SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
|
Post by incandenza on Mar 11, 2022 15:09:57 GMT -5
This is... potentially a huge advantage for the Blue Jays, no? A few teams are 100% vaxxed, IIRC, but otherwise they'll be facing depleted opponents in all of their home games. No Sale starts in Toronto, for instance...
|
|
|
Post by bluechip on Mar 11, 2022 16:11:11 GMT -5
This is... potentially a huge advantage for the Blue Jays, no? A few teams are 100% vaxxed, IIRC, but otherwise they'll be facing depleted opponents in all of their home games. No Sale starts in Toronto, for instance... Are the blue jays 100% vaccinated?
|
|
TearsIn04
Veteran
Everybody knows Nelson de la Rosa, but who is Karim Garcia?
Posts: 2,837
|
Post by TearsIn04 on Mar 11, 2022 16:27:27 GMT -5
www.yahoo.com/sports/report-unvaccinated-mlb-players-cant-travel-to-canada-wont-be-paid-for-missed-games-161439061.htmlMLB players who choose to remain unvaccinated against COVID-19 reportedly won't be able to travel to Canada when the new season begins on April 7, and will face other consequences as a result of their choice. According to WCVB's Duke Castiglione and Sportsnet's Shi Davidi and Ben Nicholson-Smith, players who are unvaccinated will be placed on the restricted list when their teams travel to Canada to play the Toronto Blue Jays. Players on the restricted list do not accrue service time or receive salary for missed games. That's quite a financial hit for Sale. If my math is correct - and it often isn't - he'd lose $555,555 for missing a three-game series in Toronto. Multiply that by roughly three if he doesn't get paid for any of the games in Toronto for the entire year and he'd have a loss approaching $1.7M. This is based on actual earnings (not AAV) of $30M. That's the number FG lists. I think JDM would be in the same situation? The player who would really lose out from this is the guy who needs a full year of service time to reach FA next winter, to qualify for arbitration, or to get to arbitration for a second or third time (meaning guys coming up on four years of service time or five years of service time). Oh, well.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Mar 11, 2022 16:33:06 GMT -5
This is... potentially a huge advantage for the Blue Jays, no? A few teams are 100% vaxxed, IIRC, but otherwise they'll be facing depleted opponents in all of their home games. No Sale starts in Toronto, for instance... Are the blue jays 100% vaccinated? Sounds like they were close to it at the end of last season, at least: Don't know if that includes coaches, etc., but if it's just players, no more than two of them weren't vaccinated by season's end.
|
|
|
Post by Underwater Johnson on Mar 11, 2022 17:14:54 GMT -5
From MLBTR's online chat with Jonny Gomes on Tuesday:
<< Future of Baseball 9:36 Jonny, There is lots of talk about the pace of the game and changes that need to be made. Sounds like some will happen in 2023 (pitch clock, limiting shifts). What would you do to bring more action back to the game and make it more exciting again? Jonny Gomes 9:37 I think the game is just fine as is without the Pitch clock without banning the shift. We have some of the most exciting pictures and all offensive players the game has ever seen right now. No reason to change anything in my opinion. >>
I'll go to bat with Jonny Johnson Gomes and all you tinkerers can go try to find someone half as kool to take your side. Good luck to you.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Mar 11, 2022 17:33:22 GMT -5
Hey look, more revenue for the Owners! Excerpt: NBCUniversal’s Peacock is finalizing a deal with Major League Baseball for exclusive rights to stream games in a new Sunday time slot, according to people familiar with the discussions, as the league looks to increase digital partnerships.
The deal with NBCUniversal, a unit of Comcast Corp. CMCSA -0.82% , would involve a package of 18 games, some beginning at 11:30 a.m. ET and others just after noon, the people said. That would limit the conflict with Sunday games that typically start at 1 p.m., making the telecasts more valuable for Peacock. The games would primarily be played on the East Coast, given the early timing, the people said.Subscription-only: www.wsj.com/articles/nbcs-peacock-is-finalizing-deal-to-stream-mlb-games-in-new-sunday-time-slot-11647034302?mod=hp_lead_pos6
|
|
|
Post by Underwater Johnson on Mar 11, 2022 18:02:50 GMT -5
Agreed. I can appreciate those things because reality is reality (and ideally, you can find interesting things about reality).
I just never liked it even though I'm a fan of a big-market AL team that almost always has a premium, full-time DH. I've always enjoyed the NL game more.
Some of the things we'll never see/hear again: A pitcher "helping his own cause." A pitchers' duel in which the starters both bat into the late innings because they're both dealing. A pitcher who everyone knows is a good hitter because he's got receipts vs big-league pitching.
Small ball. A proven pinch-hitter.
Real strategy.
And don't tell me that the other sports change their rules all the time, so why not baseball? It's because they needed to. Baseball was born fully formed and armed, like Athena out of Zeus's forehead. The NFL spent the first half of its existence as a single-wing snooze-fest. And they got so enamored of rules changes that now the smartest play call is to chuck the ball deep knowing that you're bound to get a pass interference call half the time. (I also love how people moan about how slow baseball is but they'll sit glued to 5 minutes of replays to see if a guy really caught a 5-yard pass without bobbling it.)
The NBA spent the first half of its existence with guys taking set shots and defenders coached to never leave their feet (until Bill Russell defied his college coach and showed him that he could change the game by swatting opponents shots toward his teammates). It has since turned into a nightly 48-minute 3-point shooting contest. Yawn.
The NHL is really smart about rules changes. The game is very much the same as it has ever been, but safer.
The bottom line is nobody ever seduced Susan Sarandon by listing all the great things about football or basketball. I wish people would just focus more on the things that make baseball great, rather than endlessly nit-picking about pitchers not being able to hit like first-basemen who can't field or the foibles of human umpires or the occasional bad pitcher who can't make up his mind.
But your claim is that the game hasn't changed, has never needed to change, and doesn't need to change now? Then how to explain this much... change?
It's a pretty easy question to answer.
For most of baseball's history, up to the 1970s and 80s at least, most pitchers topped out in the 80s, with the occasional Koufax, Ryan, or Walter Johnson who could throw legit heat. Because of this, guys went up to the plate hacking and because of that, they put the ball in play more often and earlier in counts than what you see today. Guys also didn't stroll around the home plate area in between pitches, for fear of hearing chin music on the next pitch.
Not long ago I watched film of the 1960 World Series between the MFYs and the Pirates (who had a pitcher named Vinegar Bend Mizell -- that's another thing we need back is great nicknames). Turns out Bing Crosby was a huge Pirates fan and for the first time in three decades, his Bucs were in the Fall Classic. But Bing had to be overseas during the series to shoot a film or something, so he arranged to be the first guy to ever tape a game at home. He had a movie camera set up in front of his TV and had someone film the games for him to watch later. Those films turned up recently and someone put them on Youtube.
Anyway, I digress. The point is that you wouldn't believe how often batters swung at pitches and put the ball in play, even in the World Series. It actually makes the fact that there were so many more CGs back then make a lot of sense too, as there were fewer pitches thrown per AB. And that's another reason why games went so much faster then -- far fewer pitching changes (I believe Bob Ryan described the rising number of pitching changes as "creeping LaRussa-ism" around 1990; soon it spread from the successful A's to every other team).
Nowadays, with every other kid throwing 96, it's not so easy to go up swinging, especially if that kid has a decent off-speed pitch, so more pitches are thrown and, with the concomitant rise in K's and walks, there are fewer balls put in play. And it's no coincidence that the number pitchers used per game has gone way up, since many of today's pitchers are throwing with max effort on every pitch, shortening their outings (and blowing out their elbows and shoulders to boot).
Once you get into the '90s, you start to get every team with their own TV network and eventually every single MLB game is on TV, which means every single inning now has TV timeouts. Most of us on this chat were alive when no team had their own TV network and you could only see your favorite team on TV when one of their games was televised nationally. Even in the early days of channel 38, they didn't broadcast every game, only a few per week. I digress again but the point is that when a game isn't being televised, there's no reason to take a 2-3 minute break between innings. As more and more games became televised, obviously the average time of a game kept going up. And once you had them all televised, the breaks started to get longer too. There's money to be made, after all.
That brings us up to what, 2010? Well, that's when all this TTO nonsense started really picking up steam, with the new breed of flame-throwing, ligament-popping hurlers forcing batters to adjust and not swing as much. More Ks + more walks + more dongs = more time.
Ultimately, all of this happened organically with very few big rules changes from about 1900 on (the DH being the big outlier and the height of the mound also getting occasional attention). And I believe that the game will continue to change organically and the pendulum will swing back toward more balls in play as the new market inefficiency over time. But it's never fast enough for the tinkerers.
[Final digression: Has anyone else noticed that NFL games are up to about 3.5 hours now too? The Sunday 4:00 game became the 4:15 game and is now the 4:25 game. Is anyone complaining that it's ruining the game and that they're going to lose all the youngs? I haven't heard it. Football games are getting longer and no one cares but if it's baseball, we have to start changing the rules.]
I hope that answers your question. #NoClocksInBaseball
|
|
|
Post by Underwater Johnson on Mar 11, 2022 18:04:25 GMT -5
Hey look, more revenue for the Owners! Excerpt: NBCUniversal’s Peacock is finalizing a deal with Major League Baseball for exclusive rights to stream games in a new Sunday time slot, according to people familiar with the discussions, as the league looks to increase digital partnerships.
The deal with NBCUniversal, a unit of Comcast Corp. CMCSA -0.82% , would involve a package of 18 games, some beginning at 11:30 a.m. ET and others just after noon, the people said. That would limit the conflict with Sunday games that typically start at 1 p.m., making the telecasts more valuable for Peacock. The games would primarily be played on the East Coast, given the early timing, the people said.Subscription-only: www.wsj.com/articles/nbcs-peacock-is-finalizing-deal-to-stream-mlb-games-in-new-sunday-time-slot-11647034302?mod=hp_lead_pos6Wow, what a coincidence that they waited to announce it until after the CBA negotiations finished!
|
|
|
Post by Underwater Johnson on Mar 11, 2022 18:14:19 GMT -5
A top-300 senior is not really a threat to get passed over 30 times in the 20th round unless they got charged with a felony or something. Last year there were only two seniors drafted that were in MLB Pipeline's top 250: Mason Miller and Dylan Dodd. Miller got full slot. Dodd was way under slot. So ultimately this probably only affects a very small amount of players. I take "Top-300 player" to mean the top 300 players drafted (i.e. the first 10 rounds, minus sandwich picks, so approximately the top 9 rounds).
Or have they agreed to some group's rankings to be the "official" top 300?
If it's the former, it's probably the end of college senior underslot signings as we've known them.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Mar 11, 2022 18:22:56 GMT -5
But your claim is that the game hasn't changed, has never needed to change, and doesn't need to change now? Then how to explain this much... change?
It's a pretty easy question to answer.
For most of baseball's history, up to the 1970s and 80s at least, most pitchers topped out in the 80s, with the occasional Koufax, Ryan, or Walter Johnson who could throw legit heat. Because of this, guys went up to the plate hacking and because of that, they put the ball in play more often and earlier in counts than what you see today. Guys also didn't stroll around the home plate area in between pitches, for fear of hearing chin music on the next pitch.
Not long ago I watched film of the 1960 World Series between the MFYs and the Pirates (who had a pitcher named Vinegar Bend Mizell -- that's another thing we need back is great nicknames). Turns out Bing Crosby was a huge Pirates fan and for the first time in three decades, his Bucs were in the Fall Classic. But Bing had to be overseas during the series to shoot a film or something, so he arranged to be the first guy to ever tape a game at home. He had a movie camera set up in front of his TV and had someone film the games for him to watch later. Those films turned up recently and someone put them on Youtube.
Anyway, I digress. The point is that you wouldn't believe how often batters swung at pitches and put the ball in play, even in the World Series. It actually makes the fact that there were so many more CGs back then make a lot of sense too, as there were fewer pitches thrown per AB. And that's another reason why games went so much faster then -- far fewer pitching changes (I believe Bob Ryan described the rising number of pitching changes as "creeping LaRussa-ism" around 1990; soon it spread from the successful A's to every other team).
Nowadays, with every other kid throwing 96, it's not so easy to go up swinging, especially if that kid has a decent off-speed pitch, so more pitches are thrown and, with the concomitant rise in K's and walks, there are fewer balls put in play. And it's no coincidence that the number pitchers used per game has gone way up, since many of today's pitchers are throwing with max effort on every pitch, shortening their outings (and blowing out their elbows and shoulders to boot).
Once you get into the '90s, you start to get every team with their own TV network and eventually every single MLB game is on TV, which means every single inning now has TV timeouts. Most of us on this chat were alive when no team had their own TV network and you could only see your favorite team on TV when one of their games was televised nationally. Even in the early days of channel 38, they didn't broadcast every game, only a few per week. I digress again but the point is that when a game isn't being televised, there's no reason to take a 2-3 minute break between innings. As more and more games became televised, obviously the average time of a game kept going up. And once you had them all televised, the breaks started to get longer too. There's money to be made, after all.
That brings us up to what, 2010? Well, that's when all this TTO nonsense started really picking up steam, with the new breed of flame-throwing, ligament-popping hurlers forcing batters to adjust and not swing as much. More Ks + more walks + more dongs = more time.
Ultimately, all of this happened organically with very few big rules changes from about 1900 on (the DH being the big outlier and the height of the mound also getting occasional attention). And I believe that the game will continue to change organically and the pendulum will swing back toward more balls in play as the new market inefficiency over time. But it's never fast enough for the tinkerers.
[Final digression: Has anyone else noticed that NFL games are up to about 3.5 hours now too? The Sunday 4:00 game became the 4:15 game and is now the 4:25 game. Is anyone complaining that it's ruining the game and that they're going to lose all the youngs? I haven't heard it. Football games are getting longer and no one cares but if it's baseball, we have to start changing the rules.]
I hope that answers your question. #NoClocksInBaseball
I mean yes... as you say, the game has changed quite a bit, even without rule changes. So... glad we agree, I guess. My point, of course, was that change is inevitable, and to never tinker with the rules is not to maintain some platonic form of the game; it's to allow the game to change in ways that may or may not make it more enjoyable.
But look, if you aesthetically prefer the pace of play as it is, with its unpredentedly long games, then so be it. I'd personally like to see it return to at least the pace it had a couple decades ago, with more action, and I think most fans would probably agree with that.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Mar 11, 2022 19:34:03 GMT -5
Last year there were only two seniors drafted that were in MLB Pipeline's top 250: Mason Miller and Dylan Dodd. Miller got full slot. Dodd was way under slot. So ultimately this probably only affects a very small amount of players. I take "Top-300 player" to mean the top 300 players drafted (i.e. the first 10 rounds, minus sandwich picks, so approximately the top 9 rounds).
Or have they agreed to some group's rankings to be the "official" top 300?
If it's the former, it's probably the end of college senior underslot signings as we've known them.
There's no way that it could be the former because we're talking about pre-draft physicals.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Mar 11, 2022 19:37:43 GMT -5
It's a pretty easy question to answer.
For most of baseball's history, up to the 1970s and 80s at least, most pitchers topped out in the 80s, with the occasional Koufax, Ryan, or Walter Johnson who could throw legit heat. Because of this, guys went up to the plate hacking and because of that, they put the ball in play more often and earlier in counts than what you see today. Guys also didn't stroll around the home plate area in between pitches, for fear of hearing chin music on the next pitch.
Not long ago I watched film of the 1960 World Series between the MFYs and the Pirates (who had a pitcher named Vinegar Bend Mizell -- that's another thing we need back is great nicknames). Turns out Bing Crosby was a huge Pirates fan and for the first time in three decades, his Bucs were in the Fall Classic. But Bing had to be overseas during the series to shoot a film or something, so he arranged to be the first guy to ever tape a game at home. He had a movie camera set up in front of his TV and had someone film the games for him to watch later. Those films turned up recently and someone put them on Youtube.
Anyway, I digress. The point is that you wouldn't believe how often batters swung at pitches and put the ball in play, even in the World Series. It actually makes the fact that there were so many more CGs back then make a lot of sense too, as there were fewer pitches thrown per AB. And that's another reason why games went so much faster then -- far fewer pitching changes (I believe Bob Ryan described the rising number of pitching changes as "creeping LaRussa-ism" around 1990; soon it spread from the successful A's to every other team).
Nowadays, with every other kid throwing 96, it's not so easy to go up swinging, especially if that kid has a decent off-speed pitch, so more pitches are thrown and, with the concomitant rise in K's and walks, there are fewer balls put in play. And it's no coincidence that the number pitchers used per game has gone way up, since many of today's pitchers are throwing with max effort on every pitch, shortening their outings (and blowing out their elbows and shoulders to boot).
Once you get into the '90s, you start to get every team with their own TV network and eventually every single MLB game is on TV, which means every single inning now has TV timeouts. Most of us on this chat were alive when no team had their own TV network and you could only see your favorite team on TV when one of their games was televised nationally. Even in the early days of channel 38, they didn't broadcast every game, only a few per week. I digress again but the point is that when a game isn't being televised, there's no reason to take a 2-3 minute break between innings. As more and more games became televised, obviously the average time of a game kept going up. And once you had them all televised, the breaks started to get longer too. There's money to be made, after all.
That brings us up to what, 2010? Well, that's when all this TTO nonsense started really picking up steam, with the new breed of flame-throwing, ligament-popping hurlers forcing batters to adjust and not swing as much. More Ks + more walks + more dongs = more time.
Ultimately, all of this happened organically with very few big rules changes from about 1900 on (the DH being the big outlier and the height of the mound also getting occasional attention). And I believe that the game will continue to change organically and the pendulum will swing back toward more balls in play as the new market inefficiency over time. But it's never fast enough for the tinkerers.
[Final digression: Has anyone else noticed that NFL games are up to about 3.5 hours now too? The Sunday 4:00 game became the 4:15 game and is now the 4:25 game. Is anyone complaining that it's ruining the game and that they're going to lose all the youngs? I haven't heard it. Football games are getting longer and no one cares but if it's baseball, we have to start changing the rules.]
I hope that answers your question. #NoClocksInBaseball
I mean yes... as you say, the game has changed quite a bit, even without rule changes. So... glad we agree, I guess. My point, of course, was that change is inevitable, and to never tinker with the rules is not to maintain some platonic form of the game; it's to allow the game to change in ways that may or may not make it more enjoyable.
But look, if you aesthetically prefer the pace of play as it is, with its unpredentedly long games, then so be it. I'd personally like to see it return to at least the pace it had a couple decades ago, with more action, and I think most fans would probably agree with that.
I'd love to see exactly how much time tv has added to the length of games. If they would make the ball like it used to be and mandated minimum dimensions for baseball stadiums, there would be a ton more action. But now because this is literally what MLB wants, we sit around and wait for home runs.
|
|
dirtdog
Veteran
Posts: 1,910
Member is Online
|
Post by dirtdog on Mar 11, 2022 20:20:28 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Underwater Johnson on Mar 11, 2022 20:59:27 GMT -5
I take "Top-300 player" to mean the top 300 players drafted (i.e. the first 10 rounds, minus sandwich picks, so approximately the top 9 rounds).
Or have they agreed to some group's rankings to be the "official" top 300?
If it's the former, it's probably the end of college senior underslot signings as we've known them.
There's no way that it could be the former because we're talking about pre-draft physicals. I don't see how that affects it. If you don't take a pre-draft physical and you wind up in the top 300 picks, you are not guaranteed 75% of slot. I'd think that would be a pretty big incentive to take the physical if you believe that you'll be drafted in the top 300.
|
|
|
Post by Underwater Johnson on Mar 11, 2022 21:30:24 GMT -5
It's a pretty easy question to answer.
For most of baseball's history, up to the 1970s and 80s at least, most pitchers topped out in the 80s, with the occasional Koufax, Ryan, or Walter Johnson who could throw legit heat. Because of this, guys went up to the plate hacking and because of ...
lose all the youngs? I haven't heard it. Football games are getting longer and no one cares but if it's baseball, we have to start changing the rules.]
I hope that answers your question. #NoClocksInBaseball
I mean yes... as you say, the game has changed quite a bit, even without rule changes. So... glad we agree, I guess. My point, of course, was that change is inevitable, and to never tinker with the rules is not to maintain some platonic form of the game; it's to allow the game to change in ways that may or may not make it more enjoyable.
But look, if you aesthetically prefer the pace of play as it is, with its unpredentedly long games, then so be it. I'd personally like to see it return to at least the pace it had a couple decades ago, with more action, and I think most fans would probably agree with that.
The problem is that the pitch clock and clown bases are not going to speed up "pace of play."
Clearly, a bunch of different factors have led us to this point of long games with less action, including all games being on TV, commercial breaks always getting longer, and TTO, and only the latter has anything to do with "pace of play." You aren't going to fix TTO with a pitch clock (but you'll sure stick it to that small subset of mostly AAAA pitchers who are too nervous to throw a pitch!).
But what about clown bases? Surely there will be more SBs, right? Not if they only went up a few % points with a 3'' bigger base. To make analytics-driven teams want to steal more bases, it will need to go up a lot more than that (I recommend this analysis for details but the take-home is that SBs today don't add enough runs because more runs are being scored overall from so many homers). So you'll need another 3-6" of base -- talk about clown bases!
So now you've got a clock in baseball for the first time in history and crazy two-foot bases and you still haven't fixed "pace of play" at all (except for those dozen or so AAAA pitchers who are out of work -- just put a buzzer in the ump's pocket and you fix those guys anyway). But at least you DID something, right?
Like just about everyone, I would love more action but apparently unlike just about everyone here, I believe it can happen organically, as soon as the first team figures out how to beat the current trends of TTO hitters and 98-mph fireballers with no command. Like I've said before, I think that you could prevent runs from TTO teams by focusing on developing good-command, weak-contact pitchers and you could score runs off their flame-throwers by focusing on contact hitters who can put the ball in play and put pressure on the crappy defenders who they signed because they can hit bombs, not field. Your Ks and HRs go down but walks stay high (b/c of your opponent's poor command), so you'll have guys on base when the ball is put in play.
More balls in play = more action. More run prevention = more value for SBs. Once one team wins with that (or another TTO-busting strategy), others will follow. The problem with "pace of play" is TTO, plain and simple. Eventually it will go away and our long national nightmare will be over.
|
|
|
Post by orion09 on Mar 11, 2022 22:07:25 GMT -5
Does anyone know if there will still be free agent compensation (without the QO system) if the international draft is approved?
|
|
|
Post by RedSoxStats on Mar 11, 2022 22:18:38 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by prospectlove on Mar 11, 2022 23:07:28 GMT -5
So if we can’t sign Xander we won’t see him traded before next year.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Mar 11, 2022 23:11:58 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Mar 11, 2022 23:12:06 GMT -5
For whatever reason this song has been in my head.
Note that a HOF was only the 3rd best CF in NY at the time.
|
|
|
Post by taftreign on Mar 12, 2022 0:07:13 GMT -5
Yet another imbalance in revenues between small and big market teams. It would be nice if MLB guaranteed each club a set number of national televised games each year similar to the NFL guaranteeing each team to have a prime time game. That may close the gap in advertising revenue a bit. Of course if you told Apple or Peacock they had to show game including less competitive teams on their exclusive deals maybe MLB receives less as a whole.
|
|
|
Post by vermontsox1 on Mar 12, 2022 1:56:35 GMT -5
There's no way that it could be the former because we're talking about pre-draft physicals. I don't see how that affects it. If you don't take a pre-draft physical and you wind up in the top 300 picks, you are not guaranteed 75% of slot. I'd think that would be a pretty big incentive to take the physical if you believe that you'll be drafted in the top 300.
No. The top 300 prospects are invited to a pre-draft combine per the new CBA, at which time they can take physicals. If they don't take a physical at the combine then a team doesn't have to give them 75% of slot. I imagine the top 300 prospects is a list from Callis/Mayo.
|
|
|
Post by Canseco on Mar 12, 2022 6:46:50 GMT -5
Ahhh… so that’s the going rate for one’s soul these days?
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Mar 12, 2022 8:43:05 GMT -5
There's no way that it could be the former because we're talking about pre-draft physicals. I don't see how that affects it. If you don't take a pre-draft physical and you wind up in the top 300 picks, you are not guaranteed 75% of slot. I'd think that would be a pretty big incentive to take the physical if you believe that you'll be drafted in the top 300.
How will it stop players who wouldn't get drafted if they didn't take a physical from signing for $10K? You don't know who the top 300 players drafted are before they are drafted.
|
|
|
Post by Underwater Johnson on Mar 12, 2022 11:18:37 GMT -5
I don't see how that affects it. If you don't take a pre-draft physical and you wind up in the top 300 picks, you are not guaranteed 75% of slot. I'd think that would be a pretty big incentive to take the physical if you believe that you'll be drafted in the top 300.
No. The top 300 prospects are invited to a pre-draft combine per the new CBA, at which time they can take physicals. If they don't take a physical at the combine then a team doesn't have to give them 75% of slot. I imagine the top 300 prospects is a list from Callis/Mayo. Gotcha.
|
|
|