http://content.usatoday.com/communities/dailypitch/post/2012/06/scott-boras-mlb-draft-a-mockery/1#.T9DAbLD9NEy
Scott Boras: MLB draft a 'mockery'
By Bob Nightengale, USA TODAY
If the amateur baseball draft is designed to reward the worst teams with the
best talent, high-powered agent Scott Boras says, Major League Baseball failed
miserably this week.
"There was all forms of artificial behavior in the draft,'' Boras told USA
TODAY Sports. "The purpose of the draft is that it's supposed to create parity
in the game. You want teams with the greatest needs to get the best available
talent.
"That has not been achieved in this draft.
"It's created a mockery.''
As part of baseball's collective bargaining agreement, ratified in November,
baseball placed a cap on total money paid through the first 10 rounds of the
draft, a mechanism designed to prevent high-revenue teams from paying princely
sums to lower-round picks who may have been seen as "unsign-able" by lower-
revenue clubs.
But the new system may have wreaked havoc on the very top of the draft, as
Boras feared last year(http://tinyurl.com/7qvpv5h).
Stanford pitcher Mark Appel, who is being advised by Boras, was originally
forecast to be the No. 1 pick in the draft. Yet, the Houston Astros instead
picked Puerto Rican shortstop Carlos Correa, who's expected to sign for $4
million to $4.5 million, much less than the $7.2 million slot for the No. 1
pick.
Boras, who was not involved in any pre-draft calls regarding Appel, watched
him slide to the eighth pick, chosen by the Pittsburgh Pirates. The plummet
lowers Appel's slot to $2.9 million. It's unknown whether Appel will now
consider signing with the Pirates.
"I'm currently concentrating on winning a national championship and finishing
my academic endeavors at Stanford,'' Appel said in a statement released Monday
night, after a conference call with the Pirates was canceled. "I will address
the possibility of a professional career in due time.''
Boras clients Stephen Strasburg and Bryce Harper were slam-dunk No. 1 picks in
2009 and 2010 by the Washington Nationals, who signed them to contracts
guaranteeing $15.1 million (Strasburg) and $9.9 million (Harper).
Appel wasn't as obvious a No. 1 choice, but his slide certainly startled many
draft experts.
Said Boras: "The dynamic was completely different in this draft. There were
all forms of artificial behavior. Since 2009, the best players were always
taken in the order of their talent. In this draft, it's not the case.
"If this draft was in 2011, you'd have three or four of your top picks go
onto college. This draft, it may not happen, but it's foolish to suggest the
teams with the greatest needs drafted the best players.''
The trouble with the draft rules under the new collective bargaining agreement,
Boras says, is that it strips away part of the scouting expertise.
"Instead of bringing a scout in the room,'' Boras says, "we brought a
calculator in the room.
"The scouting industry is highly competent, and when a team spends $2 to $3
million for their experts, they should be used accordingly. You should let
them set the limits.''
Several teams, like the Chicago Cubs, were also opposed to the new CBA that
dramatically limits the spending on draft picks. The new rules will severely
penalize teams for spending in excess of its assigned bonus pool. If a team
spends more than 15% over its pool, it must pay a $1 fine for every dollar
over the limit and lose two future draft picks. Also, if a team fails to sign
its pick, the slot value still counts against that club's bonus pool.
"There's no point complaining about it now,'' Cubs president Theo Epstein told
USA TODAY Sports last week. "It's a level playing field for everybody. You
can't take the same approach we took in previous years. We have to adjust to
the rules.''
Yet, with the new rules, Boras says, simply creates greater uncertainty in the
draft.
"We created a system,'' Boras says, "where teams are spending vastly more
money on higher risk players. The best players are getting the least amount of
money for their skills, and we're spending more money on players taken in
later rounds.
"Anyone drafted after the 10th pick, those clubs didn't stick to slot, and
they're all over the place.''
So, what just would have happened if Harper or Strasburg were in this draft?
"It would have resulted in a club not having a sold-out stadium,'' Boras said,
"and losing millions of dollars. If those players don't sign, you're not going
to have what Washington now enjoys.''