Of the 14 free agents to receive qualifying offers this winter, nine have already figured out where they will be playing next season, leading to some noteworthy adjustments to the 2022 draft order. For a refresher on the QO rules, you can check this list of what signing a qualifying offer-rejecting free agent would cost each team, or this list of what teams receive as compensation for losing a QO-rejecting free agent.
Or, for simplicity’s sake, you could just read this post right here as a quick summary of the extra picks gained and lost due to these signings. First of all, four of the nine signed players don’t factor into the discussion, since they are back with their former teams — Brandon Belt accepted the Giants’ qualifying offer in the first place, while Raisel Iglesias re-signed with the Angels, Chris Taylor re-signed with the Dodgers, and Justin Verlander re-signed with the Astros.
For the five other signed QO free agents and the five unsigned QO free agents, here is the breakdown of what their former teams would receive as compensatory picks. The specific order of the compensatory picks is based on the previous year’s record, so the team with the fewer wins would get the superior pick.
- Extra pick after Round 1 of the draft: This is awarded to a team that receives revenue-sharing funds, and whose QO-rejecting free agent signs with another team for more than $50MM in guaranteed salary. The Rockies and Reds would therefore each qualify if Trevor Story (Colorado) or Nick Castellanos (Cincinnati) signed for $50MM+. Since the Reds had the better record between the two teams, the Rockies would pick 32nd overall and the Reds 33rd overall if both clubs indeed ended up in this same category. If Story and/or Castellanos signed for less than $50MM, Colorado and/or Cincinnati would be in the next group…
- Extra pick between Competitive Balance Round B and Round 3: Four picks have already been allotted within this group, comprised of teams who don’t receive revenue sharing funds. The Mets received an extra selection when Noah Syndergaard signed with the Angels, the Blue Jays received two picks when Marcus Semien signed with the Rangers and Robbie Ray signed with the Mariners, and the Red Sox got a pick when Eduardo Rodriguez signed with the Tigers. Like Toronto, the Mets could also receive a second pick if Michael Conforto signed elsewhere. The Braves (Freddie Freeman) and Astros (Carlos Correa) would also land in this category if their respective QO free agents left town. The draft order of this sandwich round based on 2021 record would line up as Mets (77 wins), Braves (88 wins), Blue Jays (91 wins), Red Sox (92 wins), and Astros (95 wins). For the moment, the four picks in this group represent the 75th-79th overall selections in the draft, though that specific order will be altered based on where the other QO players sign, or what other second-round picks might be surrendered as penalties for signing those free agents.
- Extra pick after Round 4: For teams that lose a QO free agent but exceeded the luxury tax threshold in 2021, their compensatory pick is pushed back to beyond the fourth round. Therefore, this is where the Dodgers will make their extra pick in the wake of Corey Seager’s deal with the Rangers.
Moving on, here is what the four teams who have signed QO free agents had to give up in draft capital…
- Second-highest 2022 draft pick, $500K in international signing pool money: The Angels didn’t receive revenue sharing funds, and didn’t exceed the luxury tax in 2021. As a result, signing Syndergaard will cost the Angels their second-round draft selection and a chunk of their funds for the next international signing period.
- Third-highest 2022 draft pick: The Mariners and Tigers fall into this category, as teams who received revenue sharing payments in 2021. For Seattle, this is simply their third-round selection. For Detroit, their “third-highest pick” won’t be determined until MLB establishes the order for this year’s Competitive Balance Draft. Depending on which of the two CBD rounds the Tigers are drawn into, their cost for the Rodriguez contract could either be their second-rounder or their pick in Competitive Balance Round B.
- Both their second AND third-highest 2022 draft picks, and $500K in international signing pool money: The Rangers splurged by signing both Seager and Semien, and thus faced twice the draft penalty (both their second-round and third-round picks) for landing a pair of QO free agents. Texas would have faced the same penalty as the Angels if it had signed just one of Seager or Semien.
- Second- and fifth-highest 2022 draft picks, $1MM in international signing pool money: The stiffest penalty is reserved for teams who exceeded the luxury tax threshold last season. Therefore, only the Dodgers and Padres would have to give up multiple picks to sign a single QO free agent, which would surely influence any efforts on their part to pursue Correa, Freeman, Conforto, Story, or Castellanos.
The very problem with MLB, from the first explanation:
“ This is awarded to a team that receives revenue-sharing funds”
I’ll take “a double reward for tanking” for $500, Alex.
It’s part of the business for small market/revenue collecting teams to “tank”. Small market teams are just a training ground for stars before they are traded away. Yankees never have to worry about money or even having to develop players from with in. Last I checked, Gerrit Cole, Gary Sanchez, Carlos Stanton, Jameison Tallion, Adonis Chapman, Joe Gallo, DJ LeMahieu, Luke Voit, and more, we’re never went through the Yankees system or “prep” them for the major leagues. Most of the names above or not mentioned, are from small market teams like the Pirates, Ray’s, Marlins, Twins, A’s, Indians, and Orioles. Besides Judge, Yankees don’t have too many on that major league roster who did not come from another team. So, who is really abusing the system here?
The comp picks only apply to free agents signed from another team. Only Cole (and maybe Chapman) required a comp pick that were on the Yankee roster last year. Everyone else was either a low impact free agent, accquired via trade or drafted/IFA.
Chapman cost the Yankees no draft pick. He was ineligible for a QO when they signed him.
you’re right, mainly.
when they signed him after 2016, he wasn’t eligible for one (since he was traded in middle of 2016).
but when he opted out after 2019, he was and the yankees did indeed tag him before he signed a new deal with them.
Correct me if I’m wrong but didn’t the Yankees extend Chapman before the QO deadline so he never forced them to play their card?
After the spending spree Texas just went on, do you think you did a good job of proving your point by adding Gallo to your list?
Sanchez also has only played for the Yankees.
When DJLM first became a free agent, Colorado signed Daniel Murphy for the exact same contract the Yankees signed DJ to.
Not sure who Carlos Stanton and Adonis Chapman are.
Voit was a nobody when traded for.
I find it interesting that outside of money, the Dodgers face the same penalty for signing Correa or Conforto. The union will not change things but shouldn’t the penalties be based on the QO AND the total value of the signed contract (in addition to the other criteria mentioned in the article)?
Joe: Did you happen to catch the RAB Vlog regarding the CF prospect who is favored to sign with the Yankees, Mayea? He’s only 15 now but apparently a Franco-esque stud.
So, between ‘22 & 23’ international drafts they’re supposed to be locked for uber-prospect Roderick Arias & Brandon Mayea.
Not bad…not bad at all.
Please, Hammer. Don't hurt 'em.
He made a somewhat reasonable point though. Some of the teams are receiving compensation for going through the trouble of developing good players that other teams are just going to poach. I don’t know if it’s fair or not but the Yankees are one of the teams that do a lot more poaching than developing and that could be seen as a reason they don’t get the same compensation.
I don’t see a huge problem with tanking if the teams aren’t going to contend that year anyway. They might as well save up their funds and prospects to put towards years they actually stand a chance. Some teams take it to far though. It’s a shame what the A’s and Reds are doing and it seems like the Pirates are always tanking but it never gets them anywhere. The Rockies on the other hand don’t tank enough. The Diamondbacks should probably consider tanking too. Neither team stands a chance and that money could be used during years where the teams are better. Stockpiling prospects by trading guys like Story, Gray, Cron, and Marte would have helped speed up the process too.
They should’ve never done away with Type A, Type B, etc.` You can always play around at the margins, but that perfected rewarded and discouraged teams from signing various types of FAs. A guy like Seager should cost a #1, and recompense the losing team with a #1. No one signing a $300M player is going to care about losing a #1.
Then a player like Conforto could cost you maybe a #3, which no one will care about.
It could go either way. No one was concerned about Pittsburgh when they farmed-up perennial MVP contender and winner in Andrew McCutchen along with Walker, Alvarez, Marté, Cole, Polanco, Harrison, etc. Pieces fell into place for a time for then. They’ve still been developing guys but not everyone turns out plus they thought they saw a way to contend for WC recently and acquired Archer which didn’t work. I’m sure there will always be differences in what folks opine to be “tanking enough/too much”. Every team has more to consider than how or when to tank, such as revenue. Unfortunately the business of the sport often conflicts with the sport of the sport.
Please, Hammer. Don't hurt 'em.
That’s a good point SinHalo. If the Pirates and other teams don’t even get to draft the guys like Cole and Cutch and whoever before they sell them off, what do they have? Pretty much nothing. If teams like the Yankees or Dodgers or whoever is spending a ton of money also get the high picks the low payroll teams are toasted. They won’t be able to sign the players and they won’t be able to draft them either.
In the broad scheme it makes sense. The Pirates are already so bad. Can you imagine how much worse it would be if the teams with higher payrolls got to draft the players they poach from them? The Pirates would have no money and even less draft picks to put on their team. I’m not saying what the Pirates do is right. This game is about the fans though. It’s not about the owners. All a change would do is punish Pirates fans even more. Aren’t they already enduring enough? They can’t help if the owner sucks. They don’t get a vote. The fans of big money teams will always know their team stands a chance though. They don’t need any help. At least let Pirates fans get excited about draft picks. It’s all they have for God’s sake.
Aren’t they already enduring enough?
As a RS fan, I think the idea of punishing small market teams to be a ridiculous concept. I never liked our persona of ‘lovable losers’ and I have no intention of going back.
But I also don’t want a league of teams relying solely on revenue streams. Beating TB, CL, etc., would become meaningless. And as wealthy as we are, we still have a fraction of NY’s revenue streams.
Past that, there has to be a reward for working smarter, as opposed to just having a bigger checkbook.
@PiratesFan1981, first off, Carlos Stanton and Adonis Chapman must be players from an alternative universe.
Gary Sanchez has only been a Yankee, same as Luis Severino, Jordan Montgomery. Add in Nestor Cortes and Domingo German, who has been with the Yankees for seven seasons, and you have a top four (2nd in the AL) by fWAR. Voit? He basically was an unheralded player regarded as a AAAA player. The Yankees traded Giovanny Gallegos, who they signed and developed, for Voit. So you don’t want to give them, or similar teams I’d guess, credit on either end? They don’t get credit for Voit or Gallegos? They traded for James Taillon using prospect capital they identified, signed, and developed but opted to trade them because they view Taillon as someone who could help them the next two years. But let me guess here. I was a fan of both Miguel Yajure and Roansy Contreras who were sent to the Pirates in the Taillon trade. So when they contribute to the Pirates, you won’t give the Yankees any credit for them. See the flaw in your logic?
Let’s use another example since it also involved the Pirates. The Yankees developed Francisco Cervelli, one of a number of catchers who all reached the majors. The Cisco Kid served them well for six seasons, then they traded him to the Pirates for Justin Wilson, who they then traded the following year for two unknown AA arms named Chad Green, who also have served them well. They’ve turned Green into one of the best middle man/set up man in the majors.
Your view here is very biased because it views the only talent one way: someone a team signs and holds forever. The Yankees always draft at the back of the first round, sometimes not even the first round. That’s a “consequence” of not having a losing season in 28 years. The last time they were bad they drafted Derek Jeter. It’s kind of easy, right, to pick up great players when you draft at the front end? Aaron Judge? That was the year they had three first-round picks. They purposely let Swisher leave to have another 1st round pick. They were all at the back end, but it increased their odds of hitting on at least one. They did. Oh, and btw, one of the other players they drafted was then used to trade for Chapman, who then they used to trade for an A-ball player named Gleyber Torres. This past off season, why were the Yankees capable of trading for Gallo and Rizzo? Prospect capital, although none of them their top prospects.
If your team is not signing talent in the minors, not trading for talent in the minors, not signing free agents, then they’re not trying to win. If they’re only using one or two of those talent pools, then they’re likely a losing team.
As for Carlos Stanton and Adonis Chapman…
RobM: Just….excellent, sir. Your response summed up nicely the problems with the Pirates’ fan’s biases above, which you cogently countered.
The players the Yankees acquire tend to be at high minor league levels or MLB level. Hard to give them credit when the player spends virtually no time in their system. The Pirates, on the other hand, tend to acquire lower level prospects who are years away. So, yeah, its hard to give credit to the Yankees development, and much easier to give credit to the Pirate system, when a player works out. Maybe Sanchez would have developed as a C in another system. It sure didn’t happen in NYYs. With Golschmidt in STL, Voit wasn’t going to make it up. There wasn’t a lot of development needed there, just a short fence and a hot streak. Now every NY fan wants him dumped because he got injured. Not very good examples to be touting.
Gary Sanchez was signed by the Yankees as an amateur free agent at age 17 and played 6+ seasons in their minor league system (651 games). He’s never been anything but a Yankee.
Luke Voit was acquired from the Cardinals–not exactly a team that ‘tanks’–for two pretty good relievers that the Cardinals wanted for down the stretch in 2018 (Gallegos is still with the team and pitching well).
Carlos Stanton and Adonis Chapman are pretty bad mistakes, too.
We Stay Hungry We Devour
There’s a guy on the yanks called Carlos Stanton?Thats what’s taking up much of their payroll
The Yankees are paying the players what they are worth and not “using” them like teams of the group that you appreciate. If Pirates, Ray’s, Marlins, Twins, A’s, Indians, and Orioles paid their players what they are worth when they become free agents or even before they would never lose any players to the Yankees, Red Sox or Dodgers.
If Pirates, Ray’s, Marlins, Twins, A’s, Indians, and Orioles paid their players what they are worth when they become free agents
So all the small market teams have to do is spend like they are the Yankees and Dodgers? A bit like saying that the solution to my neighbor having a faster car than me is to spend $300,000 on a Ferrari.
Technically true, but rather impractical.
The truth is, and I am not sure why this is not more obvious, is that small market teams have smaller markets than the big-market teams, and have to adapt strategies to account for that.
Wow from the department of complete misunderstanding. If someone has to use an extreme outlier to try and make a point then ultimately they have no point to make.
Many of you fail to see the point. Many of you lack economics of MLB baseball. Or don’t quite understand the geographical side of things. NY Yankees and Mets take up majority of the state of NY and able to have their own channels YES and MSG (or whatever Mets channel is) because they have rights to 3/4 of the state of NY and New Jersey to north of NJ. They have the revenue plus the city to buy any player they desire and potentially break the luxury tax. Pirates have 35% of PA and the other goes to Phillies and Washington (southeast part of PA before touching Phillies territory). Pirates have Cleveland to contend with in Ohio and only gets a small portion of the Southeast corner of Ohio and Western part of Virginia. Pirates are in a city that also has a smaller per capital than cities like NY, LA, Houston, Chicago, San Francisco, Philadelphia, and more. Baltimore is sandwiched in between 4 other teams North, South, East, and West. So, teams like Pirates, A’s, etc. do get scraps compared to larger markets. You can’t blame smaller markets for tanking to try and get a few good years before doing it again. It’s a rinse and repeat for many small market teams. Marlins, Pirates, Orioles, A’s, Twins, Guardians (Indians), Rays, Royals, and so on have all tanked at one point.
I read about someone telling me I was being biased on this and mentioned the Archer trade. The Pirates did what the Yankees normally do and paid dearly for it. Pirates do not have the money pocket like the Yankees and can shake it off. A move like that proved that small markets can’t take a blockbuster gamble unlike the larger market teams. Small market teams can suffer for years for stupid moves like that. Rays don’t usually make stupid moves like that and remain competitive. They get what teams are desperate enough to give.
As for Gary Sanchez, I thought he came from Miami like Stanton did. My humble apologies on that one. But 3/4 of the Yankees major league roster is players brought up through smaller market teams. If you want to go with the traditional 26 man roster. And yes, if any small market team that continues to develop A or even AA players from trades, they have brought them and nurture them.
Point is, unless there is equal sharing of “territory”, the economics of MLB will remain the same unless a salary cap is placed in the league. Salary cap wouldn’t be a bad idea if they use a similar stance with players rights as the NBA does. But rich owners/larger market teams will never agree to it because it gives smaller market teams “equal” rights as them. For decades Jerry Jones has tried to get enough owners to remove the salary cap from the NFL. But there are enough small revenue teams that object to it. Green Bay, Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Baltimore, Tennessee (Nashville), Tampa Bay, Miami, and others couldn’t compete otherwise. It goes for the same with NHL and NBA. NBA type salary cap and players rights, would end this lockout.
Laughs in Tampa Bay tones. All MLB teams are flush with money. Some ownerships simply do not care about winning no matter how much their fans do. And for the record, the Met new owner is a lifelong fan that grew up 15 minutes from the stadium and is the wealthiest owner in all MLB. Smh oh what an essay
The Saber-toothed Superfife
They should actually extend team control rather than shortening it.
A salary floor could help that, otherwise turning a 100 loss rebuilding team into a 120 loss team with a depleted farm is certainly not the answer.
A salary floor doesn’t solve a single problem that is currently occurring in mlb besides paying the players more. Do you people watch and understand how other sports work. Like honestly.
Last I checked, Other 2 main “sports”, as in NBA and NFL? Both were full of activists and 1 also ccp communist sympathizers (nba).
I’d like to see MLB continue staying away from ANYTHING those 2 do as long as possible while both continue circling the drain.
Don’t disrespect the NHL like that.
Okayyy looking beyond your very interesting ideals. The NHL is a multi billion dollar league. They have a cap floor, its used as a way to rebuild and as a way to abuse the system. Small market teams are constantly taking on other teams terrible contracts in order to get to the cap floor as well as a way to acquire either prospects or draft picks. Ottawa has a very cheap owner that likes to get players who have been paid in the front half of their deals with little left in actual dollars to be paid but still have full salary cap hits. MLB would have the hindsight of seeing how all the other teams have already implemented their cap teams and be able to build off of those. The luxury tax needs to be changed to help all teams not just as a way for the big teams to abuse the system or for middle ground teams to compete for year or two before they too rebuild because they can’t afford the penalties for being over.
A salary floor puts in a minimum payroll for teams to spend more to secure better talent to be more competitive. A salary cap would also prevent teams from building all-star squads.
Flag and country are both rubbish.
The Saber-toothed Superfife
Keep out the commies!
Tanking might not be ideal for fans of those teams but in reality it’s the best way to eventually get out of the dumpster and back into contention. It’s a lot harder and generally takes longer to assemble a competitive team in baseball than any other sport.
The reality is no team ever wants to tank but sometimes it’s necessary. Small market teams need to build up a strong farm system and develop a homegrown core because they don’t have the financial means to sign top free agents whenever they’re available. Picking near the top of the draft is the best way to do that so that’s where tanking comes in.
I say all of this as a fellow Yankee fan. We don’t have to worry about our team tanking because they’re rich and can use free agency to plug holes when necessary. Teams like the Pirates, Orioles, and Royals who are among the biggest tanking culprits don’t have that same luxury
A salary floor exists in other sports like the nba and nhl and nba, all sports that have tanking.
The premier league (soccer) doesn’t have tanking. Why? Nope not because of relegation but because the revenue is pool together and put into a pot and the better you do in the standings the more money you take from the pot. That’s the best way to incentivize teams not to tank
I’m not a follower of premier and I do think pool together sounds like a good way to prevent tanking, but I think relegation would be a great deterrent – play well or get demoted to a minor league. As for a solution for the top four grossing American sports, one possibility is to reset the way the first rounds of their amateur drafts are handled. I’m sure some teams would fight this, but I think a hybrid of the ways the top leagues to do it plus a new twist would be useful. The NFL’s system of having the playoff teams at the latter part of the round based up when they are eliminated is a good one. I also think the NBA’s lottery system for the top four picks is good as well. The twist I would add would be reversing the pick order between the top four out of the lottery and the teams that made the playoffs. This way a team that just missed the playoffs would get the fifth overall pick if it doesn’t win one of the top four spots in the lottery.
Hi, can you elaborate on what sources of revenue contribute to the pool and how that is divided up?
Replacing a larger market with a smaller market like Toledo or Scranton or Buffalo is just going to make it even harder for the new “major league team” to compete. It won’t happen but the way to correct the problem is to provide each team with a protected area of equal size. It would allow more teams into the larger markets like NY and LA, but make each of those teams weaker, by causing them to share TV revenue like Baltimore and Washington. Also cities wouldn’t be happy with multiple teams trying to get stadiums. Unless full revenue sharing takes place (large market teams will never allow it) there will always be an unequal playing field.
The Saber-toothed Superfife
BS. Investing in the team is the best way. You can still sign and trade guys without totally stinking and it is more entertaining for the fans.
Watch Mn contend or trade
The very problem with MLB,
And why is this a problem for the MLB? The only way a team with a $200M revenue stream can compete with a team with a $500M revenue stream, is to occasionally tank.
That was some good work Mark. There are a lot of nuances to this and I have to admit, my head kind of hurt after reading it. But seriously dude, good work!
Do we not know, however, which CBD Round (A or B) the teams will fall based on where they drafted last year?
From a jasbcar comment on the linked 2021 CBD info:
“Under the 2017-21 CBA, six clubs will be awarded picks in Round A based on a formula that considers winning percentage and revenue. Those six teams will pick in Round A in 2017, 2019 and 2021. The remaining teams — estimated to be between six and eight — will pick in Round B in those years. The groups of teams, which will not change for the duration of the 2017-21 CBA, **will switch picking in Round A and B in alternating years** based on their initial assignment of round in 2017” (asterisk emphasis mine – SP).
Can anyone confirm?
Are we sure about any of this? couldn’t it all change with whatever the new CBA is?
Not for this group of free agents. They became free agents and rejected the QO under the last CBA.
lumber and lighting
Wonder what team lost the most salary in 1 yr all time?Im guessing this yrs LAD but I don’t know!
Do the Reds get a pick for being a revenue sharing team and losing Castellanos? i. e. 2 picks. versus just 1. In the past they got a competitive balance pick between the first and 2nd rounds.
Nope, the Reds would just get the one pick after the first round
BTW, nice job on the explanations. It’s hard enough to keep up with spin rates. Free Agency just puts one more layer of complexity on this.
Those penalties for the LAD and SDP are fairly severe.
Question-IYO, what is $1M in international spending worth, in terms of a US draft pick? Maybe a 3rd rounder? Or better yet, for a future article, what is the international market worth relative to the US market?
Did Stromen not receive a qualified offer from the Mets.
Stroman got the QO in 2020 and accepted it. Thus, Mets could not give him one again in 2021.
A salary floor would address some but not most issues.
I like a cap and floor as follows.
50% tax on salary over $330 million or 50% under $90 million. There would be no qualified offers anymore. If you are over $330 or under $90 million two years in a row, you lose your 2nd round draft pick. Three years in a row, you lose your second and third round draft pick. If you go over $350 million, you lose your next first round draft pick as well. Draft order for bottom six teams is randomly selected, followed by 7-30.
23 Kansas City Royals $86,565,788
24 Detroit Tigers $86,348,945
25 Seattle Mariners $83,837,448
26 Tampa Bay Rays $70,836,327
27 Miami Marlins $58,157,900
28 Pittsburgh Pirates $54,356,609
29 Cleveland Guardians $50,220,534
30 Baltimore Orioles $42,421,870
For above, I meant to have $330 million for the 50% tax, $300 million to lose a second round pick, $350 million to lose a fist round pick.
I hope you realize these teams don’t have $300 million in revenue,
Some of these teams do NOT have 300 million in revenue, but all should be able to spend 90 million per year and avoid a tax. If cannot spend 90 million per year in payroll for most years, then sell part or all of your team to an owner who will. Team owners get a lot of their profit in the increase in team value, which I realize for some owners is tricky if they have limited assets other than the team.
And penalty thresholds for spending more than 300, 330 or 350 million.
The Saber-toothed Superfife
The floor is the minimum salary x 26.
No one can tell another how to spend their own money.
Mariners reported about 350mil in revenue last year or so I hope you realize your comment is asinine and wrong
Interesting how a competitive sport isn’t allowed to compete in a free market.
Centrally managed anything leads to market distortions which lead to more management and consequently more distortions.
Imagine telling a lion they can only kill on odd numbered days, the type of prey and present an agreed list of kill sharing protocols presented by the less skilled hunters. You’d lose your head 🙂
Old woman – Lions live in an autonomous collective. They are no longer kings.
Little girl – you can take the lion out of the jungle but never the jungle out of the lion.
Dodgers should have QO’d Kershaw
I don’t think they’re worried about that because I believe he will be back there. I could be wrong though, and he could very well go home to TX, in which case, yeah, I guess that is a very logical point.
If I had to guess he probably does stay but they really had nothing to lose by QO’ing him.
That’s true and always made me wonder why teams don’t QO guys that are certain to get a job somewhere. The only logical reason would be that the team doesn’t want to pay the QO cost for the year and instead wants to bring back at the lower value (Cashman has done that often).
But, outside of that certainty, it seems it a very viable risk, especially for a team that will easily eat that 18+ million for one year. Curious non-move indeed.
What if, instead of punishing rich teams for spending, they rewarded poor teams for spending. If the Pirates signed Scherzer, toss in an extra high-round pick or two.
Or just reward winning teams by awarding them the higher picks?
And I think they need to go back to allowing pick-trading. It worked and was a very good mechanism to facilitate player trades.
That was one of the stupidest ideas ever for the MLB. It would increase the volume of trading at the deadline, since some GMs will simply jettison their future picks, and make the draft much more interesting.
Just imagine the possibilities. You get 95% of a trade resolved, so you ask for a 3rd rounder to make it happen. Or how many future 1st rounders would Preller trade away?
Go back to trading picks? Other than the competitive balance picks, which can still be traded, when did MLB allow any other picks to be traded? Can’t go back to something that never was.
That’s exactly what I thought. I was trying to figure out when it was allowed. Regardless of that though, it should be allowed. The issue with trading away picks in MLB is you might not see what that produces for half a decade or more. Not like the NBA or NFL where you can trade for a first rounder or a second rounder or even later and you can get a player they can help out your team right away with that pic
This is a rare occurrence…the Mets 1st round pick last year didn’t sign for several reasons and they received a second 1st round pick this year as a result (believe #14)…but it falls into the category of second highest pick they have…undue harsh penalty that they will endure…as a reward for losing Syndergaard to the Angels they will get the 75th pick…unbalanced system to say the least
And my usual rant: how did it ever get to this point with SD? They went from having the best farm in baseball to the new Evil Empire.
They are not the new “Evil Empire”. They’ve earned Court Jester status, maybe. Can’t be an empire when you consistently lose the war. Machado and Tatis screaming at each other in the dugout “It’s not about you!” was one of the most entertaining moments of the 2021 baseball season.
Your window of entertainment is too narrow. Preller traded for Cronenworth, then signed Profar to back him up, then signed Kim to back up Profar, then traded for Frazier to back up Kim, then traded away Frazier at a loss, and is looking to trade at a loss.
Traded away catchers Mejia and Torrens (combined bWAR of 2.6) and traded for catchers Nola and Caratini (combined bWAR of 0.9).
There is virtually no move by Preller that I don’t consider highly entertaining.
At this time, this is completely irrelevant. When Manfred comes out December 1st, seconds after the lockout took affect and proclaims the owners are willing to do away with compensation picks, you can bet this is likely going away.
It’s like speculating Ohtani’s free agency after year five. We don’t know yet.
It’s crazy people are paying attention to this.
I read that competitive balance draft picks cannot be forfeited by signing a free agent who declined the qualifying offer under the CBA that just expired, but I cannot find the source. That means the Tigers cannot lose their pick in Competitive Balance Round B.
Also, the Mariners should have a pick in one of the Competitive Balance rounds which might throw this off.
This should reordering of the draft should be relevant even if the system changes with the new CBA. Similar to how the CBA changed in the 2011-12 offseason. The Phillies forfeited a draft pick to sign Jonathan Papelbon even though they would have retained the draft pick had they waited until after the new CBA came out.