I just read this, and if true, it makes believe maybe MLB will agree with the Mets argument about their pick being protected
'The Mets finished with one of the 10 worst records in baseball last season and should have a top-10 selection.
However, the Pittsburgh Pirates did not sign their 2012 first-round pick, Stanford pitcher Mark Appel. As a result, the Bucs get to select one spot below where they drafted last year. That gives Pittsburgh the ninth pick and pushes the Mets down to the 11th selection.
According to the Daily News report, the Mets are making the argument with MLB that their draft pick should be protected since it's really the No. 10 pick.'
its a perfectly sensible argue ment.Its designed to help the bottom ten teams improve.thats why its done that way.taking away one of the bottom tens chances of improving via free agency because another team failed to sign their pick defeating the purpose of that rule.its helping one team but hurting the others.someone did a graph and i like the way it looked.basically if 5 of the top 2013 draft picks fail to sign their picks.the next year,regardless,5 of the bottom ten is automatically hurt.with lower picks,and having to be careful who else they add.
the bottom ten TEAMS should have their pick protected,whoever originally slots in the bottom ten should have their picks protected.