The Competitive Balance Rounds are a pair of bonus rounds within the MLB draft, designed to give an extra pick to the game’s smaller-market teams. Teams that fall within either the bottom 10 in revenues and market size are eligible, and since 2017, the league determined the eligible teams based on a formula involving market score, revenues, and winning percentage. The first of the two Competitive Balance Rounds (CBR-A) comes right before the start of the second round, and CBR-B comes right after the second round. For the 2025 draft, a total of 15 teams will gain an extra pick, and their order within their respective round is determined by their win totals in the 2024 season.
With that explanation out of the way, let’s get to the fun stuff — these picks can be traded. Specifically, a CBR selection can traded exactly once, and to any team in the league. Since these are the only MLB draft picks that are eligible to be dealt, it has become increasingly common to see teams move these extra selections as part of larger trade packages for established talent.
Three CBR picks in the 2024 draft changed hands due to trades, most prominently the Orioles’ inclusion of the 34th overall selection as part of the trade package sent to the Brewers for Corbin Burnes. This offseason has already seen three CBR picks in the 2025 draft dealt, and this post will explore the possibility that some other teams with CBR selections might move these picks to fill a more immediate need.
To cover the broad reason why any of these teams might not make a trade, it’s simply that draft picks are a very valuable asset unto themselves. Controllable young talent is particularly important for lower-revenue clubs that usually don’t splurge on expensive free agents or trade targets, which is part of the reasons why the Competitive Balance Rounds exist in the first place. Clubs are naturally pretty reluctant to move these CBR picks unless the right opportunity presents itself on the trade market.
(First, some notes on the draft order. The first 75 places in the 2025 draft have largely been established, since the remaining free agents who rejected qualifying offers all played for teams who were either luxury-tax payors in 2024, or aren’t revenue-sharing recipients. That means that if Nick Pivetta signs elsewhere, the Red Sox will get their compensation pick after CBR-B. If Pete Alonso and Alex Bregman sign elsewhere, the Mets’ and Astros’ compensation picks will fall after the fourth round. Also, because the Mets, Yankees, and Dodgers all exceeded the second luxury-tax tier in 2024, their first-round picks were dropped by 10 spots in the draft order. This means that these three big spenders are all technically selecting within CBR-A, but obviously these aren’t official CBR picks. The only potential change would be if a team that signs Alonso, Bregman or Pivetta surrenders its second-round pick to do so.)
Onto the selections….
Brewers (33rd overall, CBR-A): Milwaukee is actually making consecutive picks in the draft, as they received a compensatory pick when Willy Adames rejected the team’s qualifying offer and signed with the Giants. Owning the 32nd overall pick might make the Brew Crew slightly more opening to trading the 33rd overall pick, perhaps to add pitching or to the infield in the wake of Adames’ departure. The Brewers could considering adding their CBR pick as a sweetener to try and move Rhys Hoskins’ contract, yet it’s less likely that the team moves a valuable draft selection just as part of a salary dump.
Tigers (34th overall, CBR-A): The Tigers are considered to be one of the top suitors remaining for Alex Bregman, and signing a qualified free agent would cost the Tigers their third-highest pick in the 2025 draft. Losing the 63rd overall pick means the Tigers almost surely wouldn’t also deal their CBR pick. If Bregman signed elsewhere, it’s more plausible that Detroit could consider trading its CBR pick for a big right-handed bat, but still probably on the unlikely side.
Mariners (35th overall, CBR-A): It was almost exactly a year ago that the M’s traded their CBR-B pick in the 2024 draft to the White Sox as part of the Gregory Santos deal. Santos’ injury-plagued first season in Seattle could make the Mariners more hesitant to an even higher CBR selection, yet this tradable pick might an asset the M’s can use within an overall difficult offseason market for the team. The Mariners are working with limited payroll space and most every team in baseball would prefer win-now help over prospects, seemingly leaving the M’s dealing with a lot of offers for their starting pitchers. With Seattle so reluctant to deal from its excellent rotation, offering up the 35th overall pick in trade talks might help get things moving.
Twins (36th overall, CBR-A): Speaking of front offices without much financial flexibility, Minnesota has had a very quiet offseason, with most of the headlines focused on a potential sale of the franchise rather than any significant roster moves. With reportedly around only $5MM or so in payroll space, the Twins might have to make some trades just to free up more money for more trade possibilities. Moving the CBR-A pick could be added to the Twins’ list of possibilities, but the team has enough potential trade candidates on the active roster that moving a big league-ready player is probably their preference over dealing away a draft pick.
Rays (37th overall, CBR-A): It might not come as much surprise that Tampa is the team that has acquired the most CBR picks over the last seven seasons. As you’ll see shortly, the Rays added to that total with the 42nd overall pick of the 2025 draft. Like with the Brewers and the Adames compensatory selection, having an “extra” pick in a sense might make the Rays more open to dealing this pick here, but that hasn’t been Tampa Bay’s style.
Reds (now Dodgers, 41st overall, CBR-A): This pick was already moved, as Cincinnati traded its selection along with outfield prospect Mike Sirota to Los Angeles in exchange for Gavin Lux.
Athletics (now Rays, 42nd overall, CBR-A): Another swapped pick, as the A’s moved the 42nd overall pick to Tampa Bay as part of the Jeffrey Springs trade. This move in particular highlights the speculative nature of this post, since going into the offseason, the Athletics seemingly wouldn’t have been on the radar as a team likely to trade its CBR pick.
Marlins (43th overall, CBR-A): There’s basically zero chance the Fish move a draft pick in the midst of their extensive rebuild.
Guardians (70th overall, CBR-B): The reigning AL Central champs have generally gone chalk with their CBR selections, not acquiring or trading any picks until this year. Adding an experienced outfielder or middle infielder for the 70th pick might work on paper, as the Guards are another team with two CBR selections and not much spending capacity to address its roster needs.
Orioles (71st overall, CBR-B): The idea for this post came about after writing another piece yesterday about how the O’s might be well-suited to trade this pick.
Diamondbacks (now Guardians, 72nd overall, CBR-B): Arizona sent the 72nd pick and Slade Cecconi to Cleveland to bring Josh Naylor to the desert.
Royals (73rd overall, CBR-B): Kansas City traded its CBR-A selection just hours before the 2024 draft began, moving the 39th overall pick and third base prospect Cayden Wallace to the Nationals for Hunter Harvey. While Harvey battled injuries and wasn’t much of a help in the Royals’ run to the ALDS, the fact that the team made such an aggressive midseason deal in pursuit of a playoff spot might hint that the front office is willing to make another bold swap involving this pick. Outfield help remains the Royals’ biggest need at this point in the winter.
Cardinals (74th overall, CBR-B): Outgoing president of baseball operations John Mozeliak has spoken about wanting to leave a “clean slate” for new PBO Chaim Bloom. Between that and the Cardinals’ stated goal of refocusing on player development, it seems unlikely St. Louis would look to move its CBR pick.
Pirates (75th overall, CBR-B): The Bucs have had a relatively quiet offseason, with the team’s typical lack of big spending. In theory, trading a CBR pick might be a helpful way for the Pirates to add talent without breaking the budget, though Ben Cherington has yet to explore this tactic during his time as Pittsburgh’s general manager.
Rockies (76th overall, CBR-B): While the Rockies aren’t technically in an official rebuild, they’re not exactly building up after losing 204 games over the last two seasons. Using this pick to add another young player to the farm system seems far more likely than the Rox trading the pick away.
Miguel Rojas to the Brewers
James Outman to the Mariners or Royals
Michael Grove to the Orioles
Chris Taylor to Pittsburgh
Ryan Braiser to whoever needs pen help.
Dodgers pay the MLB salaries above minimum.
Terrible
You can pay the entire salary, and the Brewers still should not, and will not, take Miguel Rojas.
@Feury
Spot on. The Brewers taking Rojas would be like a broke college student willingly paying for a meal they never ordered. No amount of salary coverage makes that an appealing dish.
@Dodger Dog
This isn’t MLB The Show, and you’re not going to force teams to take on the Dodgers’ salary dumps just because they can technically afford it. The Brewers wouldn’t take Rojas if he came with a lifetime supply of bratwurst, and Taylor’s declining bat isn’t helping a rebuilding Pirates team. If the Dodgers are “paying the salaries above minimum,” that just means they’ve overpaid these guys in the first place.
Rojas is a top 5 defensive SS rotting on the bench in LA. A pitching dependant contender with a middle a limited budget makes a lot of sense.
Pittsburgh has a lot of holes, a multi position player on the cheap is kind of exactly what they need, since they won’t invest in free agents.
Taylor is garbage and he doesn’t fill any holes because he’s old and not good. It’s not hard to find a utility infielder capable of striking out 30% of time and hitting low .200s. Rojas is a backup at best.
You’re being a homer. Acting like teams would pay comp picks for scraps and Dodgers will just stack picks.
Grove is dump, too
WTF are you smoking?
I bet Elias keeps all these picks and trades from the prospect system if a deal is made.
@Jbigz12
“Bet” all you want, but there’s no risk in Elias keeping the picks. Trading from the Orioles’ system for an impact player is the logical move, but they’ve been hoarding prospects like doomsday preppers stockpiling canned goods. Eventually, you need to eat.
If the mariners don’t have any money then we should be looking for prospects to capitalize on the market
Because with how are team is built we can’t win it all if we have no money so it’s better to either be all in or all out, being in between with no playoffs but .500 record is what makes a playoff drought
How about a .540 record
I’d still trade a pitcher if they don’t have any more money to spend. You don’t need 5 guys that are all #1-3 starters when you have other holes.
They’ve averaged over 88 wins over the past four seasons. They’ve missed the playoffs 3x out of the 4, by 2 games, 2 games, and 1 game.
For maybe as little as another $20M a year, they could’ve been in the playoffs all 4 years. Added attendance + playoff money, might pay for the extra player outright.
Joe attendance is not a problem. Except it is the problem that the ownership group knows fans will show and they are guaranteed the profits. I am betting they start trading the young SPs next year because they will not want to pay their salaries when they come up in the next few years. Trade them for prospects because they are cheap. This is what this team will do until this group sells. Not fair to the fans but we will still show up and they make money with little investment.
@sad tormented neglected mariners fan
So your solution to financial constraints is to give up entirely unless you can be the Dodgers overnight? The Mariners are literally on the cusp of the playoffs every year, and your take is essentially, “Let’s tank instead.” That’s not strategy—it’s self-sabotage.
Wouldn’t it make sense for the Tigers to trade the pick if they sign Bregman that way the pick they lose is moves even further back in the draft if they actually do sign Bregman.
Probably will. Like Arizona did. Why lose your 2nd round pick when you can make it a 3rd.
@brewpackbuckbadg
Yes, because if you’re already losing a draft pick, why not make it an even worse one? This is like wrecking your car and deciding to drive it off a cliff just to make sure the insurance claim is “worth it.”
This is just tangentially related but doesn’t saddling a free agent with a QO make it even harder for low revenue/low spending teams to compete in the free agent market? If the goal is to entice low revenue teams to spend, the QO just gives them more rationale not to do so, because of the draft picks that get taken away. It’s almost like low revenue teams are double penalized just for spending, when there should be incentives for them to spend. Maybe (more like probably) I am missing something here completely.
In total agree and I’d add on. You touched the QO problem.
I believe all the draft pick penalties and or pick comps should be based on tv deals.
Tv deals are the great separator. For example the huge gap between the dodgers/Yankees ect and the padres is the tv money.
Tv money is mainly about market size. Heck they use tv market size as the main label for calling markets big or small.
Here is my issues. A small market team like the Padres. Spend spend spend put a highly marketable team on the field. Fans come out and break attendance record after record. Padres have raised ticket prices for 3 straight years. Fans keep breaking attendance records.
They have no tv deal. The only way the padres are going to make more revenue next year is by somehow having the same record attendance to go with record ticket costs.
Their attendance has been so high it’s put them into a revenue payer instead of receiver. Now they have removed all benefits of being a receiver including draft comps.
Everyone wants the low spending teams to spend. Then why remove the perks they had when they didn’t spend. Heck why not have incentives for increased spending. Set a draft comp incentive for reach certain levels of spending. Stop penalizing the teams with limited revenue when they spend. Penalize the haves, reward the have nots for spending. Also change how teams are classified. Don’t penalize the padres for spending and fans attending. They are now basically at their revenue ceiling. No other small tv market team can say that. NONE.
Sorry for going on so long but…
There isn’t gong to be a cap. Without a cap the top teams are going to spend penalties or not. If that’s the way it going to be then so be it.
Focus on the perks of getting bottom teams to spend. Remove all the penalties (except rev receivers bottom line needed to spend amounts). Give them more reasons to spend without the penalties. Will be good for the players and the smaller market teams. Also make the tv market size or tv deals the label maker for who is classified as what size. So if a small market team like the padres increase revenue they are then penalized for doing so. We should want all small market teams to spend like or near what the padres do.
They should go back to Type A, B, and C FAs. Maybe change it to the top 10%, 20% and 30% of players. Eliminate the charge for any team in the bottom 5 in record.
There is a lot that can be done, but the players are set in their ways, and the owners don’t care too much about balance.
I think we need to stop incentivizing poor records or little spending.
Teams are tanking to take a chance that they can change their fortune in drafts and it has been bad for baseball. The only two that have actually accomplished a tear down to rebuild were the Astro’s and orioles who both were in pretty long term builds and bad for baseball during these times.
Others have just killed fan interest by not being marketable/watchable in the short term or fix the farm in the long term. (Pirates, marlins, royals, As (sort of always operated strange), and I’m sure there are more.
@nacb55
This is the real issue: incentivizing failure instead of pushing teams to actually compete. The Orioles and Astros did it right, but the Pirates and A’s? They’ve been tanking for decades and treating “rebuilding” like a never-ending lease extension. There should be penalties for tanking, not rewards.
@Simm
A noble rant, but the problem isn’t just TV money. Small-market teams like the Padres tried to outspend their market size, and MLB effectively punished them for it. Instead of incentives for spending, the league’s system is like a casino that rewards you for not playing.
@Old York I’m all for tear down rebuild when it’s called for. Both Pirates and A’s happened to have a lot of soon to be free agents at the same time. I would have down the same thing especially the Pirates who were already losers and even the A’s. They made some trades and still missed the playoffs. Harder choice but right one.
It seems the Pirates have been rebuilding forever but it’s just that they stink at player development. 2012 they tried to contend. 2013 2014 2015 they succeeded. 2016 2017 tried and failed. 2018 they reloaded Cole Cutch trades for near mlb pieces. Half way through reload they got hot before deadline and the famous Archer trade. Reload over. 2019 trying. 2020 they would have rebuilt but health crisis. 2021 2022 rebuild and thats it. 2 rebuild years in dozen years. Will give you 3 because 2023 they didn’t go all in but the really added to team. Had that hot start that got national coverage then injuries hit extremely hard. They definitely tried last year. 10.5m for Chapman. Risked losing a year of team control on elite prospects. Did well until after trade deadline. Really short rebuild. Player development is still awful. Cherington should have been fired. But short rebuild. That should be their slogan. We ain’t rebuilding we just stink!
The QO’s are always there to discourage spending. In the case of the small market teams, they are the ones that usually lose the player, so getting a QO pick is important.
Past that, it is not a huge penalty. Any pick outside maybe the top-40 would not be enough to make me change my mind on signing a good player.
QO pick. You feel player is worth 1 year 21m. They usually get more than that. That’s 20 to 30 percent of a small markets payroll. Even without draft pick they wouldn’t be interested in signing that free agent.
Non revenue sharing teams lose 2nd highest pick and signing bonus pool. Revenue sharing 3rd highest and no signing bonus.
I see it as harming mostly only larger markets because small ones weren’t signing those players anyways. It’s a way to make baseball more competitive without rich teams giving away more of their $. Doesn’t help as much as more $ but if you were rich you would rather give up a few prospects than your $.
Small markets need to choose what homegrown talent they can extend to team friendly extensions. There isn’t any budget left for 20 30 40 million a year free agents.
The QO draft pick doesn’t even benefit them. That is more for large markets. You get a superior return trading the player so they trade them before they hit free agency. Yeah a Nick Martinez swingman or Christian Walker 1b isn’t going to bring a massive return so great for those types. But it’s hard to pass on a Juan Soto Corbin Burnes return vs a 30 something draft pick.
@YourDreamGM
You nailed the issue: small-market teams aren’t choosing to avoid big free agents. They simply can’t afford them. The draft pick compensation is a secondary issue when the real barrier is that half the league is playing with Monopoly money while the other half owns Boardwalk and Park Place.
@Ignorant Son-of-a-b
You’re absolutely right, except it’s worse than you think. The system ensures that small-market teams can’t afford the best free agents by adding a financial tax on top of the contract itself. It’s baseball’s equivalent of a cover charge to enter a club where you already can’t afford the drinks.