Here's a great article by frequent OV commenter Rice Cubs on his blog: Total Market Freedom.
If you’re a good software engineer or a good web designer, you get to work for Microsoft or Facebook or Twitter or Google or whatever. You have a choice. Maybe you decide to work for a company close by in Chicago. Maybe you decide Chicago sucks (blasphemy!) and you’d rather take a chance in Seattle or Birmingham, Alabama. You have a choice. But the athlete doesn’t have a choice in North American pro leagues, and similarly in Japan.
Americans take great pride in the freedoms they want for themsevles, but when it comes to others, they couldn't care less. If every profession hired its employees the way that professional sports leagues do, it would be viewed as a great injustice. Since it doesn't affect most people, they don't care.
Comments
I might as well be this since I’m obsessed with this shitty team. Thanks for the shout-out 🙂
Rice CubeQuote Reply
Here’s the problem: you’re assuming that Major League Baseball operates like any other industry: the Yankees are Microsoft, the Dodgers are Facebook, the Cubs are Myspace, etc. That’s not how baseball works, though. You don’t choose a team like an employer, you are choosing to play in the Major Leagues. These teams are only rivals on the field. From a business perspective, they are dependent on one another. They need a certain number of teams to profitably exist in order to have a league. Without Major League Baseball, the Yankees are worthless no matter how good their team is, unless you think people will still shell out $100s of dollars to watch them scrimmage each other 162 times a year. It’s in Facebook’s best interest to bankrupt Twitter with a superior product. It’s not in the Yankees best interest to bankrupt the rest of the baseball.
So because they’re dependent on one another, the teams have decided that in order to field a profitable league that spans the entire country, they need to ensure competitive balance through an equitable system of distributing talent. Whether or not you think they’re right is another story altogether. That’s a valid reason to argue that the draft is unnecessary. But baseball’s dependence on competitive balance is why it’s different from your software industry example.
FWIW, based on my general understanding of antitrust law, in any professional sport besides baseball, drafts are legal solely because they are collectively bargained for by the players. Baseball has a bizarre antitrust history, so they could probably do it regardless, but their labor too has collectively bargained for the draft so that’s moot.
The real “free market” solution for amateur baseball talent is starting a rival baseball league that doesn’t draft its talent (i.e., “I can play for Major League Baseball and be assigned to a team for a decade, or I can roll the dice with the League of Major Baseball and try to play precisely where I want.”) That’s obviously not going to happen, but that again just goes to show how unique professional baseball is from other markets.
GBTSQuote Reply
Don’t get me started on the minor league system though, that’s bullshit what those guys are put through. Their salaries and place of employment are set by a collective bargaining unit that doesn’t even represent them while they’re in the minors. At least in the NBA, where your rookie contract is determined by the union, you actually, you know, become a member of that union once you sign that contract.
GBTSQuote Reply
I do like that you mentioned trading of draft picks in your blog though, Rice. It’s pretty ridiculous baseball still doesn’t allow that.
GBTSQuote Reply
A draft is maybe one way to create more competitive balance. It’s not the only way. Increasing the number of teams in the playoffs is another way. A better luxury tax though I also don’t want that. I’d rather have more of that than a draft. Reducing the number of teams in the league.
As long as the draft exists, these guys will be tied to their organization for seemingly ever. The only way to fix that is to do away with the draft, but as long as its collectively bargained, teams will ensure they have their asset for as long as possible. There is a 0% chance that MLB teams would even agree to to allow players in the minors to become free agents after 5 years. That is, unless they add them to their 40-man roster at which point they’re bound to their team another 3-4 years.
dmick89Quote Reply
@ GBTS:
I’m glad you promoted the cubs to myspace level. I thought they were netscape at best.
SVBQuote Reply