 |
|
|
| |
« Adam Dunn's First Choice: Cubs | Main | Gammons' Latest: Teixeira, Cameron, Montero »
Which Free Agents Will Cost A Draft Pick?
It's important to remember which Type A free agents were offered arbitration, because those players cost a draft pick if signed by a new team. Ten such free agents remain (the numbers will be explained later):
- Mark Teixeira (98.889)
- Manny Ramirez (93.438)
- Brian Fuentes (86.694)
- Orlando Cabrera (86.000)
- Orlando Hudson (79.911)
- Ben Sheets (79.038)
- Oliver Perez (78.694)
- Juan Cruz (76.627)
- Jason Varitek (76.037)
- Derek Lowe (75.430)
The following teams' first-round picks for 2009 are protected: Nationals, Mariners, Padres, Pirates, Orioles, Giants, Braves, Reds, Tigers, Rockies, Royals, Athletics, Rangers, Indians, and Diamondbacks. These teams will not lose their first-round pick if they sign one of the above free agents.
Four Type A free agents who were offered arbitration have signed with new teams:
- C.C. Sabathia (98.110) - Yankees
- A.J. Burnett (89.729) - Yankees
- Francisco Rodriguez (87.196) - Mets
- Raul Ibanez (83.684) - Phillies
The numbers represent each player's Elias rating. The numbers determined Type A/B status, but can also come into play if a team ends up signing more than one of these 14. Thoughts:
- The Yankees' #26 pick next year goes to the Brewers, unless the Yanks sign Teixeira. In that case the Angels would get it. If the Yanks sign Manny, the Blue Jays get the Yankees' third-round pick for Burnett - pretty weak. In that case the Dodgers would get the Yanks' second-round pick.
- Unless a new suitor emerges aside from the Yankees and Rangers, the Brewers will not get a first-round pick for Sheets if he leaves.
- The Dodgers won't be signing Cabrera, which would've been the best case scenario for the White Sox. The Dodgers' #17 pick remains up for grabs if they are to sign, for example, Hudson, Sheets, Perez, or Varitek.
- Rockies fans would prefer the Cardinals sign Fuentes, giving them the #19 pick. Otherwise it could be the #27 pick from the Brewers or #33 pick from the Angels (unless the Halos also sign Manny or Tex).
- If the Mets sign Lowe, the Dodgers are stuck with their second-round pick since K-Rod is ranked higher.
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d834515b9a69e20105368f7ad6970c
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Which Free Agents Will Cost A Draft Pick?:
Comments
Verify your Comment
Previewing your Comment
This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.
As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.
Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.
Top Stories
Search MLBTR
MLBTR Features
Recent Posts
Rumors By Team
Monthly Archives
Live Chats
Tuesdays at 2 p.m. CST
I'd like to see these rules adjusted to protect the league against situations like this year.
Firstly, I have issue with the Yankee spending, however it is unfortunate that the teams who lost their top guys might end up with compensation in the 4th round neighborhood b/c a team can sign so many.
Personally, I'd like to see it done so the team(s) who loses the player would get the option of waiting a year or two until a 1st round pick was available to be taken or take the pick as it would fall now.
As it stands now it hasn't yet changed but I could easily see the Jays walking away with a 3rd or even 4th round pick for Burnett.
In this instance the acquiring team isn't paying the penalty of a 1st or 2nd rounder which arguably disrupts the reasoning behind the system being set up the way it was.
Losing a 4th round pick is not nearly as painful as giving up a 1st or 2nd rounder so for the Yankees it is almost encouragement to sign as many Free Agents in 1 year as possible, versus signing just 1 or 2 per year.
Not sure how it could all be worked out, but I would like to see something done to protect teams from losing a solid value compensation.
Posted by: KangarooBoxer26 | December 20, 2008 at 04:01 PM
whoops, should read. I have NO issues with the yankee spending...
Where is the edit key when you need it.
Posted by: KangarooBoxer26 | December 20, 2008 at 04:02 PM
I agree 100%. Teams shouldn't be forced to accept a 3rd, 4th, or even 5th round pick.
Posted by: stellar | December 20, 2008 at 04:09 PM
Isn't there a limit to the number of Type A free agents a team can sign, based on the number that are available? I thought I read somewhere that a team could only sign 2 this year, with the exception that they could sign an additional 1 for each 1 they lose. Is this not true?
If it is true, haven't the Yankees already signed their 2 that are allowed? This is a question, not a statement, as I am unsure of what the rule is.
Posted by: Number5 | December 20, 2008 at 04:29 PM
number 5, even if that was the case, with the yankees losing abreu the yankees could sign 3
Posted by: hawkeyes12990 | December 20, 2008 at 04:37 PM
How about we introduce a transfer fee as the European soccer teams do. Charge a 25% fee on top of the signing price that will be returned to the players original team. So the Yankees spending say $100mm on AJ Burnett, they would pay that to the player then and extra $25mm to the Brewers.
Posted by: scottfrompeekskill | December 20, 2008 at 04:40 PM
Rule is you can sign 3 type A's + the number of type A's you lose, since the teams that sign a lot of type A's like the Yankees tend to lose a lot of type A's, this rule almost never comes into play anyways.
Posted by: zs190 | December 20, 2008 at 04:51 PM
"How about we introduce a transfer fee as the European soccer teams do. Charge a 25% fee on top of the signing price that will be returned to the players original team. So the Yankees spending say $100mm on AJ Burnett, they would pay that to the player then and extra $25mm to the Brewers."
It doesn't exactly work that way. The reason for transfer fees and the like is because European teams don't generally trade players, they buy them for lofty sums, which are then turned around to buy others. It is usually the player, not the club, that gets a piece of the transfer fee.
Posted by: AA | December 20, 2008 at 04:53 PM
Hawkeyes, Abreu was not offered arbitration. Doesn't that eliminate him from this consideration?
zs190, are you saying the rule is always 3? I really thought that the number was tied to the number of type A's offered arbitration, which was low this year. I just can't find the rule anywhere. If it is always 3, fine, but can you refer me to where one can find the rule? Thanks.
Posted by: Number5 | December 20, 2008 at 05:18 PM
The yanks have 2 first and 2 second round picks because they did not sign their 07 picks. Can they lose both?
Posted by: monsta man | December 20, 2008 at 05:18 PM
the yanks first rounder is protected, correct? b/c they never signed gerrit cole?
Posted by: bigbankyanks.. | December 20, 2008 at 05:22 PM
"The yanks have 2 first and 2 second round picks because they did not sign their 07 picks. Can they lose both?"
No. They can't lose their '07 pick.
Posted by: melonis rex | December 20, 2008 at 05:22 PM
Won't the Jays get a 1st round supplemental pick instead of a 2nd round pick?
If not, what are those 'sandwich' picks for anyway?
Posted by: fastfuture | December 20, 2008 at 05:38 PM
What really makes no sense is if a team signs "type A' Jason Varitek, the Red Sox get a 1st round pick for compensation.
However, the Blue Jays could end up with as little as the 4th round pick for Burnett who sat much higher on the Type A rating scale?
This is kind of ridiculous if you think about it. The current ranking system is seriously flawed when Varitek would yield a 1st round pick; and if the Yanks sign Teixeira, Sabathia would only yield a 2nd round pick?
Why rank the players at all if it is only relevant when 1 team signs multiple players?
Shouldn't the best free agents bring the top picks and the guys that are top tier but rank less bring less?
Posted by: KangarooBoxer26 | December 20, 2008 at 05:41 PM
This makes too much sense for them to do it but why not?
If you would not otherwise receive first round compensation for your type A free agent you lost there should be another sanwich round directly after the first round but before the current sandwich round where the team gets a pick. You still strip the signing team of their picks accordingly. So nothing is changed except no one has to take an arbitrary 3rd round pick.
I would also possibly be in favor of essentially using the ranking of the players to determine which first round pick goes to who. For example, this year the best available first round pick goes to the team that loses teix and the second would go to whoever loses sabathia etc.
Posted by: walkoffblast | December 20, 2008 at 05:54 PM
The 'early' sandwich round does seem like the logical thing to me as well - go figure.
Posted by: fastfuture | December 20, 2008 at 06:13 PM
Jays would also get supplemental round pick too, correct?
Posted by: juiced | December 20, 2008 at 06:15 PM
jays still get their supplemental pick, but you'd have to be pretty upset if you lost Burnett and got a supplemental pick and a 3rd rounder while the Red Sox could potentially get a 1st rounder and supplemental pick for Varitek, just because the team that signed Tek didn't sign any other free agents.
Obviously a hypothetical example, point is Burnett should yield better compensation then Varitek considering he is ranked higher, but under the current system that might not occur.
Posted by: KangarooBoxer26 | December 20, 2008 at 06:21 PM
Very good point.
When you have r3tarded teams like the Yankees, that's what happens I guess.
Posted by: juiced | December 20, 2008 at 07:16 PM
Rockies fans would prefer the Cardinals sign Fuentes, giving them the #19 pick. Otherwise it could be the #27 pick from the Brewers or #33 pick from the Angels (unless the Halos also sign Manny or Tex).
I'm assuming that's a typo? If the Angels sign Tex it's not like they would lose their pick to themselves.
Posted by: Socrus | December 20, 2008 at 08:02 PM
I'm pretty sure this post is wrong.
If a team signs multiple Type A free agents then the compensation 1st round picks go to the teams with the lowest draft order. Since the Elias ratings rate players against players from their peer group and not against other positions, it would be impossible to compare the ratings across positions. Article XX(B)4.d. of the CBA says "Clubs that have lost a Type A Player shall
receive the first selections, in the reverse order of their won-lost percentage
in the preceding season."
Brian Fuentes of the Rockies would then be the locked in draft pick as the Type A from the lowest selecting team followed by Juan Cruz and Orlando Hudson of the Diamondbacks. Consequently, Francisco Rodriguez and Mark Teixeira are the last players to be compensated for even though Teixeira is the second highest rated player according to the Elias rankings.
Posted by: 88stuntmen | December 20, 2008 at 09:25 PM
Wellthis is from Keith Law:
If a team signs more than one Type A free agent, its picks are parceled out to the "losing" clubs in an order determined by the ratings of the free agents the team signed. For example, Baltimore signed Baez, whose rating was 69.810, and Chad Bradford, whose rating was 62.890. Since Baltimore's first-round pick was protected, the Orioles lost their second-round pick to Atlanta (for Baez) and then their third-round pick to the Mets (for Bradford). If, however, the Orioles were to sign a Type A free agent with a rating higher than Baez's rating, then that player's former club would get Baltimore's second-round pick and Atlanta and the Mets would get the O's third- and fourth-round picks respectively.
Posted by: juiced | December 21, 2008 at 02:41 AM
People complain too much. If the Yanks lost 3 type A players, you want them to lose 3 first round picks in they sign 3 type a FA from other teams?
How about how unfair it is for teams to collect millions in revenue sharing and put it in their pockets?
Posted by: DominicanYanks | December 21, 2008 at 12:09 PM