ATLANTA — The stage is set. The spotlights are on. The music is blasting. The podium stands waiting. The entire baseball industry is tuning in for the 2025 MLB Draft.
But for the first time in 15 years, something essential is missing: Not a single draft prospect is in the building.
Advertisement
MLB Network and ESPN have cameras ready in the homes of various prospects to capture their reactions. Both broadcasts will conduct virtual interviews with most of the just-drafted high school and college players. Families, squeezed together on couches, will leap up with pride as names are called and careers begin. Some of those moments will go viral. But inside the Coca-Cola Roxy Theater, there will be no bear hugs, no joyful strolls to the stage, no hat fittings and no photo opportunities.
Yes, the draft broadcast is still happening — but this time, without any baseball players.
The MLB Draft has never been that big of a deal, relatively speaking. Compared to the NFL and NBA drafts, it is small potatoes, the youngest sibling. That dynamic is best reflected in viewership. The first round of the 2025 NFL Draft averaged 13.6 million viewers. The NBA’s first round, down from previous seasons, averaged 3.77 million. MLB’s first round last year, broadcast across two networks, averaged just 863,000 viewers.
Advertisement
That gap in interest is due to multiple factors. Baseball draftees can take years to reach the majors, whereas most football and basketball selections arrive in the league immediately. College baseball is significantly less popular than college football and college basketball, so fans are less familiar with the main characters heading into draft night. Also, the structure of the MLB Draft — with its bonus pools, slot amounts and compensation picks — is much more convoluted and complicated for the casual fan to follow.
Still, over the years, MLB has made a concerted effort to attract more eyeballs to its draft festivities. In 2021, for the first time, it took the event on the road, pushing the date back a month to coincide with the All-Star Game. Whereas previously, the festivities were closed to the public, fans were now encouraged to attend. There was music, lights, hype, energy, fun outfits. Those changes have endured, helping to propel a growth in viewership and interest; last year marked the second-highest viewership figures in the event’s history.
And yet, most players continued to stay home.
Over the 18-year history of the in-person draft, a total of 75 amateur players have been on-site, or an average of just more than four per year. Only two No. 1 overall picks (Carlos Correa in ’12 and Henry Davis in ’21) have been on site to hear their names called. Last year, just six players showed up, a paltry number compared to the NBA (24 players this year) and the NFL (15).
Advertisement
This time around, things got worse, with that figure plummeting all the way to zero.
Why?
The answer is complicated. Conversations with industry insiders point to several overlapping factors, including unfruitful relationships between agents and the league office, name, image and likeness money changing the attitude of amateurism in college baseball and the presence of predraft bonus negotiations in the draft process.
One player rep, given anonymity to speak freely, summed it up bluntly: “There’s just not much to gain with the current system.”
Some prominent figures have never cooperated. Scott Boras, widely considered the game’s most influential agent, has never had a player attend the draft. Over the years, more agencies have begun to adopt that approach. They argue that by attending, a player compromises negotiating leverage by indicating his intention to sign a professional contract.
Advertisement
That assertion is difficult to prove. Many of the attending players over the years have earned hefty bonuses, seemingly untainted by their decision to be at the draft. But whether that caveat is true is ultimately irrelevant: Many agents believe it to be. They either advise their clients against being at the draft or, at the very least, don’t encourage them to attend. Besides, sitting on the couch, surrounded by family, not sweating it out on camera as other names are called to the podium — that sounds a lot nicer than flying to Atlanta to smile and wave for three minutes.
Another agent pointed to money. The best college players — usually the ones being taken at the top of the draft — are being paid nowadays. And so, they expect to be compensated, somewhat handsomely, to show up. That agent argued that with a stronger financial incentive, more prospects would make the trek.
“Pay them $10K a pop as an NIL deal, and they’d get the entire first round,” that rep told Yahoo Sports.
Simultaneously, the professionalization of the amateur baseball world means the draft experience has likely become less awe-inspiring to many of the players who have been at an elite level for years. Even still, multiple players who did attend in recent years indicated to Yahoo Sports that they thoroughly enjoyed the experience.
Advertisement
It all raises a larger question for the league: If the players the league is asking fans to care about don’t care to attend, why should fans care to watch? Without players, the draft is like a performance without actors. There won’t be any there there.
And for team officials, the lack of players at the draft makes the timing even more frustrating. Moving the event back a month has been a major point of annoyance for front offices. The proximity of the draft to the trade deadline creates a compressed window during which teams have to juggle multiple high-stakes decisions in quick succession. Every July teams are stretched thin, unable to devote resources to the deadline until the draft is over. That’s why, perhaps, very little trade activity happens before the All-Star Game.
Advertisement
On Sunday, many fans will tune in regardless, eager to see which players their favorite club selects. The league has far bigger priorities to address than the absence of draftees at an event that not even a million people watch. Regardless, it’s an unfortunate outcome for the league, one that threatens to dampen the popularity of a growing event.
