I disagree with the idea that everything has to be focused on improving the losing teams. Having a lottery first round rookie pick is a valuable enough commodity - adding a lottery first round FA pick rewards losing too much.

In my 24 team Trad league, Podsednik will be available in the FA draft - if the same team that gets him also gets a top rookie, that could be enough to leap-frog a couple of teams in the standings. And while that's good for that team, is it fair to the teams that didn't have a lottery pick that they pass? I'm all for poor teams getting help and having something to look forward to, but it can be overdone.

I've argued before that some system that rewards winning compared to talent is most like the real world of baseball - winning teams that aren't loaded down with stars can add players - poor teams that did OK relative to their talent can attract free agents. If teams had incentive to trade higher PB value bench players (excess talent) because holding onto them hurt their FA pick chances, that's as good for competitve balance as anything.

A system that ranks teams on success (wins) relative to talent (PB value) is how I'd run the FA draft.