Master Index of Archived Threads


Labor History (split from Michael and the Mets)

G-Fafif Aug 10 2009 02:23 PM

="Edgy DC":1gm1itry]did the Mets get any interesting compensation when the Braves signed away Washington?[/quote:1gm1itry] John Christensen was the comp pick in a [url=http://www.baseball-reference.com/draft/?query_type=franch_year&team_ID=NYM&year_ID=1981&draft_type=junreg:1gm1itry]very interesting[/url:1gm1itry] June 1981 draft. Benjamin Grimm Aug 14 2009 01:31 PM Wait... my memory of baseball history seems to be fuzzing up on me. There were draft picks as free agent compensation all the way back in 1980, before the 1981 strike? I thought that came along years later. And didn't it start out as a "pool" compensation? (That's how the Mets lost Tom Seaver to the White Sox, because Chicago had lost a free agent to some other team.) Frayed Knot Aug 14 2009 02:21 PM There were compensation picks going back, but the rules were different than today -- I don't know the specifics. The Mets, for instance, had multiple 1st round picks in '81 when they picked Strawberry with #1 and Billy Beane at #18 'Pool' compensation was the compromise reached when the players' association wouldn't agree to direct ML player transfer for a team losing a FA. Later that was dropped in favor of draft picks, although maybe it was a pool player AND a draft pick prior to that. Edgy DC Aug 14 2009 02:39 PM You're thinking 1980. Straw was number one, Bean #23, and (don't forget) John Gibbons at #24. Other future Mets taken in that first round by other teams include Don Schulze and Ross Jones. Frayed Knot Aug 14 2009 02:53 PM Beane, it turns out, was for losing Andy Hassler; Gibbons for Skip Lockwood. I think ML player compensation (via the pool process) was a result of the '81 strike. Owners wanted direct team-to-team compensation to act as a drag on FAgency, the pool process was the compromise. The current system of draft picks and supplemental picks (tweaked several times since) did away with that and was either a result of the mini-strike in '85 or put in a short time after that. Benjamin Grimm Aug 14 2009 02:58 PM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Aug 14 2009 03:09 PM I guess the "pool" thing was the result of the 1981 settlement. (Seaver was lost to the Sox after the 1983 season, so it wouldn't have been from the 1985 settlement.) My memory (apparently wrong) was that the big fuss in the 1981 strike was that the owners wanted to introduce compensation as a way of reining in free agency at least a little, and the players were, naturally, opposed to that. The "pool" idea came about as a compromise; the team that loses a player gets compensation, but there's no penalty to the team that signs the player. Thinking more about it, I guess the 1981 settlement was the one that abolished the "re-entry" draft. Remember that? A draft would be held that determined which teams could bid on which free agents. I remember getting all excited when the Mets "drafted" Reggie Jackson. Of course, they had no intention of ever talking to him. (Like there was any chance at all that the de Roulet Mets would sign a Reggie Jackson.) EDIT: Frayed Knot's post snuck in there while I was composing the above. If it looks like I didn't read his post, it's because I didn't! Benjamin Grimm Aug 14 2009 03:03 PM The Wikipedia 1981 strike article seems to support my recollection: ]Reasons for the strike The strike was called in response to the owners desperately wanting to win back the prerogatives over the players. The owners had already lost at the bargaining table and in the courts on the issue of the free agency draft. At issue during the seven week long negotiations was the owners demanding compensation for losing a free agent player to another team. The compensation in question was a player who was selected from the signing team's roster (not including 12 "protected" players). The players maintained that any form of compensation would undermine the value of free agency. The strike ends On July 31, 1981, a compromise was reached. In the settlement, teams that lost a "premium" free agent could be compensated by drawing from a pool of players left unprotected from all of the clubs rather than just the signing club. Players agree to restricting free agency to players with six or more years of major league service. [1] The settlement gave the owners a limited victory on the compensation issue. Frayed Knot Aug 14 2009 05:00 PM ="Benjamin Grimm"]... the 1981 settlement was the one that abolished the "re-entry" draft. Remember that? A draft would be held that determined which teams could bid on which free agents. I remember getting all excited when the Mets "drafted" Reggie Jackson. Of course, they had no intention of ever talking to him. (Like there was any chance at all that the de Roulet Mets would sign a Reggie Jackson.) The stupid thing was that when FA-gency was first forced on the owners they tried everything in their power to limit it (FA "Drafting", limits on how often a player could declare FA, etc) which is exactly what the players wanted; by reducing the supply (fewer FAs each year) the demand and therefore the prices went up. The owners were so far in over their heads on that issue that Miller had them both coming and going. G-Fafif Aug 14 2009 11:11 PM Two pieces from the archives that might be of interest: • 25th anniversary retrospective on baseball's longest midseason strike [url=http://faithandfear.blogharbor.com/blog/_archives/2006/6/12/2028141.html:cbc2l7rf]here[/url:cbc2l7rf]. • Who the Mets didn't have to protect in that stupid compensation pool [url=http://faithandfear.blogharbor.com/blog/_archives/2007/11/17/3360014.html:cbc2l7rf]here[/url:cbc2l7rf].