Team Draft budgets for 2012

[Myth111]

Any team that exceeds its bonus pool by 0-5 percent must pay a 75 percent tax on the overage. The penalties escalate, with a 75 percent tax and the loss of a first-round pick for a 5-10 percent overage; a 100 percent tax and the loss of first- and second-rounders for a 10-15 percent overage; and a 100 percent tax and the loss of two first-rounders for an overage of 15 percent or more.

Team Bonus Pool
Twins $12,368,200
Astros $11,177,700
Padres $9,903,100
Cardinals $9,131,100
Blue Jays $8,830,800
Athletics $8,469,500
Mariners $8,223,400
Cubs $7,933,900
Mets $7,151,400
Red Sox $6,884,800
Orioles $6,826,900
Brewers $6,764,700
Reds $6,653,800
Rockies $6,628,300
Rangers $6,568,200
Pirates $6,563,500
Royals $6,101,500
White Sox $5,915,100
Dodgers $5,202,800
Marlins $4,935,100
Phillies $4,916,900
Indians $4,582,900
Nationals $4,436,200
Yankees $4,192,200
Giants $4,076,400
Braves $4,030,800
Rays $3,871,000
Diamondbacks $3,818,300
Tigers $2,099,300
Angels $1,645,700

Hopefully we spend the extra 5% which will get us to $9,272,340. Add in $331,555 and it would cost us $9,603,495 to spend our maximum without losing any draft picks.

[Al_Oliver]

interesting...
link?

[baulderdash77]

There's also hard slotting on picks too, so you can't spend all the difference on one pick.

[flatjacket1]

Nice post. I think that the Jays should spend the extra 5% or whatever it is.

[BobbyBoy]

Angels have nothing to spend. Lol.

[flatjacket1]

Angels have nothing to spend. Lol.

It's amazing what happens when you sign everybody in FA lol.

[distracted]

There's also hard slotting on picks too, so you can't spend all the difference on one pick.

I didn't think there was a hard slot. This makes a huge difference on what the overall strategy is. I believe the total cap is based on the sum of all the slot amounts for the scheduled picks, but you can spend that cap any way you please.

This would make collecting picks even more important.

If it was just a hard slot, there would be no need for an overall total.

[flatjacket1]

This would make collecting picks even more important.

Collecting picks is near impossible now, you need to basically offer a guy 12M+ and have him say no as well as he can't be acquired at the trade deadline as he has to reside at least 1 full year with the club.

A full list of these changes is available here: http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd ... d=26030810

[Al_Oliver]

# picks, pool amount, previous year's spending can be found here...

http://www.baseballamerica.com/blog/dra ... nus-pools/

[Strav]

so much for that theory Dagger was dishing about the new draft rules being problematic for the Jays. I see no problem. Business as usual.

[darth_federer]

Jays have been top 5 the past couple of years despite not having to pay massive bonuses to sign those top 10 draft picks. They have consistently been among the highest spenders in the draft ever since AA got here and have also increased the scouting staff to the point where we have the biggest staff in the league. Nice to see Rogers showing their commitment to putting a winning product on the field once again.

[satyr9]

so much for that theory Dagger was dishing about the new draft rules being problematic for the Jays. I see no problem. Business as usual.

Well 2012 is a hybrid weird situation. comp picks are still here, at least for more of them then there will be going forward, and the Jays have extra money because they didn't sign last year's first rounder. While I don't have the same doom and gloom outlook, come back in a year's time and barring a bottom 5 finish it'll be much harder next year.

[Randle McMurphy]

Jays have been top 5 the past couple of years despite not having to pay massive bonuses to sign those top 10 draft picks. They have consistently been among the highest spenders in the draft ever since AA got here and have also increased the scouting staff to the point where we have the biggest staff in the league. Nice to see Rogers showing their commitment to putting a winning product on the field once again.

Even when adding up what Rogers has spent on the draft and internationally in recent years (amounts they won't be able to spend anymore due to the new rules), they've still been below the average overall due to the major league payroll.

That's hardly being committed to winning baseball.

[dagger]

Jays have been top 5 the past couple of years despite not having to pay massive bonuses to sign those top 10 draft picks. They have consistently been among the highest spenders in the draft ever since AA got here and have also increased the scouting staff to the point where we have the biggest staff in the league. Nice to see Rogers showing their commitment to putting a winning product on the field once again.

Lots of teams spend lots of money on draft picks and Latin, we were a couple of million more than the majority, so big deal.

And to put that into perspective, all the money we spent on the past draft is about the same as the combined 2012 salary of Edwin Encarnacion and Mark Teahan.

If you expect to win big, you have to spend bigger. The cost of major league talent continues to rise, as does television revenues (except for the Jays, of course). If Rogers doesn't spend like a winner, a lot of those Tier 1 prospects coming up will end up leaving the Jays prematurely, like Carl Crawford, to keep the budget low.

Also, that amateur spending stream you reference is being somewhat curtailed by the new CBA.

[darth_federer]

I fail to see how not throwing silly money at people like Darvish and Fielder suddenly means that they re going to let all their good prospects go away. They tried to get Beltran and Koiji which would have been a great offseason but it didnt work out. And the new CBA doesnt mean that scouting and a small army of people who are looking for prospects will beomce useless. There will still be steals just like the NBA which is much more restrictive than MLB. Good scouting will always be rewarded.

And the Jays arent just spending a couple of million more than other teams. They ve been top 5 in draft expenditures and active in international free agency. They ve jettisoned lots of dead weight and onerous contracts like Vernon Wells and Alex Rios but they have replaced those guys with better players. They havent let a single good young player go for salary reasons. They gave Philly 6 million for Drabek and took on almost 7 million just to get Rasmus. Since the past two years And they ve done exactly what they said they would which was that they would re build the farm system (which has been a success) and try to be competitive (.500 in the AL East when they ve been rebuilding). Now they re poised to make a massive jump. Just because it doesnt jive with your timeline and you think that they re not being aggressive enough it doesnt mean that they arent committed to winning.

I dont even like Rogers and they deserve a ton of criticism for the past decade but they ve been on point since AA has been hired. You would think we were the Mets based on some of the posts here.

[darth_federer]

Jays have been top 5 the past couple of years despite not having to pay massive bonuses to sign those top 10 draft picks. They have consistently been among the highest spenders in the draft ever since AA got here and have also increased the scouting staff to the point where we have the biggest staff in the league. Nice to see Rogers showing their commitment to putting a winning product on the field once again.

Even when adding up what Rogers has spent on the draft and internationally in recent years (amounts they won't be able to spend anymore due to the new rules), they've still been below the average overall due to the major league payroll.

That's hardly being committed to winning baseball.

The major league payroll has been low but wasnt that the stated intention of the new regime? Did they not say that they would focus on rebuilding the farm team first before spending on the major league team? Have they not acquired a lot of young players with star potential just like they promised they would? Wont those guys cost money to keep? If they let those guys go for monetary reasons then people will riot as they justifiably should but seeing as they have done exactly what they said they would I dont see how that doesnt translate into a commitment to winning.

[Myth111]

Jays have been top 5 the past couple of years despite not having to pay massive bonuses to sign those top 10 draft picks. They have consistently been among the highest spenders in the draft ever since AA got here and have also increased the scouting staff to the point where we have the biggest staff in the league. Nice to see Rogers showing their commitment to putting a winning product on the field once again.

Even when adding up what Rogers has spent on the draft and internationally in recent years (amounts they won't be able to spend anymore due to the new rules), they've still been below the average overall due to the major league payroll.

That's hardly being committed to winning baseball.

The major league payroll has been low but wasnt that the stated intention of the new regime? Did they not say that they would focus on rebuilding the farm team first before spending on the major league team? Have they not acquired a lot of young players with star potential just like they promised they would? Wont those guys cost money to keep? If they let those guys go for monetary reasons then people will riot as they justifiably should but seeing as they have done exactly what they said they would I dont see how that doesnt translate into a commitment to winning.

This is how I feel. People are complaining about something that has not even happened yet. I will never join the haters but I will at least understand them if the Jays do not retain their young players for monetary reasons. At that point there will be no justification for what management is doing.

[flatjacket1]

There is now a luxury tax line with penalties so strict even the Yankees and Red Sox's will try and get below it. If team A spends 178M of players and team B spends 178M on players, team A has to spend smarter than team B to be able to beat them out. A bunch of teams will spend 178M but it will be the ones who spend the smartest that come out on top and experience sustained success.

I like the direction of the club and I believe we will spend when the time is right. On top of everything we forfeit a 16th (or something like that) pick if we signed Fielder or something. That loses us around 20M in surplus value (especially with a strong scouting group that AA has invested in) over the players 6 team control years. That amount should be added onto Prince's already ridiculous contract when calculating loss. This just wasn't a good offseason to spend. The reason Prince and Pujols got so much is because the overall depth of the FA class. Keith Law called it one of the thinnest in years. Next years class will be different.

Also, don't forget players took smaller contracts to play elsewhere last offseason. That won't keep happening in the future (especially with how the club is situated).

[Myth111]

Not really the thread to ask this question but who are the potential free agents next year?

[flatjacket1]

Not really the thread to ask this question but who are the potential free agents next year?

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2011/04/2 ... gents.html

Cole Hamels, Brandon League, Josh Hamilton, Broxton, Jake Peavy (22M club option), Zack Greinke, Brandon Phillips to name a few.