The Impact of Baseball's New CBA on the Mets: The Draft Cap
Yesterday Chris broke down some of the finer points of the new CBA, namely Free Agency and how it affects the Mets. Today we'll take a look at another aspect of the new agreement -- perhaps the most controversial and oft-discussed aspect -- the drastically changed June draft. And how it will affect the Mets going forward.
Changes
So it's not completely different...it still takes place in June. Otherwise, yeah it's pretty different. First off, let's get the easy stuff out of the way:
- It's not 50 rounds anymore, it's 40.
- The signing deadline is now mid-July instead of August 15th. Easy call as this cuts out the dead space between draft and actual negotiations allowing everyone, even the staunchest holdouts, the opportunity to get their feet wet without waiting an entire winter.
- No more MLB draft "support program" aka over-slot muzzle. It's a bit complicated but in short, clubs can now announce larger deals as they happen instead of pretending they all take place just before the deadline.
- An additional year of protection is added for failure to sign picks. Before, if a club failed to sign the fifth overall pick, they got no. six the next year. If they failed to sign a second time, they're SOL. Now, that club would get another -- third -- selection the following year. Anything after that and once again, they're SOL.
- Drafted players are now only eligible to receive minor league deals.
- There is now a new round following the sandwich round that is made up solely of picks forfeited by other clubs. In the interest of brevity we'll give that topic it's own discussion later in this series.
- This one I'm calling the Dickey Corollary and it has two parts: First, if a drafted player fails a physical -- say he's missing his UCL -- and the club offers him less than 40% of what's slotted for his pick, he becomes a free agent. Part II: There will likely be a pre-draft medical 'combine' theoretically allowing all teams access to medical records for the top x amount of players, which should drastically limit the incidences of the aforementioned buyer's (drafter's?) remorse.
That brings us to the heavy stuff, namely the new Draft Cap.
MLB has, for better or worse, created a spending cap like you'd see in the other major sports; except they've just decided to implement it under the surface, at the draft level. The old idea of a draft "slotting" system is no longer just suggested, it is now more or less a mandatory draft spending limit.
Each team is awarded an 'aggregate signing bonus pool' for the first ten rounds. Teams don't necessarily have to stick to slot for each individual pick anymore, but the cumulative top-ten figure must fall below the budgeted number. Any bonus outside of the top ten but over $100K will also count against the pool.
Early reports set those pools anywhere between $4.5 and $11.5 million, depending on how many picks a club has and where those picks fall. So basically last year's crappy clubs will be on the high end of the spectrum and vice versa. The total pool throughout the entire league will hover around $185 million. That figure was collectively bargained and will be adjusted annually according to league revenues each season.
And yes, this cap has teeth.
No longer is there just a stern letter and some implicit bad tidings awaiting those slot-busting freespenders. Instead teams that hand out more than their pre-determined aggregate pool face heavy taxation on the overage and the loss of draft picks:
- A 0-5% overage on the 'aggregate signing bonus pool' would result in a 75% tax
- A 5-10% overage would result in a 75% tax AND the loss of a first-round pick
- A 10-15% overage would result in a 100% tax, the loss of a first-rounder AND a second-rounder
- A 15%+ overage would result in a 100% tax and the loss of two first-rounders -- reaching forward two seasons if necessary
For the record, all draft tax collected will be redistributed to teams under MLB's revenue-sharing plan. Any draft picks forfeited will be awarded in a lottery weighted by a club's winning percentage and revenues the previous year (those picks will represent the new round I mentioned earlier). However, any team that goes over its draft pool is ineligible to receive that tax cash or any forfeited draft picks.
Impact on the Mets
Well our one and only draft in recent memory characterized by lavish spending and subsequent high-ceiling players was fun while it lasted huh?
Last season -- after their record-setting $6.4 million draft -- the Mets would have been one of 20 teams that fell into that last penalty bucket, bumping their draft price tag up to nearly $13 million while also forfeiting first round picks in 2012 and potentially 2013.
However, despite that fact it remains to be seen whether or not this new format will hurt the Mets draft chances or actually help them going forward. Keep in mind, up until last season the Mets have historically been very conservative spenders, making this new structure mostly moot if not indirectly beneficial. What's more, few teams have been more liberal with their signing bonuses than the Phillies over the past decade, making them a prime target for the new system.
And this doesn't necessarily mean a return to the low spending, low ceiling days of the Minaya era either. Many analysts foresee relatively similar levels of dollars and talent for those first ten rounds. It's the mid-round talent that we can likely say goodbye to. This means aggressive late round picks like 2011's 15th rounder Phillip Evans, weighing in at $650,000 -- the largest figure outside of the first two rounds in Mets history -- or 16th rounder Bradley Marquez, who crushed slot expectations with his $350,000 bonus, would likely not exist. But that is true for every team, not just the Mets.
In full, the system is annoying in that the June draft is probably the most effective way to build a team long-term and this basically places a restrictor plate on that effectiveness. However, it is not without its merits. By resisting the urge to completely and utterly break the bank early on -- see Pittsburgh giving $5 million to their '11 second rounder or any recent draft by the Nats -- there should still be space for the adept GM to maneuver his way into a strong draft. What's more, there is even the potential for the crafty GM to accumulate extra picks come draft day.
In many ways, this system does in fact reward the fiscally-prudent General Manager who keeps an eye on the future. Did somebody say Sandy Alderson...?
27 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
There are 2 lotteries
I think the lottery you speak of, after the sandwich round (and also after the 2nd round), is the competitive-balance lottery which is based on a team’s revenue and winning percentage, not forfeited picks. Teams that will be eligible for the first lottery (conducted in July 2012 in preparation for the 2013 draft) are the D-backs, Orioles, Indians, Royals, A’s, Pirates, Padres, Rays, Reds, Rockies, Marlins, Brewers and Cardinals. Furthermore, a team that receives one of these picks can trade it, but only during the regular season.
Then there is lottery for forfeited picks. Any team that did not exceed its pool will be in this lottery. The odds in this one are based on a formula of revenue and winning percentage.
This article from Jonathan Mayo of MLB.com seems to cover it really well: http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20111130&content_id=26059392&vkey=news_mlb&c_id=mlb&partnerId=aw-5483368093213232526-996
yeah
I didn’t want to overload what I’d hoped would be a brief primer by expanding the scope too far so I tried to limit discussion about the lottery(s) until the next segment.
you’re right though, there are two separate lotteries. the first is open only to the bottom x teams based on revenue and market size. previous season’s winning percentage determines weighting and the ensuing picks are split into two 6-pick rounds held at the end of the first and second rounds.
the second lottery is the one i briefly mentioned, where any team that has NOT exceeded their spending pool from the prior year is eligible for the picks of any team that DID exceed their pool. in this case previous season’s winning percentage AND revenues are both taken into account for weighting.
by Rob Castellano on Nov 30, 2011 1:26 PM EST up reply actions
Technically there would be three lotteries.
One for the post-first round competitive-balance picks (6 picks total), one for the post second-round competitive balance picks (again, 6 picks total), and one for the forfeited picks. Those 13 teams would take part in a lottery to determine who gets the competitive balance picks, 6 teams would get post-first rounders, 6 would get post-second rounders, and I guess one unlucky team wouldn’t get anything. Like the NBA, it’s weighted so that the teams with the lower winning percentages have better odds at winning a pick. It’s confusing as hell, but here’s another pretty succinct write-up:
http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2011/11/13-teams-eligible-for-first-competitive-balance-lottery.html
by MetsFanXXIII on Nov 30, 2011 1:28 PM EST up reply actions
The losers of the first 6 pick lottery...
would then take part in the second 6 pick lottery. They are distinct that way. The forfeited picks lottery would then be the third lottery.
by MetsFanXXIII on Nov 30, 2011 1:34 PM EST up reply actions
Early reports set those pools anywhere between $4.5 and $11.5 million, depending on how many picks a club has and where those picks fall. So basically last year’s crappy clubs will be on the high end of the spectrum and vice versa.
Last season — after their record-setting $6.4 million draft — the Mets would have been one of 20 teams that fell into that last penalty bucket, bumping their draft price tag up to nearly $13 million while also forfeiting first round picks in 2012 and potentially 2013.
Wouldn’t the 2010 Mets have been on the crappy side of the spectrum, thereby giving us an allotment on the higher side of the 4.5-11.5 mil? I think our 6.5 mil draft (not just first 10 rounds?) would’ve been ok. But maybe I’m interpreting this wrongly.
no you're right
however, the thing is that the total league pool for 2011 was more like $130 instead of the preliminary $185 figure for next year’s draft. this means that those individual pools would have been a lot lower so who knows exactly how the Mets would have fared. and that $6.425M figure does indeed represent the first ten rounds, plus the $100K+ contracts in the remaining rounds (3 of them).
if you pro-rate these figures based on last season’s bonus slotting structure it’s something like just six clubs who would be massively penalized and i do not believe the Mets are still in that bucket.
good food for thought, I just didn’t want to get too caught up in the minutiae of this thing when I was summarizing.
by Rob Castellano on Nov 30, 2011 1:13 PM EST up reply actions
I don't think that this system really hinders the effectiveness of the draft at all
In theory this should simply have teams taking players based solely on talent vs potential injury risk, making the only guys that slide awfully far the Brackman types that scare clubs off with their medical reports. While teams likely can’t snap up the Stetson Allie’s and Phillip Evans of the world later in the draft, those guys won’t really have nearly as much leverage to demand overslot money with the new penalties. I imagine you’ll just start seeing those guys taken higher in the draft, especially now that teams have an extra year of protection for their picks.
What I do think will end up happening will be more high school players choosing college over the minors out of high school without the larger bonuses being available. I don’t really think this is a bad thing for large market teams either, as that give them three more years of development without starting their rule V clock.
by Stephen Schmidt on Nov 30, 2011 1:52 PM EST reply actions
Right
It does effect the really good two sport athletes though. There’s no way they chose to play baseball now coming out of college. Not when they could make more money playing for a more popular league like the NFL.
A deadline has a wonderful way of concentrating the mind.-Professor James Moriarty
Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.- Former Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan
by Blame-everyone-else on Nov 30, 2011 2:18 PM EST up reply actions
I'm not so sure that last sentence is really true
Top NFL players make quite a bit less annually than top MLB players with generally shorter careers. High draft picks get more money out of college, but even using Mike Pelfrey’s potential arbitration figure of about 6 million this year would be on the high side of NFLers. I imagine you’ll see less of them sign out of high school, but that really shouldn’t have much of an effect on the overall talent pool in the sport.
by Stephen Schmidt on Nov 30, 2011 2:27 PM EST up reply actions
But what about that two-sport athlete who has committed to Oklahoma or Nebraska or wherever to play QB?
If he isn’t drafted and signed out of H.S., he’s gone (unless he’s one of the very few two-sport high-profile college athletes).
Save Jenrry Mejia!
2012 Amazin' Avenue Offseason Plan: 2nd place
It's pretty rare that those guys have top shelf major league talent and don't end up playing baseball in college as well.
At most you’re talking about 1 or 2 good prospects every couple of years that baseball will lose entirely
by Stephen Schmidt on Nov 30, 2011 4:52 PM EST up reply actions
We are talking about a select few players who will be high draft picks
I mean if they weren’t they would not be considered that good of a football player and would pursue the sport they excel at (and will get a higher paycheck). It’s the really good two sport athletes who will undoubtedly pick the large paychecks and glamour of the NFL over less money and riding buses in the backwaters of the U.S. in the minors.
A deadline has a wonderful way of concentrating the mind.-Professor James Moriarty
Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.- Former Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan
by Blame-everyone-else on Nov 30, 2011 6:29 PM EST up reply actions
You make it seem as if NFL paychecks are guaranteed for elite HS players
Look at the top 20 HS football players from the Class of 2006. I think six or seven of them are in the NFL. And those are the absolute best of the best. Zach Lee wasn’t even a top 150 football recruit. Bubba Starling was No. 115. Here’s a list of the guys ranked 115 from 2006-2010: Chris Bell, Chaz Ramsey, Brandon Moore, Kraig Appleton, David Perry. Any of those guys cashing NFL checks any time soon?
So the idea those guys would turn down a couple million guaranteed from MLB on the chance they make the NFL seems iffy at best.
by Bieser's Balk on Nov 30, 2011 6:45 PM EST up reply actions
Another thing to consider
While I am not a huge fan of the new CBA restrictions in principle, one thing the Mets have done very well in recent years is finding interesting small college guys in the middle rounds (Kirk, Gorski, McHugh, Taijeron, Cohoon), those kinds of picks are going to be more valuable in the coming years, I have a feeling.
Amazin Avenue News Guru
http://metropolitantales.com
@jeffpaternostro
by Jeffrey Paternostro on Nov 30, 2011 2:01 PM EST reply actions 2 recs
I think a sad aspect of the new system
is that a lot of the best high school talent will go to college and/or switch sports.
Something I've never been able to figure out is why the MLB draft is so different from the NHL draft.
In the NHL draft, you can draft a player and you hold his rights for a period of time (it’s at least 3 years, if not more). This means that you don’t have to imminently put said draftee in your system. He can go back to college, Juniors, or his Elite League professional team in Europe no problem. If he is deemed ready to make the jump to the NHL or the AHL (the top minor league) buy the drafting team (the draftee can also participate in NHL team camps), you would then sign him to an entry-level deal. It just makes more sense to me. You draft a player, but why does that mean he has to play professionally in your system and why does he have to be signed (more or less) immediately?
Save Jenrry Mejia!
2012 Amazin' Avenue Offseason Plan: 2nd place
Baseball doesn't have the options of other leagues like hockey
But I suspect the main reason most teams want their players in their system ASAP is because they don’t trust anyone else to properly train their prospects without abusing them. In the minors, teams can place strict innings limits on their pitchers, or have their pitchers and hitters work on some aspect of their game even if costs them a few wins (like playing Thole at catcher, or having Familia work on his breaking stuff, etc..)
A deadline has a wonderful way of concentrating the mind.-Professor James Moriarty
Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.- Former Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan
by Blame-everyone-else on Nov 30, 2011 2:49 PM EST up reply actions
That's true
but they haven’t spent any money on them yet either. And it doesn’t have to be an either/or situation. There could be some players who the MLB team would want to sign immediately and put in their system for various reasons, but others who are not yet ready to play professionally. This would also allow teams to devote rookie league rosters almost solely on international signees and probably reduce the time spent in A-ball.
Save Jenrry Mejia!
2012 Amazin' Avenue Offseason Plan: 2nd place
Whatever This Means Going Forward
The Mets played nice with MLB all those years, and one year after they play the game MLB changes the rules.
Strasburg's agent is Scott Boras.
He’d’ve sold him to he Cuban League for $15.5 million and a 1962 Buick.
by Curtis3331 on Nov 30, 2011 8:42 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
He would have gotten him a Dominican passport.
"And that's why anybody who invested with Lenny Dykstra should really call that number. Lawyers are standing by."
by BobbyV_Incognito on Nov 30, 2011 11:30 PM EST up reply actions
I think the biggest influence will be a lot of a middle of the pack HS prospects
aren’t going to get enough money to forego college. I mean, they’ll still come out after their junior year of college but that’s less developmental time.
yeah
this looks like a big win for college baseball
by Rob Castellano on Dec 1, 2011 9:21 AM EST up reply actions

by 



























