dnramo

I'd argue that, as an organization, that's still a net loss. The biggest compensation-related problem is that there's not enough granularity with the classification of FAs. More than that, though, players need to declare for the draft and take slotted bonuses. The year-long holdout stuff is a farce. If a player wants to play baseball then let him declare and be compelled to sign for some certain amount. Perhaps as importantly, for the players who turn down the draft and go to college thinking they're going to improve their stock, spend all their time in college in baseball and then fail to improve, well, they're screwed. Few of the players who go to school in the hopes of being redrafted will graduate with a useful degree. It makes far more sense for MLB to include scholarships in its compensation for HS draftees so that the HS player can focus 100% on academics if he flames out in baseball. The biggest competitive imbalance in the draft is the "signability" issue. Rich teams can buy "extra" top-5 round caliber players by drafting guys who want an extra few hundred thousand dollars. Teams like the Brewers on limited budgets are hurt because players like Pedro Alvarez (Red Sox 14th rd pick) drop way down over a few hundred k. He individually may not turn into anything, but I'd guess that 30 of the top 150 drop at least a round every year over such quibles. That collectively hurts the small market teams and benefits a select few teams with practically unlimited amateur player acquisition budgets.

You mean before the Brewers' second pick? The Red Sox got a second rounder and a sandwich for losing Pedro (a ~40 pick and 59, IIRC). That hardly seems fair. They got first rounders for Lowe and Cabrera, though, along with sandwich picks. That does a little to compensate them for Pedro. All of their picks put together are less likely to net a quality player than the Brewers' #5, though. The draft compensation system hasn't been "fixed" to the extent that it needs to be largely because the draft becomes something of a crapshoot after the top half of the first round. Higher picks are more valuable, of course, but most draft projections fall apart starting in the second half of the first round because any talent consensus evaporates. At that point, teams' skill in scouting and player evaluation takes over. If anything, a team losing a FA should receive more compensation than the current system provides. The Red Sox have a lot of money so their loss of Pedro seems less significant, but what if Sheets had left as a free agent and all the Brewers got back was a ~40 and a ~55? Compensation does far more to help the lower-payroll teams who can't spend to replace losses than it does to help high-payroll teams. I'd like to see the first round go to a lottery system with teams getting extra balls for losing FAs, but that has other potential problems.