IFA 1st Poll

[Deleted]

If this gets enough yes's we can figure out how we will change then. But for now, lets see how many want changes or not. Poll is set to lock in a week.

[Deleted]

i think we should just table all discussions about changes in the offseason. Just my personal opinion.

[Deleted]

I like the idea I think Rays had about the budgets for each team depending on record

[Deleted]

I'm a fan of the draft personally. These guys are considered prospects, you decide where you want them.

[St. Louis Cardinals (Andrew)]

I have said this before but I strongly support changing the current IFA system for two main reasons :

1. People bid ridiculous amounts and too often end up dumping them when they get sick of carrying the huge salary, examples that jump to mind are Arguelles and Concepcion. I know I dumped Elvis Sanchez a couple of years ago after bidding up to $3M on him.

2. We have had our second example this year of "false" signing reports leading to premature bidding. Every year we have at least one situation like this and there are probably others that we haven't noticed.

I honestly think the best solution is for guys that are signed to big contracts like Ryu, Soler, Puig, Darvish, etc should be bid on like currently but the 16 year olds should just go into our FYP draft. Those signing before October 31st go into our draft. Those signing from November 1 through end of June can be bid on.

For the guys like Darvish, etc we should use the same rules as MLB does to separate Devers and those 16 year olds from Darvish.

[Deleted]

Yeah, you can generally tell who would be a guy that should be bid on and who shouldn't. This hot shit Cuban guy everyone is talking about for instance should be bid on no matter when he signs. And the MLB rule would cover that I believe.

[Deleted]

Letting a high upside IFA like Devers or Jimenez slip through the cracks in the system doesn't seem a sound idea. Who is to say which player can be grabbed for a cheap bid and which are considered "star" players? There has to be a solid rule, not just someone's opinion.

The number of times someone has jumped the bidding on a guy is almost negligible -- one or two each season. These are easily sorted out by going back and checking the time line on when the guy actually signed and which source is legit or not. We don't see what all the fuss is about.

The only fair thing -- if there is going to be a change in the system -- is lumping ALL IFA into one draft. But we vote to let things go on as they have been done for years. If an LM says the bidding is legit and logs him into the Combined, then it should stand as official, even if a future post says "official signing" (which means nothing more than the guy passed his physical).

This just doesn't seems like something is broken and needs to be fixed. What usually happens is someone bids, and someone else gets on the thread and says, hey, the guy hasn't been officially signed yet, and then it is all sorted out right then. One or twice a year or every other year there is a player who is won in bidding and then the deal terms up falling through (aka Miguel Alredo Ginzalez), but this is very rare and can easily be handled by LMs.

[Deleted]

i agree with cigar. im so not for letting elite teams possibly draft good IFA guys who could fall to them because of the deepness of the amateur draft. unless youre talking about a completely separate draft with IFA's specifically.

and to be honest there should be a monetary value assigned to them. the guys with awesome mlb teams and a maxed out salary should not be allowed to accrue a top notch talent without paying for it. when you have teams specifically "building" and saving money so they can spend it. hasn't it been a common occurrence throughout the league to have a good mlb team have so much room that he's able to trade draft picks around willy nilly. accruing top round picks despite being stacked at pretty much all levels.