- Thread starter
- #1
magnumo
ESPN Refugee
Most observers believe that the Pirates had another excellent amateur draft this year. Those who follow the draft know that the Pirates' high marks result from a strategy which involves drafting "hard signs" and then paying well-over-slot bonuses to bring these guys into our system. During the past couple of days, Nutting, Coonelly, and Huntington have all been quoted about how they think they've done pretty well with that strategy.
So, what would hard-slotting (possible-to-likely in the next CBA, depending upon whom one believes) mean to the Pirates? I have mixed feelings. Here are my thoughts:
1. Like most other strategies adopted by "innovative" front offices, if the current strategy employed by Huntington and company proves successful, it will be adopted by other front offices. Obviously, this is likely to take a few more years to evaluate. However, a few other teams (e.g., Washington) seem to have adopted similar strategies already.
2. If such a strategy is generally adopted across MLB, the Pirates will find themselves right back at a serious financial disadvantage.
3. If hard-slotting IS adopted, and those hard slots average substantially less than the numbers currently being paid to amateur players (highly probably..... otherwise, why do it?), the emphasis will return to good scouting. On one hand, the Pirates will lose the ability to exploit their willingness to spend big in the draft (but they may lose that advantage anyway, as other teams adopt a similar strategy). On the other hand, ALL teams will save a lot of money on contracts and bonuses for new draftees..... and that should be good for baseball as a whole.
At this point, I'm on the fence..... but if I were pushed off, I'd probably fall on the side of hard-slotting. But I'm very interested in the opinions and thoughts of others.
So, what would hard-slotting (possible-to-likely in the next CBA, depending upon whom one believes) mean to the Pirates? I have mixed feelings. Here are my thoughts:
1. Like most other strategies adopted by "innovative" front offices, if the current strategy employed by Huntington and company proves successful, it will be adopted by other front offices. Obviously, this is likely to take a few more years to evaluate. However, a few other teams (e.g., Washington) seem to have adopted similar strategies already.
2. If such a strategy is generally adopted across MLB, the Pirates will find themselves right back at a serious financial disadvantage.
3. If hard-slotting IS adopted, and those hard slots average substantially less than the numbers currently being paid to amateur players (highly probably..... otherwise, why do it?), the emphasis will return to good scouting. On one hand, the Pirates will lose the ability to exploit their willingness to spend big in the draft (but they may lose that advantage anyway, as other teams adopt a similar strategy). On the other hand, ALL teams will save a lot of money on contracts and bonuses for new draftees..... and that should be good for baseball as a whole.
At this point, I'm on the fence..... but if I were pushed off, I'd probably fall on the side of hard-slotting. But I'm very interested in the opinions and thoughts of others.