Rule 5 Suggestion

[mattynokes]

It's been suggested round and round. The big problem has always been that "teams would need to post their 40-man protect lists". Well, with my idea these wouldn't be needed. Much like in real life when a player is called up to the MLB roster and acquires service time, he's added to the 40-man roster.

So, what I am proposing is that any player on your team with MLB Service Time is considered to already be on your 40-man roster. You will then have the ability to fill in the remaining spots with eligible minor leaguers. I'm willing to take on this project and attached is a complete rundown of the process and an example from when this season started.

Some things to note is that I understand that some players have MLB stats, but no MLB Service Time. This is because Mogul makes you call up a full 40-man roster in September regardless of if they're a qualified candidate. In the real world, teams only call up an additional 5 or so players. So this is allowing for leniency for when Mogul makes you call up players that you don't want in the majors.

Also, I like a concrete age rather than figuring when a player was drafted, how old he was on draft day, and then figuring out who's eligible. The date I think is the most appropriate is March 1 as the off-season dust has pretty much settled by this point. If we're using 40-man rosters I think 22+ age players should be eligible. I would have no problem using a 35-man roster protect, but at that point I think eligible players should be ages 23+.

Once the March 1 file is posted I would work to on an excel file the will look like the attached file. I will create a thread once completed and each team would then need to respond with who their additional protects are.

I've provided what I find are the three different examples that we will come across in the league:

1. A team that can protect additional players, but will still have player eligible to be taken. (ARI)
2. A team that can protect all of it's eligible players and still have room left to make Rule 5 selections. (ATL)
3. A team that has more than 40 players with MLB Service Time and will have to decide upon players to drop. (CLE)

[Cdawg]

I'd like to see a 40M roster from guys like Florida, Chicago, Houston, Toronto and NYY. Those seem like the best teams in the league w/ the most talent.

So I'd def like to get a view of what they're roster might look like come R5 day.

also I'm to assume that a R5 is forced into a roster spot, so would some of these guys even be worth it? I can tell you I just looked over my roster and I'd personally only have a 35M roster.

[mattynokes]

The attached file has the Cubs as an example. And yes some teams are going to fall short of having 40 players to protect, but they are likely to be the rebuilding teams and can make selections to better their team.

[Jordan]

I think we have discussed it before, rule 5 seems to only just take up a ton of work, but never really gets anywhere when u do it in mogul leagues. In mogul leagues u never really get any real talent.

[GoIrish]

yeah if we were to do 40 man with rule 5, the pickings would be slim from what is auto-protected. You would have your choice on my team of some 70's rated players that never panned out or some upper 70's prospects. No one of significance. Not sure the ends would be fitting of the extra work needed to govern a rule 5.

[mattynokes]

As I said, if eligible talent levels are low, then we can make it a 35-Man Roster instead. And I don't see this being "a ton of work". This isn't the real world rules that takes draft year and age at the time of being signed into consideration. Player eligibility is cut and dry. Plus I think it'll add another dynamic as if you call up a prospect to the 25-Man Roster he automatically is on the 40-Man Roster. The amount of work boils down to this:

1. A Rule 5 Draft forum is needed to be created.
2. Once the March 1 file is posted I would copy, sort, and highlight all 30 rosters for Rule 5 eligibility
3. I would post a thread with the file attached
4. All 30 teams would need to reply to thread as to which players are being added to the protect list
5. After that's finalized I would post an update of the eligible players
6. We draft

If you're expectations for the Rule 5 Draft is to get some real good talent, then I think you're expecting too much out of it. I think we should be seeing 65/81, 68/80, 70/82, and 75/79 as the best type of players available to pick. It's going to be up to each GM as to if the player is worth taking. If I'm a rebuilding team, even though it'd be a rough season, I'd consider taking a chance on that 65/81 player, but if I were a contender I probably wouldn't. I think the point of the Rule 5 Draft is to take a chance on a decent prospect and seeing if they can hit a nice jump while teams that are more heavily stocked lose some depth.

[jhc54]

I can help matty with this provided I have time. I think it would be a pretty good idea, but isnt this really the equivalent of waivers in terms of talent without the big contracts.

[mike]

I like the idea in theory but I don't want to have be here to do a rule 5 draft. Also I'm confused on how we determine our 40 man roster. Do we take the March 1 file and then pick 40 players to rotect essentially?

[mattynokes]

I like the idea in theory but I don't want to have be here to do a rule 5 draft. Also I'm confused on how we determine our 40 man roster. Do we take the March 1 file and then pick 40 players to rotect essentially?

Players with MLB Service are automatically considered to be on your protect list. Most teams will have around 5 open spots are that and from there you can protect additional players that would be eligible to be taken. Have a look at the excel file, it should make sense. I've highlighted and noted which players would be eligible, which players are auto-protected, and how many more players you can protect.

[rockybull]

you are far more likely to ruin these specs than much good to come out of this. Such as a 65/81 could easily get ruined. Maybe that is the idea though...