Maybe the most elite guys. For the vast majority of them it works fine.

 

Cutting the amount of the pool helps players fine? Huh. We'll just disagree on that, I guess. But hey the owners have more money!

 

Cutting the amount of the pool helps players fine? Huh. We'll just disagree on that, I guess. But hey the owners have more money!

I don't think the overall pool was cut at all, just the distribution was changed. So if the top 10 picks get less but picks 50-300 all get more, that's fine by me.

 

Unless I fat-fingers something, the overall bonus pool is 2-3% higher this year than last year ($228M vs $233M).

Edited January 27, 20179 yr by markos

Here's 2016's bonus pool:

 

http://www.baseballamerica.com/draft/2016-mlb-draft-international-bonus-pools/#3bAHm8QRhpt2BZyL.97

 

It doesn't look like the total pools have been reduced, just the slots for the guys at the top, so it does look like there is about the same amount of money to go around, but it just can't as easily be hogged by the top guys.

Correct, total pool isn't cut, just the top slots were flattened a little bit. Upshot is that there is less of a gap between the top pools and everyone else.

 

Like I said, that is probably the best long run move, just unfortunate that the Twins couldn't get the benefit for one more year. International pool too.

 

I don't think the overall pool was cut at all, just the distribution was changed. So if the top 10 picks get less but picks 50-300 all get more, that's fine by me.

 

Unless I fat-fingers something, the overall bonus pool is 2-3% higher this year than last year ($228M vs $233M).

 

Thanks, I was misled....though 2% is hardly keeping up with baseball inflation. 

The labor loving liberal part of me hates the draft and I think baseball really screws with young kids far too much.  The baseball fan in me loves the draft.  

 

The labor loving liberal part of me hates the draft and I think baseball really screws with young kids far too much.  The baseball fan in me loves the draft.  

 

I think they screw them in wages, but the entry level bonuses would not be that much different for about 95% of people entering baseball. For some of them it might even lead to a bigger bonus - those drafted after round 1 but before round 10.

 

I also think if it was true free agency for amateur players it would lead to competitive disadvantage in the long run, with highest revenue teams consistently spending on the best talent. The reason we don't see that in the international market, for instance, is that it is done in the context of constraint. Lift that and there will be different outcomes.

 

I think it is a harder situation to thread than is usually suggested by analysis that is overly simplistic in my mind.

Jonathan
12:52 Would any U.S. amateurs get a 60 FV from you at this point?

 

Eric A Longenhagen
12:52 Yeah, Kendall, Faedo and Greene and you can make a case for Wright. Can't wait to see the Vandy guys in a few weeks.