Expect a change next CBA

[jacksonianmarch]

I would not be surprised if they altered the CBA when it comes to draft pick compensation in a couple yrs when they bargain again. We are seeing a lot of cases of players who are type A FAs who are getting jobbed because most teams do not want to lose their first round picks. Guys like Juan Cruz and Jason Varitek are essentially getting squeezed out of the majors by this rule. I could see the players association bargaining the picks out of the first round and into the supplemental round. A Type A player gets 2 supplemental picks, while a type B player gets 1. That would leave all the rounds untouched in the draft while giving adequate compensation to teams losing their players.

[26 to 6]

I think something to that effect will most likely happen, if they don't scrap compensation all together, which I've also heard mentioned. I think you're idea is more likely though.

[ORS]

I would not be surprised if they altered the CBA when it comes to draft pick compensation in a couple yrs when they bargain again. We are seeing a lot of cases of players who are type A FAs who are getting jobbed because most teams do not want to lose their first round picks. Guys like Juan Cruz and Jason Varitek are essentially getting squeezed out of the majors by this rule. I could see the players association bargaining the picks out of the first round and into the supplemental round. A Type A player gets 2 supplemental picks' date=' while a type B player gets 1. That would leave all the rounds untouched in the draft while giving adequate compensation to teams losing their players.[/quote']

To me this strengthens the incentives to frequent roster turnover, and magnifies the current draft compensation loophole.

 

The idea of draft compensation is to keep teams that can't afford their stars in the game by giving them extra draft picks to restock. Big market clubs routinely take advantage of this by replacing a type-A player with a type-A player, a latteral move in effect, and picking up draft picks in the process (when it's their 2nd and 3rd swap, not only do they pick up the supplemental picks, but they move up in the draft too). The current system is broken because of this loophole. You system would make that worse. Now swapping out a type-A for type-A player nets two addtional picks.

 

You could eliminate the loophole, however, by keeping a sort of tally sheet to a team's offseason activity. Type-A signings are -2, type-A player losses are +2, with +/- 1 for type-B. That way a latteral move, type-A for type-A, washes out to a net zero. To me, if a team is negative on its tally sheet, it should carry over to the following offseason.

 

As for Varitek and the current system, he was offered arbitration. He chose to listen to his silver tongued agent who totally misread the market. I have no sympathy for him.

[BSN07]

To me this strengthens the incentives to frequent roster turnover, and magnifies the current draft compensation loophole.

 

The idea of draft compensation is to keep teams that can't afford their stars in the game by giving them extra draft picks to restock. Big market clubs routinely take advantage of this by replacing a type-A player with a type-A player, a latteral move in effect, and picking up draft picks in the process (when it's their 2nd and 3rd swap, not only do they pick up the supplemental picks, but they move up in the draft too). The current system is broken because of this loophole. You system would make that worse. Now swapping out a type-A for type-A player nets two addtional picks.

 

You could eliminate the loophole, however, by keeping a sort of tally sheet to a team's offseason activity. Type-A signings are -2, type-A player losses are +2, with +/- 1 for type-B. That way a latteral move, type-A for type-A, washes out to a net zero. To me, if a team is negative on its tally sheet, it should carry over to the following offseason.

 

As for Varitek and the current system, he was offered arbitration. He chose to listen to his silver tongued agent who totally misread the market. I have no sympathy for him.

 

I like your idea. It seems to be reasonable.

 

 

I also agree with you on Tek. He could have excepted arb and got 10M for 1 season. And after the season he had last year, that was might generous. I still wonder however though if his divorce proceedings had anything to do with his offseason approach?

[riverside sluggers]

They also got to refine how they determine who are Type A free agents. Jason Varitek has been on a decline for the past 3 seasons