Jared Wickerham - Getty Images
10 months ago: PITTSBURGH - JULY 23: Manager Clint Hurdle #13 of the Pittsburgh Pirates talks with President Frank Coonelly during batting practice before the game on July 23, 2011 at PNC Park in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. (Photo by Jared Wickerham/Getty Images)
I just heard back from Frank Coonelly regarding the Pirates' 2012 draft pool, and he clarified that the number will actually be significantly less than the $10 million that, in December, he seemed to suggest it would be.
Here's the background: in December, Vlad and I and several other bloggers interviewed Coonelly at PirateFest. The first question came from me, and I asked how big the Pirates' 2012 draft pool would be. You can read my questions and Coonelly's answers here. Coonelly seemed to say that the draft pool would be about $10 million. That answer surprised me, because my own math suggested the number should actually be significantly less than that. The draft pool only covers the first 10 rounds of the draft, and signing bonuses above $100,000 per pick for picks after that also count against that total.
Earlier this week, however, Jim Callis of Baseball America reported that the Pirates' 2012 pool would be only about $6.6 million, a very significant difference. I knew that, in December, Coonelly had been counting on getting two compensation picks, for Ryan Doumit and Derrek Lee, and now it looks like they'll only get the one for Doumit. But that still doesn't explain a difference of $3.4 million, since one compensation pick would be worth much less than that. So I wrote to both Callis and Coonelly to figure out what was going on.
Callis wrote back immediately, essentially confirming what he'd already written. I heard from Coonelly this afternoon. Here's what he had to say.
I have not crosschecked Jim’s numbers with the current state of the world, but my estimate from December has moved in several important respects, and it was an estimate of our total draft spend and not just our spend in the first 10 rounds.
First, I was assuming that we would be receiving two compensation selections between the first and second rounds. It now looks like we will not receive a compensation selection for Derrek Lee. We had estimated that Lee would bring a selection around [No.] 40 and roughly a $1.3M addition to the pool. That number looks to be zero now.
Second, there were more compensation selections granted to other clubs than we had estimated. There seem to have been many agreements by players not to accept an arbitration offer. These additional compensation selections reduce the value of all of our selections following our first-round selection, beginning with our lone compensation selection (for Doumit) through our 10th-round selection. In early December, we were estimating that our 12 selections in the first 10 rounds would create a pool of approximately $8M, but the large number of compensation selections mean that our 11 selections in the first 10 rounds now will create a smaller pool.
In addition, my estimate from December included an estimate for the money that we would spend in rounds 11-40. We had estimated that we would spend approximately $2M there for the total of $10M.
So it sounds like Callis' reporting -- not that there was really a reason to doubt it in the first place -- was right, or essentially right. Assuming that the Pirates' pool will be about $6.6 million, they'll be able to spend about $8.6 million if they spend $2 million on the last 30 picks, as Coonelly estimates, or a hair more than $8.6 million if they pay a tax for the overage. My sense is that it will be tricky to spend $2 million on the last 30 picks, given that teams aren't supposed to go above $100,000 on them. But it may be possible to pull off a $400,000 signing or two later in the draft by getting a few picks in the top 10 rounds to sign for less than the recommended pool maximum, and then using the leftover funds on late-round picks. Of course, the overage comes out of their pool money, which we've already accounted for.
In any case, it sounds like we should trust Callis' numbers on this one.
0 recs | 84 comments
New rules, complicated issue
Can’t be too upset with the wrong previous estimate, the Bucs will just have to adapt like other smaller market clubs to these new guidelines. As fans, we have no control over baseball’s deeply flawed system, or who owns the club. All we can do, is continue to follow the team and offer analysis. With a few breaks(including better health), this club has a shot at .500 and handing over the losing streak back to the Phillies.
SteelStealth - February 22, 2012
People keep throwing this around non-nonchalantly (no offense Charlie). Am I just wrong in my conclusion that by going over by <5% we don’t have to forfeit any picks but we do then render ourselves ineligible to gain any picks from other teams that do forfeit their picks. I know that there isn’t even a guarantee any teams will forfeit their picks, but I don’t see being able to spend ~350K extra being worth the risk of potentially missing out extra picks, no matter how to small the chance.
McCutchenIsTheTruth - February 22, 2012
Yeah, I think you’re right about that. I wasn’t trying to be nonchalant, just to cover all the bases. In practice, it will probably be a while before we know exactly what teams do with that rule.
Charlie Wilmoth - February 22, 2012
I thought they forfeited the opportunity for the extra pick
awarded to 10 of the smallest payrolls, or whatever the exact wording was.
Joe9195 - February 22, 2012
doesn't that come into play
next year?
BurgherKing - February 22, 2012
I do not know.
Joe9195 - February 22, 2012
I think so, but I'm not quite sure.
The draft changes pissed me off so much that I can’t bring myself to memorize all the details.
WTM - February 22, 2012
The competitive balance lottery does not take place until next year. However, I assume that if there are teams who exceed the threshold in 2012, those teams would forfeit picks. Those picks would be lost in the 2013 draft, so there would be a separate lottery in advance of that draft.
Charlie Wilmoth - February 22, 2012
isnt the thing the 10 smallest payrolls get
the competitive balance lottery?
Dammit, as WTM says, there’s way too much. It’d be very helpful if someone who understands it posts some sort of a “everything you need to know” post!
BurgherKing - February 22, 2012
Right. As I read it, there are two separate lotteries. One is for the losing teams and low-payroll teams. The other, which may be intermittent, is open to all teams that do not exceed their draft pools, and this is where the forfeited picks are given away.
Why they wouldn’t just remove those picks from the draft entirely and move every other team up a spot is beyond me, but hey.
Charlie Wilmoth - February 22, 2012
As far as I can tell, that’s a separate lottery. All teams that stay within the draft pool would be eligible for the lottery on forfeited picks. Again, as far as I can tell. It’s a complicated system. See here.
http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/downloads/2011_CBA.pdf
Charlie Wilmoth - February 22, 2012
My plan to make MLB better
1. Appoint Selig ambassador to Iran.
2. The day after he takes up his post, tell the Israelis to indulge themselves.
3. Profit!!
WTM - February 22, 2012
alas, we have no ambassador to Iran … otherwise Rec
Yamada - February 23, 2012
Obama appointed a new ambassador to Syria
then had to recall him later. He probably wouldn’t mind sending someone to Iran, to show how much he is willing to talk.
Brian Cartwright - February 23, 2012
Exactly.
WTM - February 23, 2012
Not to give away too much,
but I talked to NH last night while taping, and I asked him about it. and he reviewed it, too – I was really unclear on the Rounds 11-40 picks at $100K. I think I still am.
Will post it when it’s ready – shouldn’t be too long.
cocktailsfor2 - February 22, 2012
Perhaps a stupid thing to say
But I’m worried these new rules are going to make a joke of the draft. Correct me if I’m wrong, but a top talent in the draft could conceivably say “don’t draft me until round 11 or I’m not signing”, since there’s no limit on spending after that point. Someone please tell I’m just an idiot.
bosten7 - February 22, 2012 via mobile
Spending on any given pick from 11+ can’t exceed $100k or the difference comes out of your draft pool from the first ten rounds.
Vlad - February 22, 2012
(I think.)
Vlad - February 22, 2012
What I can't figure out....
1. Who are these new rules supposed to be helping out?
2. Do you think this will mean more guys will go to college (helps the NCAA, I suppose) – since they figure that if they aren’t drafted by a team with a big remaining draft budget in the first few rounds, then it’s better to come out when they get drafted really high? OR will teams basically draft all HS guys in the first few rounds, paying top dollar. And then pay pennies for guys coming out of college (in effect, guys will NOT go to college because of this – hurts the NCAA)?
impliedi - February 22, 2012
Can I ask a stupid question?
If a guy (say out of college) is drafted and doesn’t sign, does he become a amateur free agent?
The reason I ask, is that it seems these new draft rules are going to cause a lot of teams to sign a small number of players to try and maximize their dollars. That means that the minors will be much thinner than they are now. A lot fewer guys will be signed.
Obviously, these teams will have to fill out their minor league rosters somehow. And where will these guys come from?
Just curious if there will be a huge market then for “undrafted” free agents.
impliedi - February 22, 2012
I don't believe so
I think the same rules apply as years past. If he’s eligible, he’ll return to the draft. He can go to Japan and an Independent league and become a free agent that way though. I haven’t heard about this changing.
glass0941 - February 22, 2012
Even for college seniors?
Mr. E - February 22, 2012
Went back and double checked and glass is correct.
I guess, in reality, there are no such things as amateur free agents, only professional ones. If a college senior graduates, he either has to wait until he’s drafted or sign a “professional” contract.
impliedi - February 22, 2012
signing fewer players won't work
If you don’t sign a player, you don’t get to spend the cap money for their slot.
Am I the only person who thinks this gives players more leverage? They can say “Sign me for my price or you’re completely screwed.” I wouldn’t count on being able to lowball players to free up overslot money elsewhere unless you were making huge overdrafts for that exact purpose.
WHYG Zane Smith - February 22, 2012
I don't agree. necessarily.
Basically, these new rules hinder the ability for a lot of players to get huge bonuses. So, there will be a few coveted big money spots and not much else, but just because a player says “sign me for my price”, if the team doesn’t comply, the player has to go back into the draft and there isn’t many more chances that the player will get a big payday the next year, because the number of slots will be so limited.
impliedi - February 22, 2012
It gives the organizational type picks leverage to hold out for slot dollars.
Which, in my view, makes it kind of silly to draft an org type player in the first ten rounds (or whatever the number of protected rounds are if picks don’t sign). Even in the first round, lets say someone like Sanchez (not saying he was, just as an example) was a signability pick, or a way to save money for later rounds. There is now very little incentive to take that strategy anymore. Load up on as much talent as possible, hope they sign, and if they do not, that pick is protected for more than one draft. The only time you worry about signability is if the protection on the pick expires that year. If I’m the pirates, I’m increasing the number of scouts and focusing even more on talent evaluation than normal. That is the strategy I would emply if I were the pirates.
Joe9195 - February 22, 2012
the protected pick makes sense
It makes it harder to lowball a player, but if your pick won’t sign for slot it doesn’t burn up into thin air; you just get to try again with a similar slot the next year.
I really don’t see why they went for all this Rube Goldberg crap instead of just instituting hard slots. Seems like it would have the same effect.
WHYG Zane Smith - February 22, 2012
Are all 10 rounds protected or still just 1, 2, and comp rounds?
Mr. E - February 22, 2012
dunno
WHYG Zane Smith - February 22, 2012
I'm with Joe...
The strategy has to be to draft high upside guys, and that’s where scouting becomes more important than ever. The restrictions on how much a team can spend lowers the risk, so a high upside guy becomes high reward/low risk—every owner’s dream.
I know the conventional wisdom is that players will go to college, but I’m not sure that’s right. If I’m a HS star and know that my chances at a big draft bonus after three years of college are slim under the new rules, then I want to shorten the time it takes to get to the majors and ultimately arbitration and free agency. That would suggest skipping college. Had Bell gone to college his estimated arrival time to the majors would have likely been 2016 (3 years college, a full year in the minors and then a mid-season call up, and that may be optimistic). Now he has the chance to force the issue and be in Pittsburgh by 2015 or possibly 2014 (A this year, AA next, AAA in 2014 with a possible late-season call-up). And for pitchers, why take the risk of a serious arm injury when your chances at a big draft bonus are so small (same risk as before but now a lower potential reward)?
TNbucs - February 23, 2012
Don’t forget that players can buy an extra year of draft eligibility by going to JuCo for two years and then transferring to a four-year school.
Vlad - February 23, 2012
Not in the sense that you’re using the term, no. He can sign with an unaffiliated league (i.e. foreign or indy ball), but isn’t free to shop his talents to MLB teams.
If a guy isn’t drafted at all, though, he’s free as a bird.
Vlad - February 23, 2012
Cheap owners, who don’t want to invest more than necessary in amateur talent, and who resent teams that do.
Yes.
I think you’ll see some of this, as well.
Vlad - February 23, 2012
As far as I can tell, that’s basically right — $100k PLUS any leftover draft pool funds. Which of course doesn’t include any funds intended for unsigned picks, because teams forfeit the right to spend that money.
Charlie Wilmoth - February 22, 2012
I brought this up in a different thread and am unsure of the actual rule.
Each pick has a slot cap correct? So going over that slot cap will result in a tax and/or loss of pick. Is that correct? My understanding is that in the first 10 rounds you cannot go over those caps, but in the last 30, you can go over the $100k mark if there are funds left over from the first 10 rounds. Am I just not understanding that correctly or is what I wrote the case?
pskell02 - February 22, 2012
I think
and I don’t know, but I think the pool is total for the first 10 rounds. So you can go overslot in one pick as long as you go underslot in another, and sign the guy.
I think I like this system less than a straight-up hard slot.
WHYG Zane Smith - February 22, 2012
I think it's really cool that Coonelly would give you such a detailed explanation, Charlie!
impliedi - February 22, 2012
Yeah, it is pretty cool. I don’t want to abuse it, but I guess I can try doing that every once in a while now.
Charlie Wilmoth - February 22, 2012
Not too often!
you don’t want anyone to figure you out. I’ve already said too much…
Mr. E - February 22, 2012
ha!
i keep going back to the thought that no one’s seen Charlie and Nutting at the same time, and apparently Coonelly responds to both!
BurgherKing - February 22, 2012
I figured it out
He wears glasses when he’s Bob and removes them when he’s Charlie. That had the crime lab stumped for years.
Mr. E - February 23, 2012
FRONT OFFICE LACKEY!
cocktailsfor2 - February 22, 2012
NUTTING SHILL!!!!!!!!!
SALE THE CHARLIE!
maguro - February 22, 2012 via mobile
@c42: that's whygavs
WHYG Zane Smith - February 22, 2012
...was waiting for SOMEone there...
cocktailsfor2 - February 23, 2012
They hired WHYGAVS?
Brian Cartwright - February 23, 2012
na
john lackey
BurgherKing - February 23, 2012
Hey!
I haven’t been paid off by the front office. Yet.
whygavs - February 23, 2012
Kipper from PSF
changed his signature a while back after I made a “Nutting’s too cheap to pay off the bloggers” comment there.
Heh.
cocktailsfor2 - February 23, 2012
agents
I can’t believe agents are taking this sitting down. You think they would be leading the charge for anti trust law suit. Just wondering can a player not sign a consent form to not be drafted and sign as a pro with a indy team ,thus making him a free agent when his indy contract is up.Than sign with any mlb team at market prices.
wishiewashie - February 22, 2012
Hey!
How did you get Francois to tell you this
Are you the leader of some sort of demon fan wing of the Pirates that Nutting keeps in his basement?
CTapps - February 22, 2012
We're fucked.
Kosstic518 - February 22, 2012 via mobile
Does this only apply to signing bonuses??
Could you sign a guy to a $100,000 signing bonus, but give him a major league deal where he gets 1 million for each year?
Would that only count as $100k against the pool?
Does this just mean that teams will give the high-profile guys small signing bonuses, but actually give them major league deals (like Pedro got), but give them much higher annual salaries in lieu of the signing bonus?
impliedi - February 22, 2012
Or better yet....
Can you give a minor leaguer large yearly salaries? Can you sign a guy to a minor league deal, but give him $1million each year?
impliedi - February 22, 2012
I thought
I heard there were no more major league deals
PuncSpeedChunk - February 22, 2012
How about this....
You draft Gerrit Cole. You give him a minor league deal and a $400k signing bonus. But secretly promise to give him a raise the next year. The deal goes through the commissioner’s office with no problem. The following year, you renegotiate his deal to pay him $1million/year. Is this a loophole? Or are teams required to pay their minor leaguers an exact salary?
impliedi - February 22, 2012
Commish could probably veto something like that, and probably punish the Pirates for attempting it
Mr. E - February 22, 2012
IIRC, those kinds of payments are actually expressly prohibited by the new CBA.
Vlad - February 23, 2012
Even if they aren't
it has to be on the team’s word, which is a risk for the player.
McCutchenIsTheTruth - February 23, 2012
Sorry, you are correct, PuncSpeedChunk. (I guess I should have paid more attention to the new rules!!)
impliedi - February 22, 2012
Correct me if I'm wrong...
…I’ve been out of the loop on this issue.
But it seems like the high-revenue, big-market teams will be the beneficiaries here, right? They have more big-time players to lose to free agency, and thus more compensation picks and a bigger chunk of the pool.
Am I getting that right?
CTapps - February 22, 2012
There are going to be a lot fewer comp picks after this year, so that should straighten itself out somewhat in 2013.
Charlie Wilmoth - February 22, 2012
The primary beneficiaries will be teams that don’t like spending money on the draft, like the White Sox and Astros, since they don’t have to worry about other teams out-spending them and making them look bad, anymore.
Vlad - February 23, 2012
It does level the playing field, which shouldn’t have been done without something similar happening with free agency. But the ultimate winners will be the teams that are willing to spend the most money on scouting and development. A guy like Holmes will no longer fall to the 9th round, but those 9th round picks still matter. A team can’t get by with simply spending more on players that other teams pass on (players that any scouting service would identify as a good pick), they have to rely on their own scouts to uncover guys that aren’t highly rated and are willing to sign.
TNbucs - February 23, 2012
Did this strike anyone else as odd?
I’m not saying collusion because I think that term is thrown around way to frequently by sports fans, but doesn’t it kind of sound like that’s what he was getting at?
glass0941 - February 22, 2012
Collusion is really among teams, I think; or at least that’s the kind of collusion lawsuits get filed over. There’ve been handshake deals between players and teams not to accept arb.
Now if only we could’ve got a handshake deal with Derek Lee to fucking sign somewhere.
WHYG Zane Smith - February 22, 2012
or Ludwick and Snyder not to accept arb.
Mr. E - February 22, 2012
Which is why I kind of wanted to stay away from the C word
It just seemed like an odd comment to make I guess
glass0941 - February 22, 2012
Always a good idea to stay away from the C word...
maguro - February 22, 2012
I don't know, now that I'm looking closer at this, it might not be that big of a deal.
The following teams have bigger pools than their draft expenditures last year:
Twins
Astros
Cardinals
A’s
Cubs
Mets
Reds
Rockies
White Sox
Dodgers
Marlins
Phillies
Braves
Tigers
And these teams have a pool that is 1 million (or less) less money than they spent year:
Padres
Blue Jays
Orioles
Brewers
Yankees
Giants
Angels
So, really the only teams getting really screwed by this (between last year and this one) are:
Red Sox
Pirates
Royals
Nationals
Rays
Diamondbacks
who all have significantly smaller pool money than they spent this past year.
impliedi - February 22, 2012
That is how they got it through the owners, where Steinbrenner clan goes the other owners follow. You don’t think the Yankees don’t want a system that screws the Red Sox and Rays and doesn’t affect their own strategy? Screwing the Pirates and Royals and the rest is just gravy.
Yung-Han - February 22, 2012
In a way the Pirates were screwed when they drafted and signed Bell. Teams had kind of self-monitored their draft spending knowing that without restrictions it could very quickly get out of hand. But after teams like the Red Sox felt burned by the Pirates’ success with Bell, does anyone think they were going to hold back on spending next year? And once the Red Sox spent heavily, the Yankees would soon follow suit and then we’d end up with a situation where many players used the “Bell strategy” (I think Bell was sincere, BTW).
Over the last several years we saw more and more teams implementing a Pirates or Royals-like strategy. Teams were catching on, and the Pirates advantage in the draft was about to end anyway.
TNbucs - February 23, 2012
the other day someone called me out on the sox being pissed about bell after passing on him 4 times.
should have googled red sox instead of john henry.
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/sports/s_768718.html
http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slug=ycn-10524973
karreemofwheat - February 23, 2012
Killing the comp round really helps the pirates. We generally trade away players before they become free agents. This means our second round pick will be higher in actual slot position. Honestly the team that this new system screws the most is the Rays. They play well on the field, so they will never have a large draft pool, they have gotten a ton of compensation picks because they had a ton of type A free agents which soon will be gone, and they spend a ton of money on the draft. The pirates only have a problem with the last one. We have had very few Type B free agents…actually I’m not even sure when. Connelly knew the CBA would change the rules so overspent on the last couple drafts, which makes him alright in my book since it was screw you to Selig just as the Rays use of the compensation round.
Yung-Han - February 22, 2012
Get ready to shoot me.
I don’t know that this is entirely a bad thing. I do hate the fact that the Pirates have less to spend as that is how they are going to build their team. It was great signing Bell last year. However as stated in previous posts, I think the main beneficiaries are the colleges and the people getting the screws put to them the most are the agents. “Scott you can ask for as much as you want but here is what we have to offer, if you have a problem with it go see Selig.” Wouldn’t it be something if top tier players didn’t wait until the deadline and got into minors faster…seems to have worked out just fine for Bauer. The real problem comes with international signings. If teams like the Yankees feel as though they can only spend so much in the draft and they take extra money out and throw it towards international guys, the smaller markets really can’t compete.
sidbreamslegs - February 22, 2012
There is a universal cap for all teams now on int. spending (doesn’t include Cuba and Japan though). I believe it is $2.9m to start. They also bumped the signing deadline up, I think, 30 days to July 15th, which is also very nice.
Mr. E - February 23, 2012
rules for International
from Callis…players 24 and older, 5 or more years in foreign league are treated as professional free agents, no caps, options, etc. 3 years experience in Cuba for 1st two years. Players not meeting those (like Soler from Cuba at age 19) are amateur free agents, subject to bonus pools, no MLB contracts, etc.
Brian Cartwright - February 23, 2012
Aw, balls. There goes my “sign with Honkbal Hoofdklasse” loophole.
Vlad - February 23, 2012
Hence
why Soler will sign soon.
McCutchenIsTheTruth - February 23, 2012
Soler will likely sign
before July 2, when the new rules on international signings takes effect
Brian Cartwright - February 24, 2012
I need to check back with Callis
on whether it’s age and experience, or age OR experience
Say if a Cuban is 25 but only has 2 yrs in Serie Nacional, does he qualify because of age, or a 22 yo w/5 years exp, does he qualify because of experience, or does he have to meet both?
Brian Cartwright - February 24, 2012
It's weird Coonelly insisted on the notion of an extra $2M, which means it was not a part of the cash saved from the first 10 rounds
If we keep it simple, they estimated to divide $2M between 30 players. That’s $67K per player. But no team signs all of their late-rounds draftees.
If they sign 2/3 of them (30*2/3=20), we’re at $100K per. But that’s weird because historically not all late-round draftees ask for and receive a 6-figures bonuses. And I can’t see a significant reason to start this year.
That’s maybe where their new strategy to exploit the draft kicks in. But it must be really special, because apparently no one here has even a slight idea of what it may look like.
From France - February 23, 2012
Talking to Coonelly in December??
That explains the numbers…he was drunk!
TucsonBuc - February 23, 2012
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Bucs Dugout to post a comment.