The issue really is not draft pick compensation. Nobody should have a problem with that. Its the draft pick penalty for teams that sign free agents. That's what Drew and others are complaining about. It was never really an issue before except for RP'ers who made less anyways, but now for whatever reason, teams are suddenly and collectively assigning a much higher valuation than they used to (about 5-7 million for a non top 10 pick).
I guess it's easy to say in hindsight that Drew and others should have anticipated the changing market, but when markets change suddenly, its not unusual to get caught on the wrong side. Until this gets changed, non-elite free agents are probably going to be more likely to accept the QO.
Hoplite said:
I would take issue with Drew's comments for a few reasons.
1. He didn't have to be attached to draft pick compensation. He could have taken the qualifying offer.
2. There were teams willing to give up draft picks. He was reportedly offered a 3 year deal from one of them and turned it down
3. I'm having trouble trying to find a statistic or a sample size that would suggest he was a top 5 shortstop
He knew what the rules were and only has himself to blame if he doesn't get a nice multiyear deal.
IIRCC I believe he was 8th among SS in WAR and OPS+ last year
I think the teams who were offering multi-year deals were expected to lose a 2nd or 3rd round pick, which drastically reduces the number of teams in play.
Sure he could have taken the QO, but at the time did anyone really think he was not worth at least 3/35 on the market? Players trade AAV for years and total dollars all the time.
While the rules are clear, draft pick compensation is hardly a new thing. What is new as I mentioned above is how highly teams seem to be valuing the picks.