Pirates vs. Boras

I don't know if you saw this, but Pedro Alvarez the #2 pick in the baseball draft has refused to sign the contract he apparently agreed to with the Pittsburgh Pirates. The whole thing is a he said-she said kind of affair, but when you read further into it, there are some major implications regarding MLB's granting of the two parties an extension past the deadline which has resulted in the MLB player's union filing a grievance and could possibly end up voiding the contract of Eric Hosmer who was the #3 pick in the draft by the Kansas City Royals. Furthermore, there are rumblings that the whole cause of the case is Scott Boras' ego which can't handle not having negotiated the most valuable contract in the draft (#5 pick Buster Posey got $200,000 more than Alvarez). It's an interesting case, and one I have trouble picking sides on.

But I'm not going to go into that. Instead, this gives me a good reason to rail on the MLB draft. You probably don't know too much of the specifics of the MLB draft process because up until this year, MLB has refused to let there be any live coverage of it, instead conducting it by conference call among the 30 teams. As a result, they've missed years of free advertising from networks like ESPN who, if they televised it, would likely subject us to weeks on end of talk leading up to the draft, and making the top players household names. Instead even hard core baseball fans like me have to double check the article we just read to remind ourselves what the #3 pick's name is. I'm not a big NBA fan, but I can probably name the #3 pick from nearly every NBA draft from the last 15 years, and everyone knows who the #3 pick in the 1984 draft was! Terrible marketing: point #1 against MLB.

Point #2: Teams can't trade draft picks. In every other major American sport, teams can trade their draft picks, both before and after the draft. Not so for MLB. Not only can they not trade draft picks before the draft, they can't trade the players after the draft until they've signed and played one full season. This is often the cause of the "player to be named later" in baseball trades. Teams can't legally trade recent draft picks until after the season, so they agree to a deal, but leave the draft pick to be traded after the season as the player to be named later.

Point #3: The unenforced slotting system. MLB has "rules" (I use the term loosely) which instruct teams how much they should pay the player drafted #1, #2, etc... This is similar to the NBA where, to curb escalating salaries, teams have very little wiggle room for how much they can pay a player. Unlike the NBA, however, there is no enforcement of the rule. The vast majority of major league teams follow it, and if a player is perceived to be likely to demand more than his slot, most teams will pass on him for fear of being unable to sign him. However, there are a few teams (Yankees, Red Sox, and Tigers) who have been willing to draft these players and pay them how much they're asking for. MLB's response is to give them a stern phone call and say "don't do that again".

As a result of #3, couple with #2, the amateur baseball players who are widely acknowledged to be the best in the draft often don't go in the first few picks. In some cases, they don't even go in the first round! Can you imagine LeBron James not getting picked until the second round because teams knew they couldn't sign him? It's ludicrous. But by encouraging teams to follow a slotting system for how much they pay, but then allowing teams to exceed it when they want to while simultaneously disallowing teams to trade the picks, MLB's rules allow wealthy teams to collect massive amounts of talent at the expense of poor/rule following teams. As a result, the Nationals, and quite possibly the Pirates lost their first round draft pick this year. It's not just the teams that pay-the players who are drafted and can't come to an agreement have to wait until next year's draft and do it all over again!

My solution: allow teams to trade draft picks, and enforce a system for draft salaries. Personally I am all for players earning as much as they can because baseball is a for profit business and the money is either going to go to the players or to the already rich owners. I'd rather it go to the poorer (relatively) players who I'm paying money to watch play. However, I really just want to see a set of rules that makes it a fair system for all 30 teams. Either allow players to sign for as much as they can get, or take away all bargaining power and assign values to the draft positions. Regardless of the system, teams will be able to take the best player available. If they have a fixed cost, the team signs the player and he'll quickly be able to join the farm system and begin his career. If they are allowed to sign for however much they want, and it's evident that the player is asking for more than the team is willing to pay, the pick still retains value for the team because he can now be traded.

The essence of sports is their egalitarian nature, that any person or team can win it all given the right circumstances. The way the baseball draft is set up, this is not the case. Certain teams, either because they are wealthier or because they are willing to flaunt the rules, have an unfair advantage. If baseball wants to regain it's perch as the most popular sport in America, it should start by making the draft fair for everyone.