With a little more than four hours remaining until the 2009 draft signing deadline, we still have 10 of the top 15 picks unsigned. Every year it’s basically the same thing, and every year I spend a lot of time on the radio and responding to emails saying that this is how it basically always works, and everyone will get a deal done.
This just might be the year that I’m wrong.
There is very little optimism right now coming out of clubs with unsigned picks. Right now, we’re looking at three, and maybe as many as six players (not counting Aaron Crow, who is not subject to the deadline) not signing by midnight, and re-entering the 2010 draft. It’s messier than ever. I was planning on writing something up for tomorrow, but I think there’s something bigger here going on, and I’m doing some research and hoping to talk to people over the next few days to figure out what’s really happening – Currently aiming for Thursday for not just an update, but some real analysis, and then we can all discuss together in Friday’s chat.
Could "something bigger" be (wild speculation bordering on libel here) akin to a multi-team conspiracy to not agree to terms with Boras-led players so as to seriously hurt his credibility moving forward?
Why is Crow not subject to the deadline? I'm sure it has everything to do with the fact he did not sign last year, but I wasn't aware that players like him were subject to a different rule. Anyone want to enlighten me?
That's pretty much been done since the weekend, just i dotting a t crossing on the payment spread and things like that since he can get a two-sport deal.
Investors were saying similar things about real estate 15 years ago. Then came the bubble. Kevin, are you so sure that a bubble doesn't exist with this "bargain" as well?
It's pretty easy to tell. Baseball revenues support veteran players' salaries, with plenty left over to line owners' pockets. They also support draft spending scaled such that a bumper crop of amateur talent can be signed for the annual salary of a single veteran journeyman (aka "established starter"). Moreover a good farm system assembled via amateur spending can help a team avoid signing said veteran mediocrity in the first place. The value proposition seems self-evident, even to Dayton Moore.
Are teams banking on the Strasburg saga initiating significant changes in the draft/sign process as soon as next year and therefore willing to punt signing their pick this year?
Between one and two overall. Same situation as Crow last year. Crow was drafted with the 9th pick overall, didn't sign, Nats got the 10th pick overall this year as compensation.
I wonder if it has to do with the top talent this year not being as good as other years, and yet that talent still wants not only the same money as last year, but more.
Then throw in the economy.
Then throw in how teams are protected against not signing the pick, by getting a second chance next year (especially if teams think the talent level may be back to par or better next year).
Seems to me like the perfect storm of events for some non-signs...
Actually, the more I think about the more I wonder if teams really are thinking that with this year's draft being sub-par in the top non-Strasburg talent, that next year's pick 5a might just be a better pick than this year's 5.
I know that in the NFL, during one of the recent down years in the draft talent a savvy coach (Belichick) ended up trading a decent amount of that year's draft picks for future picks when the draft would be presumably better stocked with talent.
Makes sense for Baseball front offices to at least consider the same thing.
Other readers have rated this comment below the viewing threshold. Click here to view anyway.
Baseball is going to end up like the NBA and NHL, where draftees will get $x total, signing bonuses inclusive, and it's all because these kids think they deserve more money than most people make in a lifetime because they are good at a game.
I would have agreed that there is a larger effort to control bonuses before seeing all these monstrous bonuses coming out of the middle rounds. I don't recall seeing this many mid to high six figure bonuses, and in some cases seven figure bonuses, going to players drafted in the third round and beyond. It seems like every update about the signings over the last few days talks about a new record for a given round, only to be broken a few hours later.
So...execs think that even though first round picks are more talented and more valuable (in the WARP sense), maybe mid-round picks are potentially bigger bargains (assuming rising signing demands)?
Instinctively I wouldn't expect this to be true, but IIRC the Draft pieces by Rany J. the end of the first round through the next few rounds had a pretty gradual decline in value, right? I could see how that might be true, if that's what's going on.
I would guess tis is a tough year to implement that kind of philosophy though. With the economy down and the recommended slots cut back, first rounders had to expect bonuses to already be lower, but it'll probably be tough to accept even lower bonuses due to a new philosophy.
Peter Gammons, in several articles, alluded to Strasburg playing in Japan. Any word on that? I assume if that happened they would have to go to the indusrial league to become free agents.
What about this -
If teams figure they'll make the BIG push for slotting on draft picks in 2011, is this the first time that comes into play. Even more so for Strassburg... if he goes back in, does OK, but slotting for 2011, he's got even less leverage in 2010. I can see it as background whispering now... but teams may just view rolling draft picks as the better option. Wash "loses" him this year, but they still got a pick this year. They could always go to "easier" pick next year figuring their 2010 pick can again be hardball with "guaranteed" pick doubling up in slotted 2011 draft.
Basically they're controlling costs already, but it doesn't have to be collusion.
"This is how it basically always works, and everyone will get a deal done" is why I hardly pay attention to rumors about who is and is not going to sign. I'll read about the drama after the fact and rely on our sports writers to present the relevant material. Fortunately, there are still some sports writers who do give all relevant information.
Don't the Nationals essentially have an August 2010 deadline to sign Strasburg since they will likely have the #1 pick next year and will pick him again?
It's irrelevant now, of course, but if you fail to sign a player in year 1, you cannot draft that player in year 2 unless that player signs a waiver allowing you to do so. Strasburg was unlikely to do that (unless the teams drafting after Washington next year were even less appealing or less likely to pay him), so, no, the Nats needed to sign him now or, likely, never.
So all these top 15 guys get drafted on June 15th, never talk to the teams for 60 days, then do a deal in the last few hours. Meanwhile, they've lost a year of playing time.
Move the signing deadline up to June 30. Give them two weeks to negotiate and then get them on the playing field.
15 days might be a bit too scant, but July 15 (or 4 calendar weeks from the end of the draft) should provide teams ample time to due all of their due diligence and still allow for some negotiation time.
Teams realize that for a truly "different" talent its worth paying top dollar. But its not work playing $5 million to a draftee just because they were selected 5th or 6th. That its better investment to spread that money to five, six or seven players who might be just a hair below. That's pretty much what the Pirates did.
Is there anywhere on the Internet to find out who signed and who didn't? I use yahoo & BP & some blogs for my baseball reading, and none of them have anything about the non-Strasburg types.
Frustrating! All this buildup for days, then... poof! Little to nothing.
Baseball America has some good coverage for free, including a blog where they've been updating alot of the signings and a list (updated to yesterday morning last i looked, but maybe more current now) of those who hadn't signed in the top 10 rounds.
I've been using Rotoworld.com for general sports information needs for quite a while, and although it's a fantasy site, it rarely lets me down. It's not super detailed, however.
57 comments have been left for this post.
Could "something bigger" be (wild speculation bordering on libel here) akin to a multi-team conspiracy to not agree to terms with Boras-led players so as to seriously hurt his credibility moving forward?
Nothing involving conspiracies or collusions, no.