Quote:
Originally Posted by Le Grande Orange
Without the amateur draft, the situation would return to what was seen in the 1950s and early 1960s, namely, signing bonuses rapidly spiralling ever higher. With the only limitation on signing an amateur player being the bank account of the major league club, rich franchises would quickly sign the best talent and the poorer franchises would get the leftovers.
The problem of out-of-control signing bonuses is what prompted MLB to adopt the amateur draft in the first place. Some clubs were spending more in signing bonuses than they were spending on salaries for their major league rosters.
|
Well, yea, because that was before free agency and teams spent about $1.75 on salaries for major league players. Amateur free agency was the only free agency. At least then players had some control - they could pick what organization they signed with. Now most players never have a choice, because the vast majority never get the service time required to become free agents, or if they do for most it's as six-year minor league free agents whose prospect labels have long since expired.
Anyway, at least in baseball, a combination of amateur+experienced player free agency has never been tried. It's possible that would lead to less parity, but that's not certain. With fewer restrictions and rules and organization there will be more loopholes and ways to game the system, and more advantages for teams who scout and analyze better. Smart teams might still be able to win.