![]() |
|
|
| |
« Draft Updates: Deadline, D'Backs, Rangers | Main | Rangers Acquire Jason Grilli »
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.


|
|
"Teams aren't supposed to know what the recommended bonuses are for other slots."
"This year, the recommended bonuses are 10 percent smaller, because of the economy. "
Just a thought ... but can't teams derive some slot values from this? If I had pick #10 last year, I can just deduct 10% and known the slot recommendation for pick #10 this year.
Then, next year, when we hear that slots are up 5%, I can do the same thing with THIS year's picks to derive the 2010 recommendation for those slots.
Ad infinitum ...
Posted by: kosmo @ www.ObservingCasually.com | June 09, 2009 at 01:29 PM
For sure... it would be relatively easy to estimate. Lots of teams ignore it anyways, so it's not the sort of thing teams are dying to know, but you're right.
Posted by: Ben Nicholson-Smith | June 09, 2009 at 01:34 PM
Yeah - the whole secrecy thing seems pretty silly. For that matter, the whole slotting thing seems silly to me. An owner can run a billion dollar business, but can't be trusted on how much he can afford to pay a new employee?
Posted by: kosmo @ www.ObservingCasually.com | June 09, 2009 at 02:56 PM
SLOTTING IS COLLUSION. I'D TELL SELIG TO GO TO HELL!
Posted by: Tigerdog | June 09, 2009 at 03:12 PM
Selig's recommendations are as relevant as those "do not tear" tags on pillow cases. Who really cares?
Posted by: YanksFanSince78 | June 09, 2009 at 03:50 PM
midtown - 1) The anti-trust exemption has nothing to do with collusion against players. 2) Abusive activity would get that exemption lifted rather quickly. 3) Forcing slotted signing bonuses on the players would be a violation of their freedom of contract as well as the anti-collusion provisions of the CBA.
Posted by: AA | June 09, 2009 at 04:46 PM
Is there anything to prevent Boras and other agents from creating a union for amateurs, since MLBPA dones' represent them?
The basic gist: get 75% of the top players to join the union and collectively demand certain things from the clubs (I'm not sure exactly what they would demand, this is just a hypothetical)
Imagine if 25 first rounders refused to sign ...
Posted by: kosmo @ www.ObservingCasually.com | June 10, 2009 at 11:00 AM
A union for amateur players who don't make any money until they sign? You have to remember that, except for the college seniors, the players have other options if the drafting team doesn't meet their demands. The high schooler can use that scholarship he has waiting for him and can then be drafted again a couple years later. The college sophs and juniors can return to school and play another year (or more as the case may be) and be drafted again the following year.
As for no direct consequences for ignoring slot, I've read many, many times that there are "indirect consequences" for ignoring slot because Selig really doesn't like it and he will "punish" teams that continually go over slot by other means.
Posted by: Yeldarb | June 28, 2009 at 12:39 PM