International draft might hinder labor talks
What would union seek in return for spending curb?
At a gathering with news reporters early in spring training 2015, baseball Commissioner Rob Manfred acknowledged what had become increasingly obvious: The mechanism for slowing down spending on international amateur free agents wasn’t working.
The Boston Red Sox had just landed Cuban prospect Yoan Moncada with a $31.5 million deal that carried a tax in the same amount, essentially thumbing their noses at penalties meant to discourage signings above allotted bonus pools.
Manfred and MLB owners were incapable of curbing such extravagant expenditures at the time, and they’re seeking to regain control now by establishing an international draft through negotiations for a new collective bargaining agreement.
The concept was part of the debate in the previous CBA negotiations before the owners relented, but it has become a major sticking point in what were expected to be fairly smooth talks to iron out a new CBA to replace the one that expires Thursday.
With less than a week before the CBA expiration, suddenly a lockout becomes more than just an abstract concept. While it’s still unlikely that two decades of labor peace will be disrupted, it’s also clear these negotiations will be far more finicky than the last two rounds that were executed relatively quietly and well ahead of the deadline.
The question now becomes: How hard is each side willing to fight for — or to prevent — an international draft?
The incentive for the owners is obvious: Much the way they limit competition for American (and Puerto Rican) talent with the amateur draft, they’d like to do the same with international players.
Powerful agent Scott Boras has long lamented — self-servingly but accurately — the disadvantage endured by clients of his such as Bryce Harper and Stephen Strasburg when they became pros because they could negotiate only with one club, the one that drafted them.
Amateurs from, say, the Dominican Republic, Venezuela and most recently Cuba — though perhaps in some cases lacking the sophisticated representation of their American counterparts — could offer their services to the highest bidder.
The imposition of restrictions brought on by the bonus-pool system added through the last CBA only partially curtailed the spending — 18 teams have blown by their limits — and not much at all when it came to Cuban talent, some of which was not subject to those regulations.
Therefore, the owners now insist on a draft to protect them from themselves.
There also are factors beyond economics that make the implementation of an international draft worth considering.
MLB is concerned about the abuses and life-threatening situations that have arisen from Cuban players relying on smugglers to get them off the island in pursuit of baseball riches, as exemplified by Yasiel Puig ’s odyssey when he escaped through Mexico in 2012. He eventually signed a seven-year, $42 million contract with the Los Angeles Dodgers.
Having more direct control of how players enter professionalism might help minimize the impact of buscones — trainers who also act as agents for teenage players — in countries such as the Dominican Republic.
There also has been talk of raising the minimum signing age under a new system, from the current 16 eventually to 18, which would encourage prospects to at least complete high school.
But the players association rightfully sees agreeing to an international draft as a major concession and it would want something of equal value in return. Media reports indicate the owners are offering to modify the draft-pick compensation system. That’s not going to cut it. As much as the players association finds it onerous that free agents who reject a qualifying offer — this year pegged at $17.2 million — would get saddled with draft-pick compensation, it is not about to equate that with allowing an international draft. After all, only 10 players were tendered qualifying offers this year. At the beginning of the season, more than 27% of the membership hailed from countries outside the USA.
Granted, the union is not exactly beholden to amateur players, who don’t become members until they join 40-man rosters. But players are certainly aware where much of their constituency comes from.
Moreover, their biggest goal coming into the new CBA was to get schedule relief, preferably in the form of a reduction in the number of games in a season. That’s not likely to happen, so the players’ top bargaining chip is holding out against an international draft.
If the owners want it so badly, it’s clearly pretty valuable, certainly worth more than the benefit of revamping a system that affected a mere 10 players this year.