noseeum wrote:AussieDodger wrote:San D wrote:What really needs to be done is a salary system needs to be applied to the draft so the worst teams actually draft the best players. This is what owners should really be pushing for to try and equalize the playing field a bit.
I disagree. If you can't pony up $8 or 9 million for a top 5 pick that has huge potential, than you have no business having a baseball team. Gimme a break. These guys get $8 million and then their salaries are locked down for 6 years on top of however many they spend in the minors. These baseball teams are the cheapest mofos in sports. They have an artificially reduced salary for 6 years, an anti-trust exemption, a local monopoly, and yet they want a salary cap and a cap on signing bonuses for draftees? It's not enough that they've got exclusive negotiating rights, and the only choice the player has is to take the money or risk everything by waiting another year to re-enter the draft?
I can understand not wanting to pay market rates through free agency, but by the time a player has become a free agent, he's been in pro baseball for at least 8 years most times. For some of them, their only significant paycheck is from the draft. Pay up, owners. If you let a stud prospect go over $2 million, you deserve to stink.
Your logic makes sense to me, but (without analyzing balance sheets) spending less seems to be the way a small market team makes the most profits (therefore, they all spend less). Baseball is still a business. To get teams to all spend, there would have to be some type of major restructuring and this would be a difficult undertaking.
An enforced draft slotting system would be a much easier system to apply. Sure, there are issues there as well for the owners to sort out, but if owners really care about getting the playing system equalized, they should grab the low hanging fruit that is easier to attain and pursue slotting.