Players Association, Ben Clements, BEN discussed on Effectively Wild: A FanGraphs Baseball Podcast


Ben how are you? Doing well. Good. We are also joined by other bands. Ben Clements, Ben, how are you? Doing well also. I'm so glad to hear that. It's a big day. Big day. Huge you guys. Everyone's been waiting. The questions have been pouring in. When and where is the minor league free agent draft? Well, here it is. It's in your feeds right now. You are currently listening to it. The 9th annual effectively wild minor league free agent draft. Wow. When I fire most story traditions, yes, and then this will be your first minor league for agent draft. How are you feeling? A little nervous. I mean, not nervous, 'cause it's a minor league free agent draft, but a little nervous. It's an institution. It is a podcast institution. So you should be nervous. I'm nervous. We're all nervous. This means something. This has huge stakes, bragging rights. Look, I just would like to say the following, which is that I made a compelling case for Kuzma when we did this last year and you just happened to scoop me and I would like to say, I don't think you had the conviction increased month that I did. But you got to reap the rewards and this after I generously gave you the first overall pick allow for you to take faulty. So wow. So I drafted him, but you wanted him more. So really you deserve that playing time. Yeah, I mean, I remember saying, I think there is a sneaky path for him here to be a starter even though the padre's rotation is stacked because of injury history, and who was right. I was right. Me. Yep, I evidently had more faith in him because I drafted him before you did. So we'll get to the results of last year's Mario week for age and draft and just a moment, a little bit of banter first on our last episode. We had said that we might talk a little bit about the specifics of MLB's proposal to the Players Association because those had not yet come out when we were recording. As it turns out, I don't know that they're all that illuminating or in lightning. Impression at the time was that this was not an offer that moved the needle much. And that still seems to be the case even though we know about a few of the specifics here. So Ben, I don't know if anything in particular about what was reported caught your eye here, but it seems like this is just a way to click the can down the road, I guess, just to do something for the sake of doing something and I guess put pressure on the Players Association to essentially negotiate against themselves. Yeah, I think if you told me that prospects who played a full year and got rookie of the year votes would give teams extra draft picks and asked me what that would do for when prospects got called up. I don't really know if I think it would get them called up earlier or later. So it seems to me like it's just window dressing like it's something fancy that they can do and people will talk about, but I don't know. It doesn't really seem like actually an economic proposal so much as here's an interesting different way we could do things. Yeah, I have said several times on this podcast that I think that we deal perhaps too much in incentives when it comes to things like service time manipulation and trying to provide disincentives to service time manipulation and it strikes me always as the action of people who don't really want to do anything about it at all. I understand that crafting rules that address every edge case to make sure that prospects are promoted when they're ready has some difficulty to it that takes some doing, but like just write a rule that says you can't manipulate service time and at least have the grievance process address that directly rather than trying to carrot and stick your way through this, you know, it's just like embrace regulation, it's everyone's favorite thing. Yeah, and it included universal DH, of course, and there was 14 team playoffs, of course, and there was potentially an international draft, shoehorned in here, which was very taxes going up or the CBT rather going up from 210 million to a whopping 214 million which only 5% slower than if the inflation rate exactly. It's actually lower than it was in effect. Real dollars. So yeah, doesn't seem like this is going to get a deal done. I doubt anyone expected it to. But they did something. So they ended their 42 days of doing nothing. They have technically done something. And so now I guess the Players Association has to decide if they want to budge because the owners appear pretty intractable here. So maybe it's just going to be another game of chicken for a while and we'll see if there will be an immediate counter proposal or if they just sort of stand pat and say make us a real offer. Yeah, I did enjoy that Gigi Cooper at baseball America sort of dignified the prospect portion of this with some actual analysis and he found what I think we could all into it, which is that this isn't the top 100 prospect patina that was put on that piece of this is sort of unnecessary because typically the guys who are getting rookie of the year votes and MVP votes in Cy Young votes are guys who were ranked prospects anyway, who were top 100 guys introducing the potential rigmarole and conflicts of that process seems completely unnecessary and not really pointed at trying to alleviate service time manipulation at all. I also will say, I think there are a lot of public facing prospect writers who do a lot of really, really good work. And have an accurate understanding of who the guys are who are going to contribute the most to their big league teams. And I also don't think it's really appropriate for those folks to be involved in the process to this degree. So quit outsourcing your assessments MLB seems a little bit, I don't know why that's been a trend amongst the proposals that we've heard about so far, but I'd like it to stop, please. Yeah, I guess they largely dissolve the scouting bureau. So I don't know how you would do that. You can't use teams internal ratings really. So maybe you just shouldn't do that at all. But that was an interesting wrinkle. I mean, it's kind of a waste of time to dive deep into every point of every proposal because they're all just sort of markers along the road that hopefully will eventually lead to some sort of deal that probably won't really resemble the proceeding proposals. And all of those specifics. Yeah. More to come. We hope. All right, so a couple other non labor related things that we wanted to address. There's a new big Bill James study out on Bill James's website. Bill James online and it reaches an interesting conclusion and Bill seems pretty pumped about it. He tweeted about it and asked people to share it. And I think it reaches an interesting conclusion, although I don't totally know if I buy the magnitude of the effect. So essentially, he did some research into Hall of Fame elections and he found that players who jumped from team to team may reduce their chances of getting into the hull by 50% or even more compared to a similar player who stays with one team. And he didn't do this just solely looking at one team career players because there aren't all that many of them really, but he kind of quantified how much of a team switcher you are. Did you go to a ton of teams? Did you play for one for most of your career? And he found that it makes a huge difference. He said, if we take all of the one team players in history, they have 44% more Hall of Fame selections within the group than would be expected based on those players performance numbers. He also concluded that a player is more than twice as likely to be selected to the hull if he spent most of his career with one team than if he moved from team to team, at least within a certain threshold or below a certain threshold of value once you get up into the upper tiers then it may not actually matter. But if you're kind of on the border, then a single team player seems to be more likely to get in..

Coming up next