[BostonCard]

Unfortunately you can't blame the teams for this, they are just acting in their best interest in looking at what the data shows, which is that in general free agents are a poor use of funds.  Teams are just getting wiser to this fact. The problem lies in service time rules that keep players under team control at artificially lowered salaries for such a long time. Currently players are under team control for basically 7 years of professional time (6 full years, which every team games the system to be ~6.99 years), meaning even longer if they spend significant time in the minors. This means players hit free agency either at or after their peak performance, and teams are hesitant to pay for past performance when most players are likely to decline. The answer is to increase salaries while under team control and shorten that time frame, which IMO should be 4 years from when the player is drafted, like it is in NFL/NBA contracts. Rather then arbitration, restricted free agency can be used which gives the home team the option to match salaries.

There also needs to be a salary floor, as currently the option for small market owners is pay for a relatively poor value free agent (relative to players under team control) or keep that money in your pocket. If forced to spend X amount that increases the spending on free agents.  We are definitely heading towards a strike/lockout if this keeps up.

I like Mick's solution better.  Every year, teams can bid on every player (majors or minors, and even players in college) for a one-year contract. Or at least eliminate the draft and structured contracts out of college.  Let teams and players negotiate freely.

BC

[BostonCard]

Unfortunately you can't blame the teams for this, they are just acting in their best interest in looking at what the data shows, which is that in general free agents are a poor use of funds.  Teams are just getting wiser to this fact. The problem lies in service time rules that keep players under team control at artificially lowered salaries for such a long time. Currently players are under team control for basically 7 years of professional time (6 full years, which every team games the system to be ~6.99 years), meaning even longer if they spend significant time in the minors. This means players hit free agency either at or after their peak performance, and teams are hesitant to pay for past performance when most players are likely to decline. The answer is to increase salaries while under team control and shorten that time frame, which IMO should be 4 years from when the player is drafted, like it is in NFL/NBA contracts. Rather then arbitration, restricted free agency can be used which gives the home team the option to match salaries.

There also needs to be a salary floor, as currently the option for small market owners is pay for a relatively poor value free agent (relative to players under team control) or keep that money in your pocket. If forced to spend X amount that increases the spending on free agents.  We are definitely heading towards a strike/lockout if this keeps up.

I like Mick's solution better.  Every year, teams can bid on every player (majors or minors, and even players in college) for a one-year contract. Or at least eliminate the draft and structured contracts out of college.  Let teams and players negotiate freely.

BC