|
|
Post by Smitty (Mets GM) on Dec 16, 2011 6:21:44 GMT -5
As much as I enjoyed the whole inclusion of a Rule V Draft in the league to begin with, I equally enjoyed to addition of 24year-old+ non-rosters to the Rule V.
I had a juicy list of of potentials before this draft was delayed, as I'm sure most other active users did- which is why I'm sure the Rule V was put off as long as it was. Dee Gordon was lookin' reeeeally pretty for awhile, but I digress.
Here's my main pose-
I think GM's who put in the time and attention these winter months to make a Rule V selection should see some benefit behind it.
Either not paying the salary for that year, or having them not count as 1 against the 70-man max.
Ideally, both, lol
Opinions?
|
|
|
|
Post by drewosborne on Dec 16, 2011 8:46:20 GMT -5
I would agree. And this is one reason I haven't been active... and I'm not keeping a list of eligible players. I know they are there but if I put that much work into it I need to be rewarded.... releases, non-rostered, the likes.
|
|
|
|
Post by Brian (Blue Jays GM) on Dec 16, 2011 10:03:22 GMT -5
I don't understand why we should offer benefits like that. There are very few ways of adding players to your roster in this league as it is, rewarding someone for taking the time to add someone they think increases the value of their team just seems excessive. You get the benefit of that player being under your team's control. If you don't see it as enough incentive to take the time to add a player then pass on your pick.
|
|
|
|
Post by Zack (Mariners GM) on Dec 16, 2011 10:18:02 GMT -5
i agree with brian. the reward for rule 5 research is that you get to add a pretty good player. there shouldnt be anything more than that IMO.
|
|
Ben (Rays GM)
General Manager
Commissioner Emeritus
Ben
Posts: 6,470
|
Post by Ben (Rays GM) on Dec 16, 2011 12:21:54 GMT -5
Don't see why we'd add incentive. Either you find a player worth taking or you don't, simple as that. In the real Rule V lots of teams skip picks.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rob (Rockies GM) on Dec 16, 2011 19:03:37 GMT -5
I agree with the last few. If you spend the time and research to find that gem - good for you. If not, no loss. All a matter of how much time you want to put towards it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kevin (Guardians GM) on Dec 16, 2011 22:04:35 GMT -5
Agree with most, the reward is the addition to your team. It's up to you if you participate or not, just like how much time a team spends prepping for the draft or auto selecting, all the gms have different thoughts on where they spend their time and spending time does not mean you should be given extra rewards.
|
|
|
|
Post by drewosborne on Jan 5, 2012 14:25:44 GMT -5
My point is why research all these little guys that will probably never make it when I can only keep 70 total? I mean, I've got 100s of prospects out there that will probably at some point be in the bigs... but half aren't on rosters because we don't need to go that deep. I'd be in favor of opening up the farm system more.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris (Former Cubs GM) on Jan 5, 2012 14:41:11 GMT -5
I thought ther were some solid rule 5 picks. The most likely closer for the A's was taken. And in the future the rule 5 draft will have alot more talent. Nice to get a player added to roster for nothing if a GM sleeps on him and leaves him eligible. Rule 5 draft isn't mandatory. Just something for GMs that put in a Lil xtra time. Think it's to much work or nor rewarding enough then don't participate in it
|
|
|
|
Post by drewosborne on Jan 7, 2012 21:46:16 GMT -5
I missed it but not because I wasn't prepared for it. Was disappointed about it too.
I played in a league before I joined this one with several of these guys in which you could pick up 3 mILB free agents a week... I made a killing on it. There wasn't a roster limit either I don't believe... I picked up 3 guys a week... and not all panned out but I got a few that made the bigs last year and would of helped maybe.... just don't have enough reward to do it once a year in the draft or one other time in the rule 5... you know what I mean?
|
|
