NationalsProspects.com

Will the MLBPA Eat Their Young (Again)?

While most people are celebrating the reported end of the MLB lockout, a more careful reading of the details reveals a key—and unresolved—point: whither the International Draft?

The next generation, after all, is what we’re focused on here. And the MLBPA’s track record is not good when it comes to looking out for the players who are coming up behind them.

In 2012, they agreed to caps and taxes on both the full (Rule 4) Draft and IFAs. In 2016, they agreed to more caps and taxes, albeit only on the IFAs.

If you’re sensing a theme here – IFAs for the MASN Commenters lurking – then you know that decision to kick the can down the road on the tit-for-tat, Qualifying Offers for an International Draft is a much bigger deal than most people realize.

Let’s not pretend that the current system is perfect. It’s rife with corruption (*cough* Jim Bowden *cough* José Rijo *cough*) and exploits children, with players as young as 12 or 13 being identified and shipped off to buscónes to train (and be shopped around) until they turn 16. Many of them are plied with steroids, which wreak havoc on a grown man’s body when not done under a doctor’s care, never mind a teenager who’s probably receiving them from someone like this.

However, it does provide life-changing money and an avenue for young men to escape poverty. But how can this be done without turning the D.R. and points elsewhere into Puerto Rico?

I’m not going to pretend to know the answer to that question. MLB insists it will put in the infrastructure necessary to train these players and keep the buscónes involved, albeit in a different fashion.

To use a favorite academic insult: The evidence does not support that delusion.

How long did it take MLB to raise the salaries of MiLB players?

How long did it take to improve their living arrangements (which we have yet to see)?

And would either of those two things have happened without either the years-long (and still unresolved) lawsuit?

Unfortunately, the next time the MLBPA puts the future ahead of the present will be the first time. The concern here is that history will repeat itself. In a little more than four months, we’ll find out.

16 Commments

  1. Speaking of accomodations, if anyone remembers the conversations with the Oakland prospects who were traded to the Nats, they talked of a huge upgrade of the food served to the prospects.
    In A ball, the A’s were serving peanut butter and jelly post game. So any complaints about the Nats being cheap should be taken with a grain of salt.

  2. The MLBPA by definition is concerned primarily, if not exclusively, with major league players. They seem to be skewed toward the veterans, as evidenced by their executive board voting 8-0 against the MLB proposal, while the union voted 26-4 in favor. No owner will take the first step toward providing a living wage and better conditions to the minor leaguers, for fear of condemnation by the others (raising costs for everybody to remain competitive). It’s time for the owners as a group (MLB) to set standards.

    1. I am the reincarnation of Johnny Carson’s Carnak .
      Channeled that Sanchez signing this morning
      Lol!!

      1. Aaron Sanchez is a very interesting arm in a dollar general shopping spree run
        He could swing or just end up on the DL like so many other guys .
        Baby Shark around for shits giggles and cheerleading ?

      2. Time to play the Welcome Back Kotter theme song and the dr Doolittle tune
        We should talk about if the Big major league titans eat their young in conjunction with the grooming of kids off the Caribbean islands ..

  3. Cisek was destined to land in DC at some point
    Probably long enough to be valued by contenders then flipped .
    We should give Watson some leeway with his new job since some of the farm has been hampered with interruption two years ago and just some weird lag in the system .

    2. Add another utility infielder to the chorus line Nats infield audition , Bob Fosse!!!

    1. Thanks KW, the only head scratcher was inviting Rutledge and not Cole Henry. Hope it’s bad judgement and not that Henry is injured.

      1. Mark — Agreed re Rutledge vs. Henry. They’re both at pretty much the same level on the organizational ladder, although Henry is generally said to be more polished (by the gurus; I haven’t personally seen either of them). The only significant difference I can think of is that Rutledge will be Rule 5-eligible in December (if Rule 5 draft still exists), although it would seem to be a no-brainer that he’ll be added to the 40-man before then.

        Really strange that they can’t come up with any other OF NRIs to invite other than the remains of Baby Shark, even some of the guys from the upper minors.

      2. Maybe they want more grooming mentoring in the A fields with JR since he made strides in AFL .
        Cole Henry will be fine . Should be a shooting star up the chain in 22

  5. Regarding Cole Henry, just got word that the Nats are taking it very slow with him this spring. He’s going to start throwing later than anyone else and will probably spend a part of April in Florida.

    Sounds like they want to avoid what happened to him last year.

Comments are closed.