Free Agent Compensation Re-mix
If we've gained anything this offseason, it's that we can now be 100% absopositutelutely sure that the free agent compensation system used by MLB is flawed. Here's my idea on how to fix the system. It's not too far from the current system, I think it just fixes a few illogical steps in the process and makes it more fair.
Rank all free agents based on WAR (or something like that, I'm not great with all the new metrics for player value, but I thought WAR was a good one, anyways it doesn't matter too much). The FAs are then broken up into type A, B, and no comp, similarly to how they are done now, except they'd be based on WAR over the past 3 years instead of whatever stats are used now.
When a Type A FA signs with a team, if that team has a top 15 draft pick, it's still protected, but if that team's pick is not protected, their pick goes into a pool for compensation. Teams still don't have to surrender a pick for signing Type B Free Agents, but sandwich picks would still be given for both Type A and B. After all the free agents sign, or right before the Rule 4 Draft, the picks from the pool are distributed based on the rankings of the free agents. Here's an example that I hope will illustrate my point.
Without looking up WAR (I know, very lazy) say these free agents rank as follows:
1. Mark Teixeira, 2. CC Sabathia, 3. Brian Fuentes
There would obviously be many more in between, but I'm just simplifying it for the sake of this illustration.
Yankees sign Teixeira and Sabathia, Angels sign Fuentes. Yankees surrender their 1st and 2nd Round Picks, and Angels surrender 1st round pick. In the current system, the Brewers receive the Yankees 2nd rounder and a sandwich pick, the Angels receive the Yankees 1st rounder and a sandwich pick, and the Rockies receive the Angels 1st rounder. Now, how is it fair that, although the Brewers lost a better FA than the Rockies, they receive a lesser pick? I feel that teams should be compensated based on how much they lost, as they obviously don't have any impact on where they sign.
In my system, the picks would be distributed as follows. All the picks surrended would be in a pool, and they would be given out based on the rankings of the players lost by each team. So the Angels would get NYY 1st rounder (+ #1 sandwich pick), Brewers would get LAA 1st rounder (+ #2 sandwich pick), and Rockies get NYY 2nd rounder (+ #3 sandwich pick).
The major downfall with this is that the Yankees (or any team who signs multiple Type A's) have a diminishing draft pick cost to sign the next Type A, but I'm not sure how that could be avoided. Overall, however, I think this system would do a much better job of equitably distributing draft pick compensation. Now let's hope Bud Selig is reading this...what else is he getting paid $18 MM to do?
0 recs |
10 comments
Comments
Not a bad thought
I’ve read more radical ideas, but it would be simple and probably an easy sell to keep the system the same except distribute the picks in order of the free agent rankings.
Scored three times and detonated an indisputable in four visits to the batting box.
by Jordan M on Feb 8, 2009 10:42 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Yeah that was my thought
Would be fairly easy/seamless to integrate the changes
by marty22 on Feb 8, 2009 12:36 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
there's an interesting discussion
of possible adjustments to the system between some big saber-names here.
Also, cheese.
by Jeff Sackmann on Feb 8, 2009 11:33 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
So I like the idea of draft order being based on market size, and not payroll or record. :)
Scored three times and detonated an indisputable in four visits to the batting box.
by Jordan M on Feb 8, 2009 12:11 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
What about having a pool of compensatory picks
Instead of teams having to give up picks to sign a free agent, the pick would come from the pool. I never understood why teams should have to pay twice to sign a player, in both money and picks. I’m assuming that it’s meant to deter players from leaving, but it certainly doesn’t do that.
This way, teams get compensated for losing a free agent, but teams aren’t punished for signing a free agent.
by tcyoung on Feb 8, 2009 2:07 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
next time i'll read the post before commenting
by tcyoung on Feb 8, 2009 2:17 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
no, you're fine
Your idea is different than the one I proposed. It touches on something TangoTiger discussed in the thread that Jeff posted above, which is that the cost of the draft pick drives down the value of the players (see Cabrera, Orlando; Cruz, Juan; Varitek, Jason), essentially eliminating the fact that they’re supposed to be “free” agents
by marty22 on Feb 8, 2009 3:17 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
In general, he's right, you should be able to pick your team after 6 years
but those guys have no one to blame but themselves for not accepting arbitration.
Scored three times and detonated an indisputable in four visits to the batting box.
by Jordan M on Feb 8, 2009 3:53 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

by 
























