Dodgers' spending spree is no reason for MLB to have international draft

Jesse Spector

Dodgers' spending spree is no reason for MLB to have international draft image

The Dodgers have plenty of money to sign big-ticket free agents this winter, but before the hot stove really gets burning, Los Angeles is still finding ways to spend. On Monday, Jesse Sanchez of MLB.com reported the Dodgers have agreed to deals with Cuban outfielder Yusniel Diaz and second baseman Omar Estevez, teenagers whom Los Angeles will give a combined $21.5 million.

For this international signing period, which runs until July 2, that will bring the Dodgers to a cool $45 million spent on prospects. That dwarfs the $17 million the Yankees spent in the last period, so Los Angeles will face the same penalty New York did: a 100 percent overage tax on money spent over the pool limit (which varies by team based on the previous year’s standings) and no bonuses of more than $300,000 for international signings in the next two periods. The Cubs and Red Sox are in the same boat for the 2016-17 signing window, having also gone way over their pool allotment.

MORE: Five worst draft misses for each franchise | Worst No. 1 picks of all time

One reason that teams are splashing so much cash is that a new collective bargaining agreement after next season may result in the advent of an international draft, so why not flex financial muscle now in case the opportunity to do so vanishes?

The idea of an international draft might seem like a great way to level the playing field for acquisition of young talent. Look at the Royals, after all, and the contributions they got from 2007 first-round pick Mike Moustakas and 2008 first-round pick Eric Hosmer, Nos. 2 and 3 overall in their respective drafts, to win this year’s World Series.

Moustakas and Hosmer were key players for the Royals, no doubt, but high draft picks are no guarantee of success. You can look at the struggles of those players to establish themselves as major leaguers, or see the long list of high draft picks who have not panned out. Every year, teams spend millions of dollars on draft picks who will make a minimal impact at the major league level, and the amount that they spend is all but predetermined by the slot system.

MORE: Phillies to select first in '16 draft | How SN covered the first draft 

On the international market, where the Royals acquired Kelvin Herrera, Yordano Ventura and World Series MVP Salvador Perez, teams are free to sign as many or as few players as they like, with the free market dictating prices. Restrictions on big-spending teams from previous signing periods enhance competitive balance far more than a draft where teams cannot trade picks to get the players they want at the right prices.

It’s the prices that are the issue, and the reason why teams and the MLB Players Association figure to warm to the idea of an international draft. For the teams, the ability to further cost control young talent is an obvious draw. It also is for the players, because money spent on signing bonuses for teenagers from the Caribbean is money not spent on salaries of union members.

The international draft will be sold as a way to level the playing field and grow baseball globally. It will be about what things are always about: money, how much of it is spent and who gets it.

While it does make more sense for big money to be spent on established talent than speculative talent, allowing rich teams to load up on prospects should be seen as a feature of the current system, not a bug. When teams like the Dodgers, Red Sox and Yankees have strong farm systems, they are more likely to be willing to trade prospects to acquire more expensive talent from teams for whom their salaries are becoming too high. The lower-revenue teams then get players who are closer to the major leagues, are cost-controlled for years to come and do not come with a heavy signing bonus attached.

The more big-money teams that have loaded farm systems, the more robust bidding wars for such trades could become. A better idea to enhance actual competitive balance would be to dismantle the draft entirely, and let teams spend on Americans just as they do internationally.

The classic argument against this is that in the days before Major League Baseball had a draft, the Yankees could buy any young talent under the sun, and the result was their dominance for much of the 20th century. What this argument ignores is that in those days, the reserve clause bound players to their teams, and without free agency, major league teams did not get themselves into bad deals for aging players — the reason the Yankees have only been a fringe contender in this decade.

For now, the Dodgers can keep spending. If and when baseball goes to a global draft, it won’t stop them — it will only redirect where their money goes.

Jesse Spector