PDA

View Full Version : Tom Verducci: Three ways to fix the MLB Draft



Caveat Emperor
05-28-2010, 03:07 PM
Tom Verducci wrote a piece for SI outlining three problems with the MLB Draft (no trading of picks, overspending on mid-round picks, length of the draft) -- it's an interesting read, but this particular fact really struck me:


In 2000, major league teams selected 436 high school players after the 13th round. Only nine of those kids signed a contract that year and eventually made it to the big leagues -- a 98 percent failure rate. After Round 26, teams selected 213 high school players, only one of whom, Victor Diaz, an outfielder who appeared in 147 games for the Mets and Rangers, played even a day in the big leagues -- a 99.5 percent failure rate.
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/tom_verducci/05/28/mlb-draft/index.html?eref=sihp

Really does lend a lot of credit to the idea that the draft should be cut off a lot earlier than it is.

bucksfan2
05-28-2010, 04:03 PM
Shortening it makes sense when you look at it prospect wise. As pointed out your rarely get guys who make the big leagues who were taken late in the draft. However an organization needs fodder in order to compete at all the minor league levels. You can't have a team if you don't have enough players. A guy may never have a shot at making the big league club, but he could be valuable to a single a affiliate.

OnBaseMachine
05-28-2010, 04:06 PM
I'm definitely in favor of allowing teams to trade draft picks.

dougdirt
05-28-2010, 04:20 PM
Tom Verducci wrote a piece for SI outlining three problems with the MLB Draft (no trading of picks, overspending on mid-round picks, length of the draft) -- it's an interesting read, but this particular fact really struck me:


http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/tom_verducci/05/28/mlb-draft/index.html?eref=sihp

Really does lend a lot of credit to the idea that the draft should be cut off a lot earlier than it is.

I am curious if he counted all players, or just players who signed. Still, as noted by bucksfan2, while some guys are never going to be major leaguers, they surely can help out an A ball team (sometimes). Those teams need players too.

bucksfan2
05-28-2010, 04:22 PM
I'm definitely in favor of allowing teams to trade draft picks.

The only way this could possibly work is a hard salary cap. No "slot" "above slot", etc. You can't let Boras dictate the draft any more than he already does.

TheNext44
05-30-2010, 12:31 PM
Teams need to fill rosters, but why use the draft for that? Why not cut it off at around 20 rounds and let teams sign free agents to fill out their minor league rosters?

Scrap Irony
05-30-2010, 12:41 PM
I'd love to see all three of these changes implemented. Dealing picks makes all the sense in the world, especially if MLB also adds the draft salary cap. (If nothing else, it'd delay Borass problems years.) And signing free agents mean you can find the exact player you want (though I'd be concerned the larger market teams would sign or attempt to sign all HS players with talent).

mth123
05-30-2010, 01:02 PM
Teams need to fill rosters, but why use the draft for that? Why not cut it off at around 20 rounds and let teams sign free agents to fill out their minor league rosters?

Agree with that. If they allow trades of picks, I'd deal all mine above round 20 for a pick or two earlier in the draft and go with Free Agents.

corkedbat
05-30-2010, 02:18 PM
I wouldn't necessarily shorten the draft, but instead I'd make it international in scope.

Mario-Rijo
05-30-2010, 03:25 PM
I wouldn't necessarily shorten the draft, but instead I'd make it international in scope.

I would shorten it (and implement the other ideas Verducci puts forth as well) but I agree it does need to be international. 30 Rounds is more than enough with or without international guys. And I see Dougs point but I think the FA's available will have a better shot at advancing and doing well if they can pick the organization that suits them best, which in turn also helps the organizations.

IslandRed
05-31-2010, 02:11 PM
One other thing to consider -- right now, in any draft, there are a number of players who have early-round talent who aren't drafted until the throwaway-pick phase because everyone knows they're going to college. If the draft is shortened to the point where there are no throwaway picks and those players go undrafted, then here come the Yankees with the checkbook.

I agree that the draft can be shortened somewhat, but it'll still be long enough to satisfy clubs that there's no one left undrafted who could inspire even a small-scale bidding war.

Mario-Rijo
05-31-2010, 07:01 PM
One other thing to consider -- right now, in any draft, there are a number of players who have early-round talent who aren't drafted until the throwaway-pick phase because everyone knows they're going to college. If the draft is shortened to the point where there are no throwaway picks and those players go undrafted, then here come the Yankees with the checkbook.

I agree that the draft can be shortened somewhat, but it'll still be long enough to satisfy clubs that there's no one left undrafted who could inspire even a small-scale bidding war.

Just have to draft them sooner in place of fringy organizational filler types.

dabvu2498
06-01-2010, 11:15 PM
Just have to draft them sooner in place of fringy organizational filler types.

So "lesser" clubs would have to throw away an even more valuable draft-pick?