Unannounced draft signings

Kevin Goldstein of Baseball Prospectus has a good story up about unannounced, over-slot draft signings waiting for MLB approval. Within this story is a note that the Indians will sign RHP Trey Haley (second-round pick) for about $1 million, and also go over slot to sign RHP Zach Putnam (5) and OF Tim Fedroff (7). Good news if true, but none of those signings will be as significant as some over-slot signings by Red Sox and Rangers -- who are close to signing some top prospects who plunged in the draft due to bonus demands. Goldstein reports a rumor that Red Sox close to signing their 20th round pick (Alex Meyer) for $2 million... wow.

Link requires subscription to Baseball Prospectus.

about 1 year ago parsons 17 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

So why have draft slotting if no one actually follows it? Either negotiatiate “hard” slotting as part of the next CBA, or just drop all pretences that the draft is a means for bad teams to select the best players.

by Ryan on Jul 21, 2008 1:15 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Is there even that pretense? Is that written down someplace, or is it just something The Man would rather have you believe, like thinking that the gold in Ft. Knox backs the dollar?

by fleerdon on Jul 21, 2008 5:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

There are assigned slot values. I think there’s a committee or something outlined in the CBA to create these assigned values.

by afh4 on Jul 21, 2008 5:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

MLB does actually suggest slot value. But for all intents and purposes it’s useless, for there’s no real penalty for going above it.

The slotting system as currently constituted is the worst of both worlds. It funnels the best talent to the organizations with the most money, and gives poorer organizations cover for overdrafting just to save money.

There really needs to be “hard” slotting for the entire draft. Negotiate it as part of the CBA, index it to revenue, whatever – it needs to happen.

by Ryan on Jul 21, 2008 7:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Something’s fishy about this… Meyer’s agent is Scott Boras. I would not be surprised if Boras is making promises to his players that they will be drafted by specific teams. Isn’t it an unwritten rule to avoid drafting any players represented by Boras because the team will have to pay through the nose for the kid? Someone needs to investigate this guy on racketeering. (you lawyers out there please correct me on this…)

Yankees and Red Sox - MLB's Axis of Evil
(And ESPN is right in the middle)

by Spidey on Jul 21, 2008 5:25 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I don’t know if it’s illegal but it’s incredibly frustrating. It’s one thing if a team uses it’s first pick (or at least a first round pick) to take a player that it knows it’s going to pay way, way over slot for; it’s another thing if the team is able to pick that player in the 20th round.

I know basically nothing about amateur scouting but just going off his bonus, if Meyer gets 2 million that’s the amount that Matt LaPorta got. In the 20th round. So, if we can extremely loosely equate bonus money to reputation at time of drafting, Boston was able to draft a guy somewhere in LaPorta’s neighborhood in the 20th round.

Sigh.

by afh4 on Jul 21, 2008 5:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

yeah, this is total balderdash

by Gradyforpresident on Jul 21, 2008 6:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

But we’ve done plenty of this — signing guys in later rounds who are committed to college programs. It’s called “taking a flier.” You don’t know if he’ll sign, but you’ll try to impress him with your organization, offer a little more than he should have gotten, and see what happens. By the 15th round, how could it hurt?

by Jay on Jul 21, 2008 7:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Sure, every team does it – the Indians picked up Aaron Laffey that way. But with a true slotting system, the actual talent will be better matched up with the draft order. If you want to spend a third-round pick on a guy with great tools but committed to college, then it’s a talent evaluation choice, not a financial risk.

by Ryan on Jul 21, 2008 7:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Now, I don’t completely trust the source, but I think Laffey’s $400,000 is a lot less egregious enticement than $2mil. I mean, if the team wants to bring a guy into the fold right away it’ll take some amount of money to make that happen, but it’s confusing when late-rounders get so much more than our one and only first-rounder (0.8 million, in the case of Meyer vs. Chisenhall).

How might this be fixed? Should there be a cap on bonuses? Like, go ahead and give the 20th rounder $4mil, but just don’t exceed $XXmillion in total draft bonuses or pay luxury tax.

by jhon on Jul 21, 2008 8:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I think a 100% luxury tax on bonuses above slot would be an interesting way to address it.

by Jay on Jul 21, 2008 8:44 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

That would be interesting.

by Ryan on Jul 21, 2008 9:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I’d just rather go with the NBA-style slotting through at least the first 5 rounds, and then perhaps limit any bonuses after that to $1M each.

by Ryan on Jul 21, 2008 8:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

i think there’s a slight difference here jay. taking a flier on college guys, OK, they can change their mind. but willingly throwing egregious sums of money – that most teams simply cannot afford – on draft picks is just, well, unpleasant.

let’s go [socialist] tribe!

by Gradyforpresident on Jul 21, 2008 11:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

but willingly throwing egregious sums of money – that most teams simply cannot afford – on draft picks is just, well, unpleasant.

$3M for a first-round talent, wherever he’s picked, is a pretty good investment, actually – if you hit on an everyday player, that money is well worth getting the best years of his career for peanuts.

If you remove the shenanigans of drafting a guy in the late rounds and paying him first-round money, then the key factor comes down to when he’s picked. Which opens the entire draft to the teams at the top of the board, including the Boras clients.

by Ryan on Jul 21, 2008 11:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I thought in was scandalous when the Cubs giving all that money to Samardzija, their 2006 5th rounder. If what I’m reading about this Meyer dude is accurate, I’m pretty pissed off. They already broke slot to sign their 1st rounder (30th overall), SS/P Casey Kelley to the tune of $3mil. (I think we might’ve drafted him had Chisenhall not been available for ~$1.2 mil, or whatever he signed for).

I won’t hear anyone try to tell me the Sox run a tight organization. The hell they do.

by jhon on Jul 21, 2008 6:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Samardzija might be the perfect example of a mid-to-late round flier. He was expected to be a first rounder for the NFL draft and still had another year of football at ND when the Cubs drafted him. He actually pitched well in the summer before returning to play football. I would compare the Samardzija situation with that of Larry Bird, who was drafted by the Celtics prior to his senior season (the NBA subsequently instituted the Bird Collegiate Rule soon after that, requiring draftees to declare their intent to sign before the draft. Maybe, this is necessary for baseball?)

As for the Red Sox running a tight organization, I would say it is as tight as a drum. It’s hard to argue with their decisions, in light of the large budget they have to work with. Don’t get me wrong – I can’t stand the sense of entitlement the team and its fans have and delight whenever the Sawx lose. On top of that, the Red Sox are focused on the almighty dollar and have prostituted itself and the game every step of the way.

On top of that, my conspiracy theory has it that Boras and the Red Sox have many conversations that are a little shy of tampering about many of his clients.

Yankees and Red Sox - MLB's Axis of Evil
(And ESPN is right in the middle)

by Spidey on Jul 22, 2008 12:26 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs