Why The Union Should Push Back At International Changes

When Major League Baseball and the players’ association sit down to negotiate the Collective Bargaining Agreement, there isn’t anyone at the negotiating table whose job is to fight for the interests of international amateur players.

MLB has a proposal that includes an international draft, which should allow owners to control labor costs by limiting signing bonuses. The responsibility of the players’ association is to look out for the interests of 40-man roster players. There isn’t anyone at the table truly invested in the rights of amateur players, which is unfortunate for them, but the union wouldn’t be doing its job if it didn’t first and foremost look out for its 40-man players.

So while the union could use MLB’s desire for an international draft as leverage to get additional benefits for major league players, there is a compelling reason why the union should push back against one of MLB’s proposed international reforms because of the impact it would have on all union members.

As Buster Olney of ESPN first reported, one of the items MLB has proposed is raising the signing age from 16 to 18. Raising the signing age would have benefits and drawbacks, both for players and teams. The optimal signing age is a great discussion worth having, one that draws a range of passionate, informed opinions across the game.

However, from the union’s perspective, they should be strongly against raising the signing age to 18. The reason they should reject it is not because of how it will affect the bonuses international amateur players get paid. The players’ association should be against it because of the long-term ramifications it will have on the future major league contracts its union members will sign.

Raising the international signing age from 16 to 18 pushes back the timetable for players to reach the major leagues. Right now, Latin American players who sign on July 2 can make their pro debuts at 16 or 17. The most prodigious talents can race to the major leagues and make their big league debuts when they’re still 19, like Felix Hernandez and Julio Urias did. Other fast-rising prospects get to the majors when they’re 20, like Miguel Cabrera, Elvis Andrus, Rougned Odor or Xander Bogaerts, or 21 like Hanley Ramirez, Carlos Gomez and Nomar Mazara.

These players who reach the majors at such a young age tend to develop into the game’s biggest stars. By reaching the majors at 20 or 21, they can become free agents in their mid-to-late 20s when they are still in their prime years. Those players command premium money and help elevate the market for all players.

If MLB raises the signing age to 18, then instead of having Latin American players make their pro debuts at 16 or 17, they would make them at 18 or 19. That would severely diminish the chances of players from the Dominican Republic or Venezuela reaching the major leagues by 20. It makes it more likely that those players will take longer to reach the major leagues, which means more players will be older when they hit free agency. Teams will have more control of players in their 20s through their cost-contained years, while players will be selling their decline phase on the open market as more of them reach free agency at 30 or later. Becoming a free agent at an older age not only damages a player’s value for that contract, it also reduces the chances he could sign a second big contract.

Think about the standard development path for Latin American signings right now. Most Latin American players start in the Dominican Summer League. Some of them spend multiple seasons there. The most advanced ones will sometimes start in Rookie ball in the United States, but most debut in the DSL, including a lot of million-dollar signings. Even “older” signings—players who are 18 or 19—mostly start in the DSL. Starling Marte signed with the Pirates when he was 18, then spent his first two seasons in the DSL.

If the signing age is 18, teams will be more inclined to push their top signings to debut in a Rookie-level complex league in the U.S., but most players will still probably stay in the DSL. The youth baseball structure isn’t as organized in the Dominican Republic as it is in the United States, and while there are signs that players are becoming better prepared to enter pro ball with the growth of trainer-organized leagues that put players into more games, they’re often still behind their U.S. counterparts in terms of game experience.

That’s before even getting into the cultural adjustments and language barriers that exist for Latin American players making the jump to the States for the first time. Once a player signs, there’s a lot of work that goes on behind the scenes for teams to help him both on and off the field. The trainers who develop amateur players serve an important role, but they don’t have the same resources as a major league team. Something as basic as physical development is crucial and can take off once a player signs with a team that can give him better nutrition and strength coaching, aside from the obvious developmental advantages of access to professional instructors.

There will still be some Latin American players who can get to the majors at 21 and hit free agency still at their traditional peak years, but raising the signing age from 16 to 18 reduces the number of them who will. That hurts players in the union—and not just Latin American players. While international amateur players aren’t in the union, the players’ association would be smart to push back against raising the signing age to 18 because of the long-term impact it will have on union members.