Quantcast

As noted in this morning’s Bullets, the Yankees have signed Raul Ibanez, thus setting the 2012 MLB Draft order (assuming Derrek Lee isn’t going to get a big league contract, which, at this point, he’s not).

Wasting no time, Baseball America’s Jim Callis went to work finalizing the bonus pool allotments that each team will get for the Draft (recall, starting in 2012, each team will have a pool of money that they can spend on the first 10 rounds of the draft (teams get $100K with which to work for each pick after the 10th round, but if you go over $100K for one of those picks, it counts against your pool), and, if you go over the pool, the penalties can include a massive tax and lost future draft picks).

The Cubs’ pool, according to Callis, is $7,933,900 – the 8th largest pool. The Cubs pick 6th, but a couple teams behind them have more picks at the top of the Draft than the Cubs, thus, they slot in at 8th in funds to spend. The Astros and Cardinals, for what it’s worth, come in at numbers two and four, respectively, with $11,177,700 and $9,131,100 to spend.

Teams can go over by as much as 5% without losing a future draft pick (instead, they pay a 75% tax on the amount of the overage), so the Cubs could spend as much as $8,330,595 (by paying an addition 75% on that extra $400K).

The Cubs spent $6.555 million in the top 10 rounds last year, so everything is gravy, right? Well, not exactly. For one thing, the Cubs failed to sign their 8th round pick, Taylor Dugas, so their bonus pool would have been reduced by his slot amount. Secondly, and more importantly, the Cubs overspent big-time on picks after the 10th round, signing at least six kids to overslot deals in rounds 11 through 50, including big money for Dillon Maples ($2.5 million) and Shawon Dunston, Jr. ($1.275 million). Those would have counted against the pool were today’s rules in effect back then.

In other words, replicating last year’s draft will probably not be quite possible. Then again, the Cubs have far more high picks than they did last year, so the overall haul of talent could be comparable. The Cubs will have four of the top 65 picks (numbers 6, 43, 56, and 65) in 2012.

  • Edgar

    Can you remind me how Ibanez signing moves our pick? if Lee signed what would our pick be?

    • http://www.bleachernation.com Brett

      In short, the Phillies get a supplemental pick for Ibanez, which bumps the Cubs’ formerly number 54 pick one back, but since the 55 pick is locked in to that spot (for reasons beyond the scope of this simple response), the Cubs fall to 56.

      I wouldn’t worry about Lee getting a big league deal.

  • http://www.bleachernation.com Brett

    Blake DeWitt accepted his assignment to Iowa, so he’ll come to camp as a non-roster invite. And he gets to keep his $1.1 million contract.

  • Noah

    Clearly the biggest change you’re going to see is in the non-top of the first round high school talents who will instead pick college. If they were in this years draft, Dillon Maples, Trevor Gretzky and Shawon Dunston, Jr., would definitely be going to college this year instead of being in the Cubs’ system. Dan Vogelbach would be more questionable, but I think he’d still sign.

    It’s going to make the MLB amateur draft be much more like the NFL draft, but the NFL levels the salary playing field elsewhere. Honestly, I have a feeling this is going to be a dreadful five year experiment that ends with the next CBA.

    • fearbobafett

      those guys, especially Maples fell beucase of the perceved intend to goto college in the first place. With everyone pretty much being able to spend roughly the same, it just means kids like these are going to have to be drafted higher and paid just like this. Only difference will be they actually have to be drafted higher. Now who is to say you gamble on drafting a guy like this late and if you can get your other picks in on the cheaper than expected you can still go over the 100k on these guys if you have the room in your pool money to do so.
      Net affect is going to be less of these guys vs. more.
      HS kids are not going to have to make a choice, do i sign the deal on the table or risk getting injured/suck by going to college.

  • MightyBear

    How do the Cardinals come in 4th? Didn’t they win the world series? Again, baseball is the poorest run of the major sports.

    • Billy

      I’m guessing it’s based on the total number of draft picks the Cards have in the first 10 rounds, not based on what they did last year

    • http://www.casualcubsfan.com hansman1982

      Ya, they got a 1st round pick from the Angels and a supplemental pick for Pujols leaving. That is a lot of money right there.

      I hope the teams that consistently spend a lot in the draft all have a wink and nod agreement to spend 6% over cap. If you suddenly have 10-15 teams each year that lose draft picks every single year then system will go away quick. But seeing how competative baseball is, it would be a wink, nod and heh, let him lose his pick next year, not me, kind of arrangement.

      • http://www.bleachernation.com Brett

        Yeah, I think it’s more likely you’ll see teams spending 3-4-4.9% over each year.

    • JB88

      Agree 100%. Think about the competitive draft. It is based 100% on market size, which means that the most successful team in baseball from last year, St. Louis ends up with another draft pick. And it receives that year, after year, after year. How is that at all fair? If you want to create competitive balance, basing it on market size is just a terrible way to manage that.

      • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

        I don’t think the competitive balance pick is automatic.  If I remember right, eligible teams go into a lottery pool weighted in reverse order of finish (similar to the NBA Lottery).  A few teams a selected for a post-first-round pick, and a few more for a post-second-round pick, but I don’t think all teams eligible are guaranteed a pick every time.

        And now I’m going way out on a limb (my memory isn’t great), but I think if a team overspends on the amateur draft above the 5% threshold, they are removed from the lottery.

        Also, it isn’t based purely on market size; total revenue is also in the equation.  Theoretically, if the Astros were so terrible they only drew 5,000 fans a game, they might qualify for it.  Likewise, if the Cardinals were so popular that their ticket prices doubled and they sold out every home game, they probably wouldn’t.  I think there will be a handful of teams (including the Cubs) that never qualify, and handful that always qualify (like Pittsburgh), and that the rest will be a constantly churning muddle.

        • http://www.bleachernation.com Brett

          Your memory is spot on.

          • ferrets_bueller

            The problem is that the Cardinals will ALWAYS be eligible.  They got in not because of the low revenue, but because of the small market part.  And that will always remain.  Half of the teams get in on market size, half get in on low revenue.  Its not a combination thing, is an either or.

        • JB88

          You are partly right, and partly wrong in your recollection. Here is a summary from an article posted at MLB.com from November:

          “The first lottery will take place in July, after the 2012 Draft signing deadline has passed. The 10 smallest-market teams and the 10 lowest-revenue teams will be placed in the lottery to have a chance to win one of six extra picks in 2013. This doesn’t mean there will be 20 teams in the lottery. There will be plenty of crossover, with the expectation of having 13 teams involved.

          The teams that will be eligible for the first lottery are the D-backs, Orioles, Indians, Royals, A’s, Pirates, Padres, Rays, Reds, Rockies, Marlins, Brewers and Cardinals.

          The odds of winning a Draft pick in this lottery will be based on each team’s winning percentage in the previous season. The half-dozen picks will be made at the conclusion of the first round, but after the compensation picks for free agents.

          There will be a second group of six picks, coming after the conclusion of the second round. The teams from the first group that did not get one of the early picks will be re-entered, along with any other Major League team that receives any revenue sharing.”

          If you look at that list, there are 4 playoff teams from 2011 who will receive a “competitive balance” draft pick in the 2013 draft. How does that make sense? Why is market size and/or payroll indicative of needing another pick? The Cards won the WS; the Brewers played in the Division Championship, but both are eligible for a “competitive balance” draft pick. So are the Reds, who many are thinking could win the Central Division. It is just such a non-sensical add-on.

          And frankly, the cynic in me thinks it was added simply based on Selig’s interest in the Brewers.

          • King Jeff

            Selig has turned baseball into a socialist game. MLB decides who has to pay in for revenue sharing and which teams receive it, they decide which teams get extra draft picks when they lose free agents, and now they decide which teams get even more extra picks, just for being bad at managing money or having a team in a small market. Selig has handpicked many of the new owners, and hardly any of them have worked out. The whole give the Marlins to Jeff Loria and take over and move the Expos within another teams market situation still baffles me. To top it all off, MLB takes control of each team that has a Selig-picked failure of an owner, and finds another buyer for them, while maintaining payroll and operation cost, likely from money that they rake in from the large market teams that are carrying the small market teams who pocket part of their revenue sharing money. I really grow to detest the emperor more and more each day.

            • BetterNews

              Jeff-I see what your saying, but hasn’t that been that way since the beginning ?

              • King Jeff

                Some of it, yes, but most of it is a byproduct of Selig as a commissioner and Selig and Reinsdorf colluding free agency in the 80′s to the tune of a 280 million dollar fine. Selig and Reinsdorf then weaseled their way into control of baseball and introduced revenue sharing early in his tenure. After he became permanent commissioner he absolved the AL and NL offices and consolidated them into the “commissioners office”, giving himself even more control. Then recently he has changed the draft, compensation for free agents, and pretty much gave himself a raise and an extension. The guy is a crooked person who has way too much power and way too many of his friends in control of the game.

                Doc, you’re right, it’s not socialism, it’s just borderline criminal.

                • Cheryl

                  And on top of the hand-picked owners look at who the powers that be squeezed out as potential owners. Bill Veeck comes to mind as an early victim. He didn’t want to sell the sox to Reinsdorf but was forced to do it if I remember correctly. When Reinsdorf came in control of the sox I quit following them. I didn’t like him then and I don’t like him now.

                  • King Jeff

                    Between the way he keeps screwing with the Cubs, the money he got for new Comiskey, and the way he treated Jordan and the Bulls, I hate that guy almost as much as Selig and the McCaskeys.

                • BetterNews

                  Jeff-You’re right. Borderline criminality is a BIG issue. Proving criminality comes with a HUGE cost.

            • DocWimsey

              That’s not socialism: that would be funneling the money solely to the employees: i.e., the ballplayers as well as coaches, scouts, etc.  Part of what the new CBA does is reduce how much goes to some employees, and reduces how much some teams have to spend on other employees.

              Instead, this is closer to the “Royal Corporation” model of 200+ years ago, where the English government (i.e., the landed aristocracy) would control corporation charters.  (That was under King George, not King Jeff, however!)  These practices are now called “collusion!”

              And, is BetterNews is right: baseball has been like this for nearly 100 years.

              • BetterNews

                Doc-You make so many interesting points. Not just about baseball but you can carry your points right out into politics, religion , business, etc.. Of Course I am not going there, but you ARE a very bright peson.

                • DocWimsey

                  My blushes!

        • CubFan Paul

          has anyone done the math on how much the Cubs would have been fined in 2011 (actual dollar$) on rounds 11-50 (with the 2012 rules)? they spent $12M total on the draft in think (spending $6.555M on rounds 1-10, leaving $5.4M spent on rounds 11-50)

          • CubFan Paul

            no math whizzes available? i’ve tried, but ended up with three different answers/figures

  • http://www.casualcubsfan.com hansman1982

    Every time I hear more about the new CBA, I just want to hurl that many more insults towards Bud. I don’t know whether to blame the owners of that south-side-shit-shack and their friends or the player’s union more.

    • DocWimsey

      Blame Reinsdorf more than any other individual: the new CBA could just as well be called “The White Sox Way.”  I suppose that it will help their (relative) farm system in the future: everybody will be constrained to do what the ChiSox have been deliberately doing for years.

      I am a little surprised that the union caved on this, no so much because of the players, but because of the agents, who have historically exerted a lot of influence.  However, the players themselves have always felt that teams should be spending those dollars on MLB players, not guys who haven’t “earned” it by making it to the big leagues.

      • Andrew

        I think it has a lot to do with getting the free agents paid. the agents and players know that free agents are seen as a riskier bet than international and amateur talent, so they are looking to make more money for established players. The people entering the draft are not members of the union yet so their opinions are clearly not going to be well represented in the discussion.

  • Chris

    Hey Brett, remind me: can teams still use major league contracts to entice draft selections, (ie, the Trevor Bauers and Jeff Samardzijas of the world)?

    • http://www.bleachernation.com Brett

      I believe Major League contracts for draft picks is now a no-go.

  • OHBearCub

    I think what the Cubs scouts and draft team need to do is spend a great deal of time talking to the kids they intend to draft and communicate with them that they will be drafted and what their signing bonus might look like. They can get a yes or no answer. Clearly if they want to draft players like they did last year that other teams passed up because of college recruiting etc. The Cubs need to be a lot more forward and get far out ahead of the draft. Clearly nobody knows what teams in front of them will be drafting but if the Cubs are aggressive in their scouting and recruiting they should get the players they want. With this CBA teams are going to have to operate like college recruiters get in front of the kid and his parents early and often. I believe the Cubs are one of the organizations that offer a kid a college education paid for when his playing days are over. Whenever that might be. For me as a parent of a talented player I listen to that. My kid gets his college paid for no matter whether he makes it or not by reason of skill or injury. The parent’s mindset is this is a no brainer. Take the millions and if it doesn’t work out you go to college for free. Even if a later round draft pick get’s offered $100K and gets the college paid for it’s a no brainer. Were is an 18 year old kid out of highschool going to get that kind of money.

    • http://www.casualcubsfan.com hansman1982

      The thought process isn’t – hey it’s $100K or nothing, its, “Maybe if I go to school for a year or two I can become a top-ten pick and get a multi-million bonus.”

      What would be interesting is to see a big market team like the Cubs, Yankees, Red Sox, pull a Nike and buy a school like Vanderbilt and use that to get kids who fall through the draft and have a more open arena to scout and develop kids their way before drafting them highly.

  • connor
    • http://www.bleachernation.com Brett

      Thanks for that, connor. I (usually) love Jonah Keri, so I look forward to giving that a look.

    • Andy

      Definitely the most optimistic Cubs preview I have read. Makes me just a little more giddy for the season to start. And Keri is right…if a few things fall in place this team could actually be in the race for the majority of the season. LaHair, DeJesus, and Stewart are all question marks but their pasts show they could all be potential breakout players. However, the could all be busts and the Cubs would be a 70 win team. Lets hope for the former!

  • ferrets_bueller

    I think the extra draft pick lottery thing is pure BS, when it includes a team like the cardinals. Small market, my ass. Thats like calling the Packers a small market team.

  • Spencer

    What about the lottery picks?

    • http://www.bleachernation.com Brett

      A fine question.

      • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

        I could be wrong, but I don’t think either of the lotteries will affect the 2012 draft.  Stipulations and qualifications for those additional rounds (the competitive balance and the over-budget-penalty picks) are based on events in the previous season, so I don’t think they can kick in until after we have played a season under the new CBA.

  • die hard

    maybe this is what Selig was waiting for…now he can decide

  • Leotard

    Whens the draft??

    • http://www.bleachernation.com Brett

      First week of June.

  • Ryan

    Anyone know what the amount the Cubs will have to spend on international signings?

    • http://www.bleachernation.com Brett

      $2.9 million for every team, I believe, in the 2012/2013 signing year. And then it will change based on record for 2013/2014.

      • MichiganGoat

        Damn that seems really low, how does MLB expect to attract top international talent with such a small pool to spend with.

        • DocWimsey

          The “attraction” idea works only if the players have competitive offers from other sports.  Now, it’s possible that a lot of these guys will be potential futball (soccer) players, too; however, even offers of hundreds of thousands of dollars will top the offers that they will get to play futball.  And more realistically, a guy who’s a star in baseball probably is not going to be a star in futball: he’ll probably be good from pure athleticism, but the skill sets are very different: really, the only big overlap is footwork for infielders.

        • King Jeff

          This signing cap is going to all but kill any amateur Japanese players wanting to skip pro ball in Japan and come straight to America. I have a feeling that this rule might have been put in place to keep the Japanese pro leagues happy with MLB by preventing them from poaching their high school players, and it will probably eventually lead to an international amateur draft.

          • Pat

            Has there ever been a Japanese high school player signed for more than a few hundred thousand? Have any been signed at all?

            Edit – Okay, I googled this myself. Although possible, it has never happened. So basically, something that has never happened before is now less likely than before to happen now. I can’t get to worked up on this angle of it.

            • King Jeff

              Kazuhito Tadano and Mac Suzuki both jumped straight to mlb without playing pro ball. Junichi Tazawa requested that Japanese teams not draft him and signed with the Red Sox. A few weeks later, Japanese pro baseball voted to ban any players that leave the country instead of playing there. A few pretty good young pitchers have considered the move and balked, guys that were top overall picks in the Japanese amateur draft, and would have been top 20 overall prospects over here. Japan has also threatened to ban Americans from playing in Japan, and threatened to quit doing business with teams that sign their players.

              • Pat

                Tazawa was not a high schooler. He was 22 and playing in an independent league.

                http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/south-korea-japan-and-the-mlb/

                • King Jeff

                  The point was that he was a draft eligible player who passed on the Japanese draft to sign with the Red Sox, and the Japanese pro leagues reaction was to ban him for life, and do the same thing to anyone who did the same, which has discouraged some pretty good prospects from coming over. This signing limit further discourages that, and it’s fishy to me because there have been more and more Japanese high schoolers considering the jump lately.

                  • Pat

                    But again, he didn’t pass on the draft to sign with Boston. He passed on the draft to play semi pro and four years later decided to play with Boston.

                    Todano didn’t pass on the draft either. He went undrafted due to the porn scandal and had no choice but to try for a US deal.

                    My point is it either has never happened, or only happened once, depending if the fan graphs article was wrong re Suzuki. The fact that it is less likely (maybe) to happen in the future isn’t a big deal. It’s hard enough projecting US high schoolers correctly. Projecting Japanese high schoolers is likely to be a huge waste of money, assuming the kind of signing money you’re talking about.

                    Edit. Suzuki did not bypass the Japanese draft either. He was kicked out of his home and sent to California when he was 16 as a punishment for being expelled from high school.

                    • King Jeff

                      Unless my information and memory are both wrong, Tazawa wasn’t drafted coming out of high school, even though he was eligible. He then pitched for a corporate team and dominated, caught the attention of scouts and would have been drafted in the next draft, which he was still eligible for. He asked not to be picked, the pro teams complied, and he jumped ship on the agreement that he couldn’t come back to Japan for a certain number of years, which lead to the general rule for all amateurs. There was seemingly a courtesy rule for MLB teams to not poach guys, and Tazawa broke that mold, which has lead to others considering the move, and to Japan pro baseball leagues to threaten the exchange of talent between their league and MLB. I could be wrong, this all from memory of an article I read a few months ago. Also, many teams, including the Cubs, already heavily scout Japanese high school prospects.

  • BetterNews

    How is it the Cardinals have more to spend than the Cubs?

    • Pat

      More draft picks

      • die hard

        draft pick #43 would look good in a Bosox uniform…wasnt that Yaz’s number?….karma

  • sdcoddi

    This system seems like it’s really going to hurt the smaller market clubs more. The royals, pirates, rays, diamondbacks and even nationals have all depended upon overspending in the draft (mainly due to top 5 picks consistently), but they all have $6.5M or less to spend (rays and d’backs have less than $4M to spend).

    each of those teams spend as much or more on the draft last year than the cubs. looking at those numbers, i’m not as upset with where the cubs rank on the list! it will be interesting to see how this plays out over the next few years.

Bleacher Nation Privacy Policy and Terms of Use. Bleacher Nation is a private media site, and it is not affiliated in any way with Major League Baseball or the Chicago Cubs. Neither MLB nor the Chicago Cubs have endorsed, supported, directed, or participated in the creation of the content at this site, or in the creation of the site itself. It's just a media site that happens to cover the Chicago Cubs.

Bleacher Nation is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com.

Google+