forsberg_us wrote:

Not only can't you trade draft picks, but the player(s) drafted cannot be traded for at least a year.

Bsaeball is probably the one sport where the draft doesn't necessarily proceed in terms of talent.  It's quite common for teams to pass on more talented players for players that can be easily signed.  As Tk said, however, if you draft the more talented guy later in the draft, you have to be willing to pay the cost of signing him.

weird how that works.  i would think that the whole point of having a set wage for rookies would so that small market teams could draft and sign the best young players each year, but it seems like the powerful owners found a way to get around that.  the royals might get to draft early, but they will still be stuck with drafting the players they can afford to sign.

tkihshbt wrote:

Probably. It would depend on how much money they are willing to spend. If you have a bunch of first/supplemental/second round picks you have to reach for some signability guys, otherwise a team will wind up spending $20 million on their draft.

If te team ends up letting all those guys go spending 20 million on draft picks would  be no issue.  It would be worth it to have a system full of major league projected prospects.

Here is Zack Cox's contract


Zack Cox 3b
4 years/$3.2M (2010-13)

4 years/$3.2M (2010-13)

signed Major League contract with St. Louis 8/16/10
$2M signing bonus (paid in $0.4M installments 10/31/10 and Dec. 15, 2010-13)

10:$0.2M, 11:$0.2M, 12:$0.35M, 13:$0.45M
salaries increase to Major League minimums in majors

drafted by St. Louis 2010 (1-25) (Arkansas)
ML service: 0.016

tkihshbt wrote:

Max wrote:

forsberg_us wrote:

"i would think that the whole point of having a set wage for rookies would so that small market teams could draft and sign the best young players each year"

There is no "set wage."  There are "suggested" salary slots for each pick, but teams aren't required to follow the suggestion.

then why do so many rookies earn the league minimum of $415,000, or whatever it is?

Those are the terms of the contracts. The big money that rookies earn is their signing bonus.

exactly.  that was my point.  it defeats the whole purpose of those low salaries for the first few years if a player can demand a 'signing bonus' that makes him/her unaffordable to low payroll clubs.  it has the veneer of a method designed to promote parity, but not the effect.

The signing bonuses aren't nearly as large as you might think.  Strasberg signed what I believe was the biggest signing bonus ever paid.  It was $7.5M paid over 3 years.  If a team can't afford $2.5M/yr, they shouldn't be in the league.

Bryce Harper (last year's #1) received a $6.25M deal payable over 5 years.

Teams can afford the bonuses, they choose not to pay them.

"sounds reasonable, except there are only three guys on the royals who earn $2.5 m or better.  so your argument might not be well-supported."

If you're trying to make the case that small-market teams don't/can't pay the bonuses, the Royals are a bad example.  In fact, the Royals would be the first team I would point to in making my case.  Look at their recent draft history:

2011- Bubba Starling (1st Round, #5 overall)- signed $7.5M signing bonus (spread over 3 years).  Starling was represented by Scott Boras and had a football scholarship to Nebraska waiting for him.

The Royals also signed their 2nd Round pick, Cameron Gallagher, to the highest bonus paid to any player outside the 1st round ($750,000).

2009- The Royals drafted and signed Aaron Crow (1st Round, #12 overall) the year after Crow had been drafted and refused to sign with Washington.  Kansas City gave Crow a $1.5M signing bonus and signed him to a major league contract.

2008- Royals draft and sign Eric Hosmer (1st Round, #3 overall) and paid him a $6M signing bonus.  Hosmer now plays 1st base for the Royals.

The Royals paid Tim Melville (4th Round) a $1.25M signing bonus.  Melville was considered a 1st round talent, but fell to the 4th round because of signability issues.

2007- Royals draft and sign Mike Moustakas (1st Round, #2 overall) and paid him a $4M signing bonus.  Moustakas now plays 3rd base for the Royals.

2006- Royals draft and sign Luke Hochevar (1st Round, #1 overall), paid him a $3.5M signing bonus and gave him a major league contract.  Hochevar is in KC's rotation.

2005- Royals draft and sign Alex Gordon (1st Round, #2 overall) and paid him a $4M signing bonus.  Gordon currently plays left field for the Royals.

2004- Royals draft and sign Billy Butler (1st Round, #14 overall) and paid him a $1.45M signing bonus).  Butler currently DHs for the Royals.

2002- Royals draft and sign Zack Greinke (1st Round, #6 overall) and paid him a $2.475M signing bonus).

Greinke, Butler, Moustakas, Hosmer, Melville, Gallagher and Starling were all high school kids, which for the most part means they had other options and had to be paid more than "slot" to get them to sign.

Perhaps it's your argument that lacks support.

Fair enough, although I I don't think it's the cost of bonuses that cause small payroll teams problems.  The costs of arbitration and free agency are much more significant problems IMO.  Look at Tampa.  They competed against the Yankees and Red Sox until their younger players became too expensive.  Tampa's inability to pay Carl Crawford didn't have anything to do with draft bonuses.

Regardless, you aren't going to do away with the bonus system.  There's no way your going to implement a system in which the 1272nd kid drafted ends up playing for the same salary as the kid drafted #1.

Also, baseball has the unique aspect of being the one sport where some of its draftees have alternatives.  Most of the high school kids have the option of going to college and coming back into the draft later.  Same for college sophmores.  That gives the players much more leverage.

forsberg_us wrote:

Fair enough, although I I don't think it's the cost of bonuses that cause small payroll teams problems.  The costs of arbitration and free agency are much more significant problems IMO.  Look at Tampa.  They competed against the Yankees and Red Sox until their younger players became too expensive.  Tampa's inability to pay Carl Crawford didn't have anything to do with draft bonuses.

Regardless, you aren't going to do away with the bonus system.  There's no way your going to implement a system in which the 1272nd kid drafted ends up playing for the same salary as the kid drafted #1.

Also, baseball has the unique aspect of being the one sport where some of its draftees have alternatives.  Most of the high school kids have the option of going to college and coming back into the draft later.  Same for college sophmores.  That gives the players much more leverage.

The layers to the game of baseball is what makes it so interesting.  Is a team better off giving over time several unproven guys a couple million in bonuses or pay a free agent player a large contract.  Every team has there own way of doing things.

tkihshbt wrote:

In the spirit of this ridiculous and fluffy article by Jeff Gordon (http://www.stltoday.com/sports/columns/jeff-gordon/article_ee4bda9a-c4f4-11e0-8d69-001a4bcf6878.html), I decided to take a look at how the team is shaping up for 2012. Here's where they stand as of right now (approximate):

Veterans
Holliday - $15 million
Lohse - $11.8 million
Westbrook - $8.5 million
Wainwright - $9 million
Molina - $7 million
Garcia - $3.25 million
Carp $10 million

~$54.55 million

Minimum Wage
Jay - $415K
Craig - $415K
Descalso - $415K
Salas - $415K
Cruz - $415K
Freese - $415K
Boggs - $415K

~$2.9 million

Arbitration
Motte - arb
Scrabble - arb
McClellan - arb

That's a payroll right now of about $74 million. They would be set at four rotation spots, four spots in the field, three bench spots and five relievers. Gordon thinks they could have a payroll close to $120 million (right now it's at $110 million). I say it stays in that range.

Whatever they do, Furcal should be a must-sign.

An updated version.  If you figure in Berkman and Furcal for a total of 15 million and Pujols at 25 million the payroll is about 110 million.

Wow.  Kyle Lohse will be the team's highest paid pitcher next season.

SS-Furcal = 5mill
CF-Jay = .5mill
1B-Pujols = 23mill (2mill deffered)
LF-Holliday = 15mill (2mill deffered)
RF-Berkman = 10 mill
3B-Freese = .5mill
C-Molina = 7mill
2B-Descalso = .5mill

BN-Cruz ,C = .5mill
BN-Craig, CF,2B,3B,RF,LF = .5mill
BN-Punto, 3B, 2B, SS = .750mill
BN-Greene, SS, 2B, CF  =.5mill
BN-Skip, 2B, RF, LF, CF = 2mill

SP-Wainwright = 9mill
SP-Carp =10mill
SP-Garcia = 3.3mill
SP-Westbrook = 8.5mill
SP-Loshe = 12mill

BP-Salas = .5mill
BP-Sanchez = .5mill
BP-Lynn = .5mill
BP-Boggs = .5mill
BP-Motte = .5mill
BP-Rzepczynski = .5mill
BP-McCellan = 1.5mill

My first figure looks to be way off.  After writing it out I have come up with a 113ish payroll.  Of course I had to assume some things like Pujols, Berkman, Furcal and Skip's contract.  Still there is enough wiggle room each way that this roster shouldnt be out of the question.

APRTW wrote:

forsberg_us wrote:

Wow.  Kyle Lohse will be the team's highest paid pitcher next season.

IDK how interested teams are in overpaid, average pitchers?

Mozeliak sure seems to like them.

alz wrote:

I'm still hoping they somehow keep Jackson and dump Westbrook. I don't know how they'd do it, but he's a much better pitcher with a much better upside imo.

Now wait a minute, that was the genius of trading Ludwick.  We got Westbrook to come play in St. Louis for a 2 months, which is just long enough to fall in love with it and sign to a multi-year contract with a home town discount.