DallasAg 94 said:
I also like the idea of a player becoming a FA after 4 years of team control, instead of 6.
If you know you only get a #1-5 pick for 4 years, you aren't spending 4 seasons "rebuilding." I believe it WILL effect service time manipulation.
Use Leiter. You get 4 years of team control. You don't bring him up for 2022 and likely try to push out a 2023 callup until after the service deadline. You have him from 2024-2027, if you can push out a 2023 callup.
But,if he makes the case for a 2022 call-up... 4 years... your window starts in 2022 and goes through 2025.
You can't afford to tank 2022, in order to get a player that won't help your window.
I think it will also have an impact on players that are drafted out of HS vs those drafted from College.
Thoughts?
I'm not a fan of that idea. Admittedly, my opinion is possibly a result of battered Rangers fan syndrome, but I just remember too many potential star players that the Rangers ruined by rushing to the show too soon (David Clyde being the most obvious and saddest example, but there are plenty of others).
I think that would work out fine for the truly elite players, like Tatis and hopefully Leiter. I don't think it would be a good plan for the majority of players, a great many of whom need the steady progression through the minors (low A, to high A, to AA, to AAA). Some of the latin players, a lot of whom sign at age 16, would be effectively forced to the majors before their 20th birthday. I remember seeing Juan Gonzales in the minors when he was 19. He looked nothing (physically) like what he was as a MLB player.
In my opinion, your idea is fan-friendly but not good for the players, or organizations.
** I misread, you were talking about MLB control, not minor league control. Still not a fan of 4 years, but 5 I could get behind. **