Skip to main content

From LA Times. I bet a lot of HS players who were headed to D1 programs will be switching to D2/3 forcing talent out at the lower levels. Just a thought.

Shortened MLB draft will create a roster logjam for college teams

UCLA head coach John Savage talks to his team during an NCAA college baseball tournament super regional game in Los Angeles.
UCLA head coach John Savage talks to his team during an NCAA college baseball tournament super regional game in Los Angeles, Friday, June 7, 2019. Michigan won 3-2. .
(Ringo Chiu / Associated Press)

Their sport won’t return to action until next February, but repercussions from the coronavirus crisis already have college baseball coaches bracing for a potentially seismic impact.

Usually, college baseball serves as a river connecting the amateur and professional ranks, ferrying players to MLB clubs in a strong and steady stream. But when the league, in an unprecedented cost-saving move, downsized the 2020 MLB draft from 40 rounds to five, it was as if a hastily built dam had suddenly clogged the whole system.

By the time the two-day event ends June 11, only a fraction of draft-eligible college and high school prospects will be offered professional contracts. The rest will be backlogged in a reservoir of talent, threatening to flood college baseball with more players than it is designed to handle.

“In the big picture, it’s something that we’ve never calculated or prepared for,” UCLA coach John Savage said: “It’s so fluid, we’re changing our roster and the looks of it literally day to day. It could lead to mass confusion here in a month or so.”

 

The problem is unique to baseball, the only NCAA sport whose major pro league drastically altered its amateur draft this summer. Even under normal circumstances, managing college rosters is “a shell game,” USC coach Jason Gill said, forcing coaches to sign recruiting classes months before knowing how many of their draft-eligible players (juniors and 21-year-old sophomores) might be drafted and signed.

Add in a 2020 draft one-eighth its normal length and a meager $20,000 signing bonus cap for undrafted players, and “all those predictions are getting fouled up across the country,” Gill said. “There’s a lot of layers.” The logjam will swell even larger because the NCAA will allow 2020 seniors in spring sports to return in 2021.

 

Ballooning college rosters could stretch programs’ resources thin. The limit of 11.7 scholarships per team is not expected to change even though scholarship money earmarked for incoming freshmen may instead go to returning players. An overcrowded transfer market could exceed demand, potentially leaving some players with nowhere to go.

 

 

 

And if the NCAA doesn’t adjust its strict roster rules, which currently cap baseball teams at 35 players and allow only 27 to receive scholarship money, many coaches could be forced to cut players just to remain roster-compliant.

“There’s no way a majority of us can get under 35,” Gill said. “There’s going to be some phone calls that have to be made to families that are going to be unfortunate.”

Gill and Savage believe their programs will exceed the 35-man roster max by only a handful of players, depending on how the draft shakes out. But they know other schools could face rosters as large as 45 or 50 next year.

“That’s what we’re trying to get the NCAA, as a coaches group, to understand. If you don’t make some relief legislatively, there are going to be kids run off of rosters through no fault of their own.”
TRACY SMITH, ARIZONA STATE BASEBALL COACH
 

“Can you imagine your son getting a call in July — after they’ve been committed to a school for three years and signed a national letter of intent back in November — that not only do they not have a scholarship but they don’t have a spot on that team?” said Craig Keilitz, executive director of the American Baseball Coaches Assn., which issued recommendations that the NCAA temporarily waive the 35-man roster cap and increase the maximum number of scholarship-eligible players from 27 to 32.

Keilitz continued: “I mean, that’s reality unless we make this change.”

Arizona State coach Tracy Smith echoed similarly dire predictions.

“If [the NCAA] says, ‘We’re not going to do anything,’ you’re going to see a massive amount of kids enter the NCAA [transfer] portal on the suggestion of coaches,” Smith said. “That’s what we’re trying to get the NCAA, as a coaches group, to understand. If you don’t make some relief legislatively, there are going to be kids run off of rosters through no fault of their own.”

 

The expectation within the sport is that the NCAA will approve the ABCA’s baseline proposals. But after the NCAA Division I Council failed to address any baseball management issues during its latest meeting May 20, the earliest that rule changes can be considered is at the council’s next meeting, June 17 — six days after the draft is completed.

“College baseball needs clarity,” said Kendall Rogers, co-managing editor of D1Baseball.com. “You can get away with not voting on it last week. But if you’re not voting on roster issues by June 17, you’re going to have a lot of kids and a lot of coaches in limbo leading up to school.”

Rule changes won’t erase all complications, either. Rogers expects the transfer portal, which he said had already seen 1,000 entrants since January, to “explode when the draft is over” — especially if more schools eliminate their baseball programs, as Bowling Green and Furman did this month.

 

Junior colleges stand to be a big benefactor from the shortened draft and Division 1 logjam. High school players who expected to be drafted, and signed, after the fifth round could play at a junior college and be draft-eligible in 2021. If they attend a four-year school, they wouldn’t be draft-eligible until 2023.

Yet, Rogers said, “there are going to be a lot of kids that will end up having to hang up their cleats and not play baseball. There’s going to be a lot of careers ended.”

Loyal upperclassmen role players will have few options because they are too old to transfer to junior college and unlikely to be desired by other programs.

“Running juniors off and seniors off, it’s just — boy oh boy,” Savage said, at a loss for words. “That’s what I fear.”

 

College baseball could benefit in the long run from a reduced draft and expected minor league contraction. But there will be a short-term cost first, one that will affect almost every player, coach and program.

“The silver lining to this whole craziness [is that it] could change things for the better for college baseball, who knows?” Keilitz said. “But I wish we didn’t have to go through it.”

Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

BOF,

That has been the 800-lbs gorilla in the room that everybody has been talking around for months....thanks for finally letting it out!      I've been talking to some folks offline about this cause and effect in their recruiting efforts.  Hopefully they see this article.  I think you are spot on.  JUCO, D2 and D3 and possibly NAIA schools are going to be getting a quantity of studs like they never seen.

Even if a recruit has MLB draftable talent, folks are going to be faced with this "talent cascade".   Because that potential MLB draftee doesn't know if he is going in the top 5 rounds or signed to a contract.  Let's say he doesn't.  Now he is looking to sign at P5 schools or possibly JUCO..   Another P5/JUCO recruit is now being pushed down to D1 mid-major level...and so on.... and so on.    The talent cascade is going to effect everyone at every level.   There will be more talent at the lowest collegiate levels that has not been there before.  Playing time will be at an all time premium.   Those that love the game will adjust or find other options.

As always, JMO.  I hope you and the family are doing well.

PitchingFan & adbono,

You guys may be "geniuses in the know", but many others don't understand or think this is going to effect them.  They don't have your experience here. 

I've had at least 10-12 side conversations in the last few months with folks being recruited at the mid to low-D1 level as well as D3 who don't understand how difficult it is to get recruited and win some playing time in the best of times.   I've tried to explain they are probably better off over 4 years to weigh the D3s higher, get playing time and leverage their academic numbers to get recruited.   Most of us that have been around a while and read HSBBWeb daily understand the value of any college playing time and going to a program that wants you.   There are a lot of people that read HSBBWeb but many are not getting the real message or understanding the real implications.

JMO

Last edited by fenwaysouth

Fenway, I think you are missing the boat where me & PitchingFan are concerned relative to this topic. A couple months ago we (and some others) saw the writing on the wall and (on this board) said that this was going to affect everyone - and we explained how. We were met with a lot of pushback, disbelief, and criticism for being negative, knee jerk reactionary, etc.  It can be pretty frustrating to put a knowledgeable message out there in an attempt to help and have holes shot in it by people with lesser experience. You should know that as well as anyone. So no need for the “genius” poke. 

I started a thread shortly after the NCAA decision to grant all current players an additional year.  It created a lot of controversy (maybe because I used the word Slaughter in the thread title).  

A little more analysis:  What will be interesting, is to see what MLB is experimenting with here.  They want to know how many will sign at next to $0 bonus.  While the draft is only 5 rounds, a lost year is a lost year.  If you were a college junior looking at signing in rounds 8-10 at 125-150k, does taking an additional college year make more sense than signing for 20k this year.  NO is the answer.  If you are taking the gamble that this(baseball) will work out for you professionally, the lost year on the back end is worth far more than the signing bonus most will get up front.

Additionally, if you are a draft eligible guy that entered the portal and can't find anywhere to play in college because of the logjam, maybe the best answer is to sign as an undrafted free agent.  Economy is going to be crap, new jobs will be hard to find, work a part-time job, get the folks to sponsor you for a year and see if it works. 

Last edited by Pedaldad
@Pedaldad posted:

I started a thread shortly after the NCAA decision to grant all current players an additional year.  It created a lot of controversy (maybe because I used the word Slaughter in the thread title).  

A little more analysis:  What will be interesting, is to see what MLB is experimenting with here.  They want to know how many will sign at next to $0 bonus.  While the draft is only 5 rounds, a lost year is a lost year.  If you were a college junior looking at signing in rounds 8-10 at 125-150k, does taking an additional college year make more sense than signing for 20k this year.  NO is the answer.  If you are taking the gamble that this(baseball) will work out for you professionally, the lost year on the back end is worth far more than the signing bonus most will get up front.

Additionally, if you are a draft eligible guy that entered the portal and can't find anywhere to play in college because of the logjam, maybe the best answer is to sign as an undrafted free agent.  Economy is going to be crap, new jobs will be hard to find, work a part-time job, get the folks to sponsor you for a year and see if it works. 

This is exactly what I have been wondering about.  Would appreciate thoughts from those in the know as to how many of these undrafted players does MLB need/want, and why wouldn't some college upperclassmen take this chance - knowing that the draft is unlikely to greatly expand in the future.

Quite honestly it doesn't take a rocket scientist (shout out to Elon and his amazing involvement in making history yesterday) to figure out what is happening and what's more than likely to come of this in the next year or 2. Jeez....you don't even have to search the web and read link after link and story after story....It's all right here in front of you on the good ole' HSBBWEB!

@adbono posted:

Fenway, I think you are missing the boat where me & PitchingFan are concerned relative to this topic. A couple months ago we (and some others) saw the writing on the wall and (on this board) said that this was going to affect everyone - and we explained how. We were met with a lot of pushback, disbelief, and criticism for being negative, knee jerk reactionary, etc.  It can be pretty frustrating to put a knowledgeable message out there in an attempt to help and have holes shot in it by people with lesser experience. You should know that as well as anyone. So no need for the “genius” poke. 

I understand what you are saying and apologize for the genius poke, but you guys are smart and been around the block.   This isn't about you.  Lots of people still have a lot of questions, especially those new to our site and those that don't post frequently.  Lots of them didn't know where to start while the poop was hitting the fan, and are really behind the 8-ball right now.   Recruiting is difficult enough without a feel, experience or someone to Sherpa you through it.  Throw this freaking virus on top of it, and recruiting becomes a rubiks cube to the new folks.

I saw what you saw.  Yes, you guys got out in front of it.  I recall all the threads, and frankly I probably read more than a few of them a couple times for understanding because I had to run it through my noggin.   Thanks for doing that.   But the challenge is taking what you read and transferring that into taking action.   I know a couple people that are just completely overwhelmed with data right now, and the recruits haven't taken their SAT or ACT which is not a great place to be.   Over the last 10+ years, I've suggested that most people with the proper leverage take that shot (aim high!) at their dream school and see what happens.   These days, the advice is a little different given Covid-19, MLB and NCAA policy changes...aim low and hope for the best.   All of this is very difficult to message.  I saw an opportunity to reinforce the message to others that I've been in touch with because I think they're tired of hearing it from me.   That is all this is about.  Nothing more. 

Hoping for a more thorough conversation about how the logjam will affect the high academic D3s, Ivy's, and other schools with hyper competitive admission rates.  

Will all colleges feel that same talent movement, or are those very high academic schools going to experience the "logjam" differently?

An obvious assumption would be that Ivy's and other high academics will only superficially experience the same level of problem.  I base this very superficial guesstimate on the following factors:

1.) The Ivy's exercised their option to NOT grant an additional year to seniors.   This creates no increase in roster size without NCAA changing the rules.  But it is interesting to note how difficult it is to hang up the cleats, as most of the graduating players from the Ivy's and other high academics (like Wofford) are seeking places to play given the additional year of eligibility.  

2.). D3's, like the Ivy's, offer no athletic aid.  some might think this would cause their rosters to be more fluid, but in actuality they are more stable.  This is likely because the bulk of their players are students first and athletes second.

3.) Expanding on the items above.  Academics was the first requirement to get into to these schools, not baseball skill.   It is just the opposite at baseball competitive D1, D2, and JUCO programs.

 

 

Last edited by Pedaldad

I posted Prof Galloway's article on another thread earlier but the link below is a 2 min interview and its the same as the article I posted and gets right to the point.  It basically says top tier schools will be ok but many colleges are in real economic trouble and will close.  What he says about the future of education clearly has a huge impact on the future of sports at colleges.   I suspect he's a bit overhyping the situation but this is worth a quick listen.   

How this bleeds down into D3 sports is a good question but I think the post above by pedaldad is a logical one.  I would also say PitchingFan & adbono were way early in discussing the impacts of Covid, the extra year of eligibility and smaller draft on college ball.  I appreciate their insights.  I think my son is somewhat protected by playing high academic D3 and all seniors at the school he is joining moved on but whether D3 or not it's always going to be a battle to see the field.

* watch Part 2 (watch it all of course but I am referencing part 2)

https://twitter.com/profgallow...874000670855169?s=20

Last edited by Gunner Mack Jr.
@Pedaldad posted:

1.) The Ivy's exercised their option to NOT grant an additional year to seniors.   This creates no increase in roster size without NCAA changing the rules.  But it is interesting to note how difficult it is to hang up the cleats, as most of the graduating players from the Ivy's and other high academics (like Wofford) are seeking places to play given the additional year of eligibility.   

The NCAA granted an extra year to ALL spring sports student-athletes, not just seniors. This includes players in the Ivy League. So no, the Ivy did NOT exercise an option to NOT grant an additional year to seniors. In fact, the Ivy League took NO ACTION at all, which means their rule barring graduate students from participating in sports remains the same. 

So yes, ALL Ivy student-athletes (spring) have an extra year of eligibility. But if they happened to graduate then they are no longer eligible to play on an Ivy sports team. They have to use their extra year of eligibility elsewhere. No different than previous years.

Add Reply

×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×