Rule 5

[Deleted]

Hey,

Any thought to putting in a rule 5 clause? If we do expand that would be a few more players to protect, so maybe have a certain number of protected players now and as rosters increase so could the number protected.

It would keep owners involved because they would have to determine who is work protecting and who isn't it was also give some owners a chance to kind of reshape their team incase they don't have the trade pieces to do so.

Throwing it out there in the interest of keeping woners involved.

[Deleted]

I'm not clear how this would actually work. Would you mind elaborating a bit?

[Oakland Athletics]

Like, KC I’m not sure exactly how that would work you will need to elaborate.

[Deleted]

Well in MLB each team puts players on their 40 man roster and the ones that aren't which met certain requirements are available to other teams. The team can take that player and then have to keep them all year long on their 25 man roster, or they can offer them back to the team they took them from for a price.
My thought isn't that involved. I just though between our 25 man roster and our 20 minor league players we could let's say protect 30 and then do a 1 or 2 round draft where we would be picking from the 15 players per team that weren't protected.It should keep owners invested in their team as they would have to think do I expose this player what is his upside does he have a role with his team next year? Or hey this player is making a lot of money I don't want to keep paying him this amount maybe expose him and see what happens.
Who knows maybe this would be a good way for a team to acquire a player they normally would'nt. Basically it's just a thought to keep things active.

[Oakland Athletics]

That’s an interesting idea and a good idea but I do they there might be some logistical things that don’t work with this.

Like the real MLB I think the player should have to be on the roster all season long, but the issue with doing this is someone might draft someone with 0 AB’s or IP and we do not allow players to be on MLB rosters if they have no time in the MLB unless they have been promoted by their real life team.

I think this is a really good idea, but maybe some logistical things that may not work. I think we have plenty of things to keep owners active, if owners aren’t active that’s on them. This league does have a lot going on and a lot things to think about so I don’t think that is really a concern that we need more things to keep owners active. It can be a lot to keep up with already from an owner standpoint but especially from a commissioner standpoint.

[Deleted]

The keeping a player on the roster all season would be the drawback but we could just bypas that if you draft a minor league player you put him in your minors. If he is an active 25 player you put him on your roster. If we do one round it's 20 picks and we could even do it before free agency,so maybe your able to fill a need that way.
We already have something like it with the grabbing a minor league player if he doesn't get promoted, this would just be league wide on a grander scale.

[Deleted]

I mean, I'd be open to exploring the idea further, but it would really depend on what that criteria is. People run their team as they see fit, if they want to load up on minor league talent hoping that they contribute I don't see a reason to penalize them for doing so (which is what Rule V essentially does). It's not like teams can hold down players who are in MLB very long based on the other rules that we already have in place.

[Deleted]

With the rules we have in place loading up on minor league talent will either be 20 or 25 players max, If we protect let's say 30 a team could protect all their minor league players and then none would be at risk. As I said to Josh we don't have to do a strict rule 5 like MLB. It can be altered to fit our league.

We do though have a penalization rule with the minor leagues if you don't promote them within 48 hours of them going over limits then your at risk to lose them. I just thought this would be something that could create some options for teams.

[Deleted]

Now I'm confused. If teams can just protect their entire MiLB rosters anyway, then what does this accomplish?

[Deleted]

It's not a Rule 5 draft in the MLB sense where you can only draft from teams minor leagues, you can draft from whomever isn't protected. You said about teams losing minor league players. So if your protecting 30 players you could protect the whole minor league team if you wanted you don't have to. The protecting the minors was the answer to your question, of teams being penalized for having built up their minor league.

[Deleted]

Hmm, interesting. I'll have to think on it a bit, but I see what you're getting at now.

[Deleted]

KC it gets easier once you get past my long winded explanations.

[Deleted]

I have used Rule 5 players in the past but it's a bit more involved than what is stated above. For example in two leagues I played in there were no MiLB pickups other than trading for more prospects when trading is allowed. Then there were two drafts six months apart from each other. Typically speaking one draft, using the allotted 5 draft picks each team gets every season in this league, took place after the real life first yr player draft was completed and then the Rule 5 player draft would be sometime like FEB.

The summer draft would simply be any player who was selected in the first year player draft if they signed a MLB contract or not. The Rule 5 player draft would be those prospects not currently on anyone's minor league listing. It's pretty basic and straight forward. Whatever player was drafted in the R5 draft would simply be placed onto the new team's prospect listing.

[Deleted]

Yours does sound like it is more involved, I suggested something a little simplier, with your background in it do you think what I suggested could be work out as something for us?

[Oakland Athletics]

The more I think about this the more I really do love the idea, but I go back to the fact I just don’t think it fits with our rules unfortunately. I do think there needs to be a risk when drafting a player. Drafting a player and being able to stick them on your MiLB roster has no risk for the team drafting the player. All 20 teams would be swapping around minor leaguers most likely and that just doesn’t seem worth it to me.

The other thing real life does in regards to the rule 5 draft is if a team has protected a total of 40 players they wouldn’t be able to draft. So teams can only draft somebody if they protect 38 or 39 players.

One thing I did consider is to only involve players with AB’s or IP. But it’s possible teams don’t have 30 players AB’s and IP.

To me this is a fantastic idea but one that just doesn’t fit with the way our league is structured. Im open to listening to everyone’s thoughts on this beyond just the few of us that have said anything.