Rule 5 Draft Cancelled?

[jorgenswest]

The Athletic reported the rule 5 draft may be cancelled for this year. The Twins were certainly losers last year in the rule 5. This year they would have been selecting early though I am not sure if they reserved space or two on the 40 for an acquisition. They certainly would have more time to gather information about the available players.

Is it better for the Twins to guarantee keeping players like Palacios if the rule 5 is cancelled or should we be hoping for a pickup in the rule 5? 

[ashbury]

Conditions have changed and the chance of snagging a Johan Santana are now vanishingly small.  Rule 5 is for bottom-feeders; the potential upside is maaaaybe grabbing a player who can be league-average for a few seasons.  I have little to no interest anymore.  If we draft anyone, we're the bottom-feeders.

Unless they plan to sign a good SS, I would rather Palacios be on the 40-man, since you mentioned him by name.  He and Gordon can duke it out for the starting role.

[jorgenswest]

I wonder if the conditions this year with the opportunity to see eligible players in the spring or potentially the start of the minor league season are much more favorable for teams picking early this year. 

[High heat]

I kind of felt like the Twins would be taking at least one starting pitcher in the draft this yr or a defensive minded SS especially if they felt like they could trade out for them to send them back and fourth to minors.  

I wasnt to worried about us losing anyone this yr, but then again I didnt think Baddoo would be taken last year.  

[Doctor Gast]

There were quite a few very good players last year that were left unprotected & some weren't Twins. We could've really used Badoo last year and this. It's nice that we were able to hang unto Palacio but I think we are in better shape this year than last. I haven't really check to see what's really out there as far as talent. Now that it's been canceled it doesn't pay to guess.

[Doctor Gast]

Independently how this effects the Twins or not. The Rule 5 is a good thing, it gives a guarded player an opportunity to play out his dream and start getting MLB pay. It also forces the organizations to be more compentent in their evaluations of their players and what their needs are. IMO any team can benefit from the Rule 5 draft, if they have a need at a position that can't met internally.

So I'd wouldn't want them to discontinue the Rule 5 draft this year, no matter what.

 

[mikelink45]

I am disappointed.  There are so many obstacles for players to make the majors, I am always happy to have them get a chance outside the organization that has held them captive.

[jorgenswest]

It will be a financial loss to all of the players who would have been drafted and that can’t be ignored.

There is also a unique opportunity to see a player in the spring before selection and teams are asking it be dropped for this year. Many are blocking scouts access to workouts. 

I think there is a middle ground. For teams that have space on their 40, give them an opportunity to add eligible players they did not add in the fall. These additions need to be prior to any movement to 60 day DL. They also should not be in combination with releasing any other players once the lock out ends. Had they been selected and retained these players would have made a minimum major league salary. If added now they should get that salary for next year even if optioned to the minors. Once any additions are made conduct the rule 5 draft.

The concern of teams in showcasing eligible rule 5s is at least partially addressed. The concern of players losing out financially is also addressed. 

[Greglw3]

18 hours ago, ashbury said:

Conditions have changed and the chance of snagging a Johan Santana are now vanishingly small.  Rule 5 is for bottom-feeders; the potential upside is maaaaybe grabbing a player who can be league-average for a few seasons.  I have little to no interest anymore.  If we draft anyone, we're the bottom-feeders.

Unless they plan to sign a good SS, I would rather Palacios be on the 40-man, since you mentioned him by name.  He and Gordon can duke it out for the starting role.

Akil Badoo?

[ashbury]

33 minutes ago, Greglw3 said:

Akil Badoo?

Sure, I'm not saying to purposely discard players who profile to be average.  And Baddoo may be a blunder on our FO's part, as his upside may be better than that.  Most FO don't blunder.

The losses of players are more painful than the gains to be had.  I don't want to follow a bottom-feeder team.  So I won't mourn the absence of the Rule-5 draft, this year or any; that was my point.

[AceWrigley]

18 hours ago, ashbury said:

Unless they plan to sign a good SS, I would rather Palacios be on the 40-man, since you mentioned him by name.  He and Gordon can duke it out for the starting role.

Also add Royce Lewis to the mix here. Considering the offensive black hole we had at short last year (though good defense), whoever wins the job doesn't have to be an offensive force if they can hold down the job defensively. My Ace-in-the-hole pick is Palacios, but ask me after a few weeks of spring training, if there is one.

As for the Rule 5 draft, it seems redundant now for this season.

[Rosterman]

I can see it not working this year. And just goes to show that the MLBPA cares more for the rich rather than those aspiring to become part of their Union.

 

But if it doesn't happen, consider it a minor payback for those that lost a searson in 2020, as well as the major leagues teams losing a year of minor league control for no play abck then.

 

Now don't get me wrong, the money greedy owners are also to blame in all of this. Keep raising prices, keep grabbing mroe TV and play-off money as the audiences for both continue to free-fall.

 

AT some point, have to start thinking of fans and affordability of people seeing and enjoying the game.

[DocBauer]

I like the rule 5 because it allows an opportunity for some younger players that may be blocked in an organization a chance to make it. The reality is most of the time those players selected are returned, kept but never turn out, and a precious few turn out to be viable role players or quality regulars. But it at least affords them a chance. If you're a losing/rebuilding team, you probably lose nothing. If you're a winning team, you run the risk of maybe losing a decent/good ballplayer. But if your a good team, what you lose can normally be absorbed. 

I hope the very best for Badoo as well as Wells, who the Orioles picked up and kept. But they, especially Badoo at this point, are the exception rather than the rule. (Same with Santana all those years ago). In retrospect, maybe the Twins should have protected both. But with only 40 spots to fill and a belief the team was poised for another playoff run, they elected to keep some additional arms that might come in handy during the season. Not sure you can fault them for that. And we have to remember that Badoo hadn't played above A ball and had missed some time due to injury, not to mention missing all of 2020. Same with Wells. I know I was surprised they were selected and thought there was a very good chance each would be offered back, just not ready yet.

I do think dismissing the rule 5 for this year does make sense. Hell, we don't even know when we'll have baseball at this point, and it's going to be awfully hard for anyone to be selected, jump in to ST, and then have any legitimate chance to stick. Further, the guys elgible are already in milb ST with their teams. How do you just suddenly ask them to pack up and move, especially IF the labor unrest isn't settled until these guys are actually playing games?

I say table the rule 5 for this year.

[jorgenswest]

I think many of the guys selected will be happy for the opportunity to earn a major league minimum salary as well as the the opportunity in spite of having to pack up.

[Trov]

The reason for wanting to cancel the rule 5 is because the non-40-man roster players are in camp.  Very few teams are allowing scouts in because of fear the guys up for rule 5 will have made a jump in talent that the scouts will see and take a player they may not have normally looked it.  The rule 5 is normally in December where all you have to go on is last years numbers, but this year, it would be possible a player improved over the winter and the teams are worried they will lose a player they would not normally done so.  

This makes some sense as the 40 man gets set with what you think other teams might do with a player, and it is too late to make those adjustments.  

[Dman]

10 hours ago, Trov said:

The reason for wanting to cancel the rule 5 is because the non-40-man roster players are in camp.  Very few teams are allowing scouts in because of fear the guys up for rule 5 will have made a jump in talent that the scouts will see and take a player they may not have normally looked it.  The rule 5 is normally in December where all you have to go on is last years numbers, but this year, it would be possible a player improved over the winter and the teams are worried they will lose a player they would not normally done so.  

This makes some sense as the 40 man gets set with what you think other teams might do with a player, and it is too late to make those adjustments.  

Yeah this makes sense.  It is too late to do the Rule V IMO.  No Rule V would likely be in the Twins best interest anyway as they have three players that seemed likely to get taken.  Although Palacios might only end up a utility player he can at least play short competently and he has some power now so he is likely worth a look by any team trying to rebuild.  

Kody Funderburk was a starter with a good K9 11/9 and nice 2.55 ERA and 1.10 WHIP who wouldn't want to take a look at that arm even if he ended up in relief he would be a good steal.  While this was Jordon Gores first year pitching it was at AA where he did close a fair bit as well and he too had a good K9 at nearly 12/9 a 2.39 ERA and .95 WHIP.  Honestly those are pretty elite numbers for that level.  I think they both would will be grabbed if there is a Rule V.

If you don't think so then I present Calvin Faucher as evidence. The Twins had him throwing harder but he had a 7.00 ERA and 2.00 WHIP at AA.  He was included as a no name trade candidate in the Cruz deal and once in Tampa they threw him in AAA where he had a 1.77 ERA and 1.03 WHIP.  They ended up adding him to their 40 man this past fall. If another team can get that out of Faucher I think they would be well served to do as well or better with Funderburk and Gore.

The Twins have arms in the system and hopefully they can keep Funderburk and Gore as they just might be able to help the big club this year.  AAA can still be a difficult level to master and MLB even tougher but to this point they both look up to the challenge.  So for me kind of hoping there is no Rule V this year.

[Musk21]

Rule 5 draft has been deemed expendable and has been cancelled.

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2022/03/2021-rule-5-draft-officially-canceled.html

[Rosterman]

Rule 5 cancelled! Maybe they should've let teams carry a 27th player for the first month of games!

 

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2022/03/2021-rule-5-draft-officially-canceled.html