it is, why should we think they can do if for a draft? I don't think you can compare the two

leagues at all.

 

 

 

 

No major league team is using their high round picks on need. This isn't the NFL. Obviously, the Reds felt a need in pitching and went out to spend the money on Chapman. What's the problem here? The small market team won the top talent by spending the cash they wanted to. The new draft system only punishes small market teams for spening money to improve their club. It's that simple. The current draft system does not allow for the best talent to go to the worst teams (See: Appel and Houston because Houston had more high rounds picks last year they they were going to have to pay without hitting the cap)

 

Houston gambled that more players would be better than just one. That isn't the same as being outspent by someone, even though as the worst team you should have the first shot at the new players coming into the league.

[witesoxfan]

I don't see how that risk is any different than paying a free agent that same amount of money. Their future isn't guaranteed just like a free agent's.

 

Free agents are signed because they've had success previously in the majors. There's obviously risk, but there is far less risk in a major league free agent compared to a 20 year old international free agent. Teams can certainly overspend, but how smart was it for the Mets to sign Kazuo Matsui? or the Yankees to sign Jose Contreras? I'm sure the Red Sox are extremely happy with their decision to pay Daisuke all that they did too.

 

 

I never argued Texas a small market club, but I think it's foolish to argue they're a large market club too. Fruther, I completly disagree that small market teams will benefit from an international draft. Currently, clubs like the ones you mentioned can get high celing talent on the cheap when compared to the free agent market. Lumping an international draft in with the draft cap (yes I also hate that too) kills smalls market teams even more (let alone the draft cap puts them at a competative disadvantage once again) simply because the international market and the draft are really the only places these clubs can compete for talent at a fair level.

 

I don't see how you can say they aren't a large market club. It's the 4th biggest metropolitan area in the US and they have the 8th biggest payroll in the MLB. Both of those specifically point to the team being a large market club.

 

Compare that to San Diego, Tampa Bay, Cleveland, or Pittsburgh. All are generally smaller metropolitan areas in the US and don't typically spend a lot. Cleveland opened up the purse strings for the first time in years this year and they're going to have a mediocre product.

 

On top of that, I don't understand how you can say it's cheap. Michael Ynoa signed for $4.25 mill with the Athletics, and while he just got an extended stay stateside last year, he was not very good. He's still incredibly young, but there's no doubt that he's a greater risk than spending that $4.25 on someone else.

 

Really, it's not like these guys are all going to go in the top 30 or the top 150. They'll be interspersed throughout the draft and teams will be able to draft and sign them and build a collection of talent just like anyone else. It all still comes down to scouting and development.

 

 

[Quin]

Free agents are signed because they've had success previously in the majors. There's obviously risk, but there is far less risk in a major league free agent compared to a 20 year old international free agent. Teams can certainly overspend, but how smart was it for the Mets to sign Kazuo Matsui? or the Yankees to sign Jose Contreras? I'm sure the Red Sox are extremely happy with their decision to pay Daisuke all that they did too.

 

 

 

 

I don't see how you can say they aren't a large market club. It's the 4th biggest metropolitan area in the US and they have the 8th biggest payroll in the MLB. Both of those specifically point to the team being a large market club.

 

Compare that to San Diego, Tampa Bay, Cleveland, or Pittsburgh. All are generally smaller metropolitan areas in the US and don't typically spend a lot. Cleveland opened up the purse strings for the first time in years this year and they're going to have a mediocre product.

 

On top of that, I don't understand how you can say it's cheap. Michael Ynoa signed for $4.25 mill with the Athletics, and while he just got an extended stay stateside last year, he was not very good. He's still incredibly young, but there's no doubt that he's a greater risk than spending that $4.25 on someone else.

 

Really, it's not like these guys are all going to go in the top 30 or the top 150. They'll be interspersed throughout the draft and teams will be able to draft and sign them and build a collection of talent just like anyone else. It all still comes down to scouting and development.

 

Because then Paint it Black can't complain about the Sox not spending big bucks on foreign players