Couldn't agree with you more on draft picks. There are too many Josh Hamiltons out there that for one reason or the other never reach their potential or have off the field problems that stop them from reaching the major leagues.

I can't say I really agree. Sure, you're probably not going to turn around your team's chances next year with this year's draft, but it's interesting to see how the management of clubs go about filling their "needs" with the draft. The popularity of "Moneyball" probably lends some more interest to the process, considering so many people now know how seriously clubs like Oakland take the draft. Maybe we'll see a few diamonds in the rough revealed today.
In the mid to late nineties, the Cubs and the A's drafted pitchers very well, and they are reaping the rewards now. It'll be interesting to see where the Rice trio is in five years.

Definitely not the drama or hype of the NBA or NFL drafts, but certainly significant in its own right. I'll be watching.

Well, not even the Josh Hamiltons of this world--- many draftees, even first-rounders, never even make it to the bigs. Yes, the draft is important in the long run, but a lot happens between the draft and when some of these guys finally make it to the bigs. Compare with the NBA or the NFL, where the new guys are on the roster the next season. Imagine if the minors didn't work in a farm system with the major league teams, and the major league teams had to draft guys from the minors... THEN there'd be a lot of interest. But it's not how it's done.

Adam

The obvious reason why the draft is not televised is simply because it is not interesting! In baseball a drafted player is usually not ready to step up in the big leagues and has to undergo a few years in the minors (John Olerud notwithstanding). So who wants to see who will be the next player on his club's A team? Who cares? Only a few diehards and fantasy nuts do, and they would watch, but they don't justify a big telecast.

Basketball and football don't have minor leagues to speak of. Basketball and football players, when they leave college, are more or less ready to play in the pros, and even to carry a team on their own. That's why their drafts are interesting. Not in baseball, it isn't.

I find myself agreeing with John Kruk, that it is bad some teams don't draft good players due to "signability", basically being able to afford the bonus. Perhaps there should be a schedule, the top 5 get X dollars, and from there on it's a percentage of that.

Is there any reason teams aren't allowed to trade draft picks? Wouldn't trading the high draft pick spots to teams with money help the low-budget teams? They let the high-price players slide as it is...

The draft was instituted because the big market teams were using the ability to sign players to stock themselves. Basically, the Yankees run of 1949-1964 brought about the draft. It was intended to bad teams a chance to pick up talent. I suppose that trading draft picks would somehow defeat that, but I don't quite see how.

And let's face it, it doesn't really matter. If a team really wants a player, it can make a deal with another team to trade for him once he's signed. There's plenty of ways around that rule.

Another argument against televising is poor entertainment value. With football, many of the draftees are fairly well-known to the college football fan, so the interest is broader. In basketball, there's always the hope that the lottery pick will be the one guy who can turn around the team almost immediately (cf. LeBron James). Baseball, as others have said, drafts a bunch of relative no-names in hopes of a payoff several years down the road. Who's gonna watch?