Hugh2

Guys guys guys gusy, arguments like this about nothing, where we complain and argue about everything down to heated semantics battles are not ALLOWED until after the world series. You can't wait 10 more days????

The problem with the narrative that teams "suck" on purpose with the intent on losing more games to get a better draft pick is that in baseball you are far more likely to find your George Springers, Mookie Betts, and Aaron Judges later in the 1st round or after in baseball than you will in other sports. If you suck to get a good farm system, well....there are teams that don't suck and still are able to build elite farms.

I don't think it's that "tanking doesn't work" as much as it's the incentive to tanking in the MLB is not what it is in the NBA or NFL, generally speaking it just doesn't happen in baseball. I don't think.

OR maybe it makes more sense that teams should receive none, or a reduced portion of revenue sharing if they dip below a certain threshold.

To add to my comment above, a concept I've seen brought up time and time again is a salary floor. It can be reasonable, I think something around 100 million is fair. That's going to force the bottom 1/3 to 1/4 of teams to make decisions a little differently, I'm not so sure a financial penalty makes sense. I think it draft pick penalty makes more, yet taking away a top pick for a s***** club seems unfair. I think they can find a happy medium e.g. if you dip below you lose 25% of your bonus pool OR you become ineligible for any competitive balance picks. So, you're the A's and you have the #1 pick, you don't lose that pick.....but you shouldn't be getting extra picks in between the top rounds just because you don't make any money. I'm for the reverse ranking system of drafting across all sports. Parity helps build the brand, but giving compensatory picks for being a horrible franchise feels like moving the needle past even and too far in the other direction for me. A fair way to not completely get rid of that system is to remove those extra picks for teams that can't spend at least 80-100 million a year.

I don't disagree, but I will say how much is by design and how much is by function. Take the Red Sox for example, do they really need to go out and spend around $15-$20 million to bring a RH bat in for two years to platoon or plug up 2B/CF/RF (rotate those positions as you wish)???? no they don't it would be the easiest thing in the world to just roll with Yoshida/Duran/Verdugo if you have zero expectations of competing. Are you trying to tank? or do you just not want to spend $20 dollars if you know you're probably not going to win? Big market teams will always make that move and hope to get lucky even during bridge years, sometimes even in suboptimal conditions you see just that, E.G. the 2021 season. But small market teams who do not pull in the same amount of revenue do not have that luxury. Not every team is just trying to not spend money, but then again.......some are.

The MLB draft, despite not being anywhere nearly as marketable as the NBA or NFL draft is so much more complicated and comprehensive than any of the major sports. Some will say that you draft for BPA over need in baseball more than any other sport, yet teams will cut deals with guys at the top all the time so they can spread the money around. Literally, this is how we ended up with Marcelo Mayer. The Pirates literally drafted Henry Davis at #1, Davis was in everyone's top 5 but almost no one had him going #1 until it was rumored the Pirates were looking to cut a deal at the top. Then teams below often stay with their predetermined Picks, Texas likes pitching and stuck with what was largely considered the best pitcher in the draft in Jack Leiter, and the Tigers effectively already had a deal in place with Jackson Jobe, then Marcelo was right there for us. It's not very uncommon for the player who is highly regarded as the #1 player in a draft to go somewhere else in the top 3 or 4. Sometimes you end up making that decision and the guy you spent less money on ends up being the better pick as well. In the 2012 draft, Bryon Buxton was unanimously considered the top talent in the draft. That didn't stop the Astros from taking Carlos Correa and saving 1.2 million dollars.

"There's NO TANKING IN BASEBALL" - Tom Hanks

Not sure baseball could support 30 teams with that philosophy, heck I don't know if they could support 15.

Nobody is really tanking in baseball. The draft is more of a crapshoot than the NFL or NBA. MLB needs more than just 4-5 teams to stay solvent. Heck, if anything the good teams need someone to play.

I think they should keep the cap system but allow trading picks, this allows teams to increase their pool if they wish. Maybe you disallow top 5 or top 10 picks from being traded. They allow bonus slot money to be traded in the IFA system. It's not a stretch.

It prevents guys from moving themselves down in the draft so a richer club can sign them for more money. It doesn't work 100%, but the system the have now make it much more fair than it was.

That’s the type of s*** they should bring back if they want wheeling and dealing and exciting trade deadlines and winter meetings with more free agents. But. Big market teams exposed that system.

The 2011 draft was also the last draft where there weren’t any penalties for going over your bonus pools. I’m not even sure there pools then? But I do remember that in 2012 and from then on if you spend like that you start losing 1st round picks. I also remember the day when you could trade for a rental, let them walk and receive TWO supplemental first round picks.

Oh you’re probably right. My comment is half a joke, it’s like watching two fat ugly yankee fans getting married. “Awe, they have found love” It will be interesting to see if he gets to run another organization he takes a job that is a demotion. There’s only 30 of them.

Also, Dave D took 2 pitchers in the first round with his 4 first-round picks. He seems to be 1/2. Groome is a complete bust, and Houck is TBD but he looks to be a valuable player, it's just still iffy if he has a home as a starter or a reliever.

A first-round pick every several years that's a pitcher doesn't invalidate the concept that they predominately pump resources into the position side. This has been well-established with the Sox organization for some time. They love and draft up the middle athletes. Yes, they take a Tanner Houck here and there and not pass up on a Jay Groome when he falls. But those are more of an exception than a rule. If you purely look at the numbers, it's not going to be lopsided. You have a 180-man roster to fill out across the minors and you need roughly half pitchers at every level. But if you look at where the money is predominately being spent over the long term, it's hitting. It's much more hitting. And the fact that they draft a Trey Ball, or Jay Groome high here and there and they flop only strengthens the argument that they also develop position players better. That and you hit on position players much more often, thus increasing the probability of a dud draft when going all pitching.

Bloom didn't run the drafts, Sox had an affinity for drafting predominately position players with higher picks for years before he got here. What Bloom did do was hire more scouts and coaches and beefed up the pitching development program, something that takes years to pay dividends and maybe not the results you like if you still fail to draft those guys. Bloom doesn't have the balls to run a big market club like Boston, but he'd be perfect for a franchise that is in shambles and does not have any realistic chances of competing for years. They're losing Ohtani, money is tied up in guys who are either turning in to DL machines or have completely fallen off a cliff (Trout/Rendon). And they have the worst farm in baseball. They need to start from scratch.

If I was a betting man I’d be on the Casas will improve on defense team.

So In the 2022 draft the Angels drafted 20 pitchers with 20 picks. They only have 11 pitchers in their top 30 and only 3 from the 22 draft. They easily have one of the worse farms in baseball. They’re an organization that makes desperate moves. It’s going to be interesting to see their situation unfold.

A match made in heaven.

LAA might be in a position where they just won’t have the resources to even think about competing for a while. Seems like a good place for Bloom to see what he can bloom with a second chance. Give him four years, I’m sure he will at least turn around their farm system

I wonder where Bloom lands on his feet. I think he’d be perfect for the Angels

I really really really like the Breslow addition. But we really have no ideal how good he’s going to be. He seems nice, smart, local, and has a good track record with real game experience. But he hasn’t done a damn thing yet. Not his fault, but that’s the reality right. I will continue to live life with my optimistic nature with this in mind.

If you didn't have Verdugo, and you had an outfielder out there who could play good defense in RF, and had an average to better bat, about a TWO WAR player who would sign for one year 9.5 million you would BE ALL OVER THAT GUY. I don't think it's a safe assumption at this point, but I think it's a good one Verdugo is still here come spring time.