By Alan Schwarz
November 18, 2005

The proposed changes to minor league baseball and the draft, including eliminating the complex leagues and moving the draft to the end of June, will not happen until 2007 at the earliest.

Major League Baseball executive vice president Jimmie Lee Solomon said the commissioner’s office wants to do more to explain the purpose of the changes and answer questions for those who do not support all of the measures. While MLB has enough support to approve the changes, Solomon said officials want to follow commissioner Bud Selig’s usual practice of building a broad consensus.

For a complete look at Solomon’s perspective on the changes, here’s Alan Schwarz’ interview with Solomon.

Ever since word started filtering out over the summer, Major League Baseball’s proposed changes to the lower levels of player development have been kept curiously quiet. From the shifting of the draft to the end of June to the elimination of the complex leagues, from a defined bonus structure and signing date to longer, mandatory instructional leagues, almost no executive has been willing to speak openly about the situation.

Not surprisingly, the changes were among the most hotly debated topics at the recent general managers meetings in Indian Wells, Calif. On the meetings’ final day, Jimmie Lee Solomon, MLB’s top executive in charge of the situation, sat down for his first extended interview about what might become the most significant alterations to player development in decades.

---

ALAN SCHWARZ: Where do the proposed changes to the minor leagues stand at this point?

JIMMIE LEE SOLOMON: We’re trying to get consensus from the vast majority of the clubs. The GMs voted over the summer and the vote was 23-7—it did vacillate and ended up at 22-8—and we decided, the commissioner as well as many of us, that we needed to get more of a consensus, see what their concerns were, and try to hash those things out. We found there was no real consensus as to what the concerns were—they were all over the place.

AS: What were they?

JLS: A lot of the issues had to do with the pro scouting coverage, with the instructional league being mandatory. They had to do with, “Well, what do I do with my player after I sign him for the next season?” And then there was the concern of, “What about my Gulf Coast League or my Arizona League complex situation? Where do I send my young Latin players?” Things like that. So we’re trying to address all of these questions, and we’re working to give them answers as soon as possible, but no later than when the GMs convene, which will be at the Winter Meetings.

AS: Is it realistic to think that in three and a half weeks you guys will be able to allay those concerns?

JLS: I didn’t say allay, I said provide some semblance of a solution to these concerns. We really want to have a more effective system. The current draft system is not an efficient, effective system. We have tried not just to look at one thing—the draft, cost containment at Triple-A, or cost containment at the rookie levels. We’ve tried to look at the entire universe.

There will be some rough spots in the system, but it will be more efficient and lead to a much better system for us. There are naysayers who say, “No it won’t,” or “No, we like it the way it is,” or, “This change will hurt me over here.” Any new system will have people who will not be supporters of it. You think back when people thought interleague play would be silly, the wild card would be awful.

I know there are some in the National Association who have questions and issues too with this proposal. There is an idea that this proposal will benefit the independent leagues. I don’t think so, but it’s a fair concern. There are those who believe that our short-season level—the Pioneer League, the Northwest League, the New York-Penn League—level of play won’t be quite as good. So those are legitimate questions. Will it play out that way? I don’t know.

AS: If the draft were in late June and teams wound up signing players in July and sending most of them to instructional league, would they be signing—let’s use next year as an example—2006 contracts or 2007 contracts?

JLS: You sign an ’07 contract.

AS: That saves you guys a year Rule 5-wise—teams can keep players an extra year before having to protect them on the 40-man roster.

JLS: Well, it does help us, no question.

AS: Will any of these changes take place for 2006? Many people across the minor league landscape are still in the dark about this.

JLS: No. ’06 will be the status quo. But we’re going to continue to move toward these proposals.

AS: How would you assess the chances of significant portions of these proposals being in effect in ’07?

JLS: I believe it is going to happen. I think that 22-8 or 23-7 is a pretty strong group. There is a very small group holding this back at this point. We want total consensus if we can get it. Our commissioner is a consensus-building person, but we have the votes to carry it right now.

AS: What vote do you ultimately need with the GMs?

JLS: Just a simple majority. But we always work to make sure that it is a vast majority. If a vote is called for, the owners will have an opportunity to vote. And if it was voted in (by majority), we would implement it as soon as we could based on the time of the season and contractual arrangements.

AS: What would the effects be on minor league cities? Is this good for the minor leagues?

JLS: We are not talking about taking away baseball in any community. Baseball played in as many communities as possible is the most important thing in the world to us—that’s how you get kids to select the game. The only teams that we are talking about eliminating are complex leagues. Have you been to those games? There are a lot of scouts, and a lot of empty seats. The Florida State League plays in the same facilities that the Gulf Coast League teams do. So there is no loss of a team for any community. The Appalachian League, they might get a different type of league, there might be co-ops, some teams might be run by (MLB). But the teams will be there.

AS: With connections to 40-man rosters, what role must the union and the expiring collective bargaining agreement play in these talks?

JLS: It’s arguable. I think certain things shouldn’t be discussed with the union but there are others who believe they probably should, and most likely will have to be. So I defer to the labor guys to tell me what does and doesn’t have to be.

AS: Any bonus slotting system for the draft almost certainly will be discussed with the union, and the union has vehemently opposed it in the past.

JLS: I don’t think it’s any secret that we would love to have a slotting scenario. It’s a way we could get more cost certainty in our drafting system. It’s a way we could be more efficient in making our selections. But I think it’s also fair that the Players Association says, “Look, you want us to help you be more efficient in these things, why don’t you help yourself?” So if we can go in and show that we are consciously making every effort in the world to provide a system that is as efficient as possible, our Players Association partners might find it amenable to make the overall system work best for everybody. I’m assuming they are interested in helping our industry grow—when we grow and go forward it works to their benefit, too.

AS: Do you think that could ever happen?

JLS: I can always dream, can’t I? (Laughs.) If I did not think it would happen, I would not have worked as hard towards it as I have, and (committee chairmen) Dave Dombrowski and Mark Shapiro wouldn’t have worked tirelessly not only at the committee level but also making the phone calls back and forth. They are committed to this process to the nth degree.

You have to sometimes go out there and push the envelope in order to make this thing better. There is always risk involved. It’s hard to steal second base if you keep your foot on first.

You can reach Alan Schwarz by sending e-mail to alanschwarz@baseballamerica.com