If Rabelo clears waivers, does that impact this at all?

No. He will be assigned to AAA, just like De Aza or Owens. If he is called back, then he has to go back onto the 40 man.

 

I'm counting 40 players total on the Marlins 40-man, including Rabelo, according to the official site. Are they missing someone? I counted 4 times lol

If Rabelo clears waivers, does that impact this at all?

No. He will be assigned to AAA, just like De Aza or Owens. If he is called back, then he has to go back onto the 40 man.

 

I'm counting 40 players total on the Marlins 40-man, including Rabelo, according to the official site. Are they missing someone? I counted 4 times lol

Oh, I misread the question. It drops to 39 when Rabelo is claimed or cleared. If he clears, he can be assigned to AAA and not take up 40 man space.

And yea, I'm confirming Doolittle now. He signed in 2005 undrafted according to his AFL blog.

 

Rule V Eligible:

 

Chris Mobley

Jacob Marceaux

Todd Doolittle

Jeff Allison

Greg Burns

Does anyone know anything about the eligibility in the minor league phase? If the same rules apply to the major league phase, I think Burns and Allison might be eligible for AA teams, and Marceaux, Doolittle, and Mobley to AAA teams. If that's true, I can see all 5 going "poof" really fast.

 

This seems like a lot of turnover though. I'm not sure if that is right. Again, anyone know anything about the minor league phase? Google is seriously letting me down.

I don't see why Leroux is being added to the 40-man, his numbers are not that impressive, and he's only reached High-A.

 

He's got great stuff

Does anyone know anything about the eligibility in the minor league phase? If the same rules apply to the major league phase, I think Burns and Allison might be eligible for AA teams, and Marceaux, Doolittle, and Mobley to AAA teams. If that's true, I can see all 5 going "poof" really fast.

 

This seems like a lot of turnover though. I'm not sure if that is right. Again, anyone know anything about the minor league phase? Google is seriously letting me down.

 

I haven't heard too much explaining the rule V draft in the minors, but from what I seem to recall, minor league teams have a certain number of players that they reserve. Those left unreserved are free to be picked up by minor league teams in order to fill out their roster. Since there are enough reserve slots for practically every potential prospect to be protected, it is very rare to see good players come through this.

Man, I didn't realize Wood was so old.

 

Wood underwent TJ a couple years back, so he has been on the back burner. Must be showing something good if they are willing to protect him.

Options

An option (optional assignment) allows a club to move a player on its 40-man roster to and from the minor leagues without exposing him to the other 29 teams.

 

After 4 or 5 years as a professional, a player must be added to his club?s 40-man roster or exposed to the 29 other clubs in the Rule 5 draft. (A club has 5 years to evaluate a player who signs his first pro contract at 18 years old or younger, but only 4 years to decide on a player who signs at age 19.) For purposes of calculating years as a pro, the counting begins the day a player signs his first pro contract, not the season he begins to play.

 

When a player is added to the 40-man roster, his club has three ?options,? or three separate seasons during which the club may to move him to and from the minor leagues without exposing him to other clubs. A player on the 40-man roster playing in the minors is on optional assignment, and within an option season, there is no limit on the number of times a club may demote and recall a player. However, a player optioned to the minor leagues may not be recalled for at least 10 days, unless the club places a Major League player on the disabled list during the 10-day window.

 

After three options are exhausted, the player is out of options. Beginning with the next season, he must clear waivers before he may be sent to the minors again. See Waivers. Additionally, a player with 5 years of Major League service may not be sent to the minor leagues on an optional assignment without his consent.

 

Let's do it methodically.

 

Summer 2004 draftees to now is 4 1/2 years, which basically means the 2009 season is their 5th year.

-All players drafted 2004 and prior have to be on the 40 man to be protected, regardless if they were 18 or 19+ when drafted.

 

This opened up not much from the 2004 class. We had a really bad draft, and the two best players (Tankeresly, Carroll) were already protected. Chris Mobley destroyed Carolina this year, and the Marlins opted not to keep him. Greg Burns is also available in the Rule V now, which is the only guy I see that has even a semblance of a chance to be a MLB player.

 

One more notable, we didn't draft Dallas Trahern (2004), but he obviously fits into the same category.

 

Other players from pre-2004 drafts were Tim Wood (drafted 2002), who emerged this year, and Jeff Allison (drafted 2003), who is back from crack.

 

Summer 2005 draftees to now is 3 1/2 years, which basically means the 2009 season is their 4th year.

-Players drafted 19+ in age (i.e. College players) are eligible for the Rule V draft.

 

As for the 2005 class, this opened up the college players. Jacob Marceaux, Bryan Harvey, Brett Hayes, Gaby Sanchez, and Chris Leroux. G. Sanchez was already on it and was a no-brainer. The organization must like Hayes over Rabelo, and feel Leroux is a late bloomer (he has a big arm, but really low level of competition).

 

This basically says, we could lose Chris Mobley, Jacob Marceaux, Gregg Burns, or Jeff Allison. No one else is really a prospect not protected on the 40 man, or to young to qualify.

 

Maybe. Or maybe because of Rabelos injury plagued, and thus below par season, they just figured they could slip him through wavers. As I see it, basically this is just paperwork, kinda like juggling players. Rabelo clears wavers, is assigned to AAA, comes to ST as a non-roster invitee, and competes for the catchers slot again. I would think because of Allison's past they are hoping for the same results.

[This basically says, we could lose Chris Mobley, Jacob Marceaux, Gregg Burns, or Jeff Allison. No one else is really a prospect not protected on the 40 man, or to young to qualify.

Depending on when Doolittle signed, which I cannot figure out, he may be added to this list. He didn't play in 2006 (injured), but he could fall into the 19+ exception to the Rule V draft. I would lean yes that we signed him out of College and he was hurt so he's probably available. Just trying to be thorough.

 

Completely off topic on this one. But being somewhat of a history buff, I have to wonder if he is related to the famous WW II Doolittle.

[This basically says, we could lose Chris Mobley, Jacob Marceaux, Gregg Burns, or Jeff Allison. No one else is really a prospect not protected on the 40 man, or to young to qualify.

Depending on when Doolittle signed, which I cannot figure out, he may be added to this list. He didn't play in 2006 (injured), but he could fall into the 19+ exception to the Rule V draft. I would lean yes that we signed him out of College and he was hurt so he's probably available. Just trying to be thorough.

 

Completely off topic on this one. But being somewhat of a history buff, I have to wonder if he is related to the famous WW II Doolittle.

 

I talked to Dallas last night and my understanding from what he said was that they had to either put him on the 40 man roster this year OR the AAA roster. I didnt get the impression that they had to put him on the 40 man but I might have misunderstood.

I haven't heard too much explaining the rule V draft in the minors, but from what I seem to recall, minor league teams have a certain number of players that they reserve. Those left unreserved are free to be picked up by minor league teams in order to fill out their roster. Since there are enough reserve slots for practically every potential prospect to be protected, it is very rare to see good players come through this.

That makes a lot of sense as fringe prospects would be flying back and forth every draft if not. I need to find the actual language for this. Thanks.

I really don't want to lose Allison. You just have to be curious about the guy... The what if's are fun to think about. He started off last year strong and tailed off, but I think after that first initial year back he could be back much stronger, and much more in focus. He got over that first hump... now it's a little more steady.

I really don't want to lose Allison. You just have to be curious about the guy... The what if's are fun to think about. He started off last year strong and tailed off, but I think after that first initial year back he could be back much stronger, and much more in focus. He got over that first hump... now it's a little more steady.

 

Unfortunately, his stuff isn't nearly as good anymore. Great chance he is not selected.

I really don't want to lose Allison. You just have to be curious about the guy... The what if's are fun to think about. He started off last year strong and tailed off, but I think after that first initial year back he could be back much stronger, and much more in focus. He got over that first hump... now it's a little more steady.

 

I really wanted to get to Jupiter and watch this kid pitch. The entire org stuck by him for so long while he was so determined to self destruct. There HAS to be something about him. He may have worked himself out of a SP role, but maybe he can be a useful piece of the pen.

Royals fan here.

 

Did your GM leave Sean West unprotected for the Rule 5?

 

His birthday is June 15th, he signed on June 15th 2005, his 19th birthday. That should make him eligible this year if I'm not mistaken?

 

Thanks

Royals fan here.

 

Did your GM leave Sean West unprotected for the Rule 5?

 

His birthday is June 15th, he signed on June 15th 2005, his 19th birthday. That should make him eligible this year if I'm not mistaken?

 

Thanks

This is actually a pretty interesting and potentially absolutely terrifying point. Cot's does say this. A club has 5 years to evaluate a player who signs his first pro contract at 18 years old or younger, but only 4 years to decide on a player who signs at age 19. 19 year olds from the 2005 draft (Maceaux, Hayes, Harvey, G. Sanchez, Leroux) are eligible for the Rule V. We protected G. Sanchez, Hayes, and Leroux, but not Marceaux or Harvey.

 

If West's signing date and his birthday are accurate on the Marlins site on MLB.com, he was 19 the day he signed even if he was drafted at 18. This would technically fit into the rule. This would be an ENORMOUS oversight from the front office and everyone in the front office should be fired for such a monumental f-up. The Marlins would be insane to leave West unprotected as he is one of the best left handed SP prospects.

 

To answer you question, I'm guessing NO he is not eligible. He is far to valuable to just forget about and I'm sure there is some definition rule somewhere where the starting date for the Rule V starts the next day, or (and being completely serious) what time of day was Sean West born and what time of day did he sign his contract. I mean crazy argument, but it would be a winner if the Marlins can prove it. This is all I got though. Simply deferring that the front office knows what they are doing and having no real substance to back up the opinion.

 

I'd be interested in seeing if someone can follow up on this. I'm going to home depot to get some wood and start sharpening stakes in case I have to stab Beinfest and Hill in the heart for being complete idiots.

Yikes! Someone needs to shoot an E-mail over to the Marlins front office. I looked for an E-mail address on their official site, couldn't find anything.

High school draftees from '04 & college guys from '05 are eligible. That is my understanding.

High school draftees from '04 & college guys from '05 are eligible. That is my understanding.

 

I agree, that's how the rules should be interpreted.

 

For Sean West, high school draftee

 

2005 Rule 5 draft to 2006 draft - one year

2006 Rule 5 draft to 2007 draft - two years

2007 Rule 5 draft to 2008 draft - three years (this year is the 2008 Rule 5 draft)

2008 Rule 5 draft to 2009 draft - four years (West is eligible for THIS draft)

 

The time between when he was drafted and when the first Rule 5 draft after he was drafted does not count because it wasn't a year.

 

A player's clock starts with the first draft after he signs and is measured in whole years.

 

This method of counting matches up with everyone from Wikipedia to MLB to Cots to some Yankee fan with a blog.

High school draftees from '04 & college guys from '05 are eligible. That is my understanding.

 

I agree, that's how the rules should be interpreted.

 

For Sean West, high school draftee

 

2005 Rule 5 draft to 2006 draft - one year

2006 Rule 5 draft to 2007 draft - two years

2007 Rule 5 draft to 2008 draft - three years (this year is the 2008 Rule 5 draft)

2008 Rule 5 draft to 2009 draft - four years (West is eligible for THIS draft)

 

The time between when he was drafted and when the first Rule 5 draft after he was drafted does not count because it wasn't a year.

 

A player's clock starts with the first draft after he signs and is measured in whole years.

 

This method of counting matches up with everyone from Wikipedia to MLB to Cots to some Yankee fan with a blog.

I don't think the methodology is right. Something is wrong, whether it's Cot's, or Wikipedia, or something. Or maybe I'm just going crazy.

 

So West was 19 the day he signed, that's 4 years and comports with Cot's saying "A club has 5 years to evaluate a player who signs his first pro contract at 18 years old or younger, but only 4 years to decide on a player who signs at age 19." Sure, I get this for West with your year illustration. West is eligible in 2009 Rule V without a doubt.

 

How does this work with Morrison, Thompson, Tucker, Winters, etc who were all drafted the same year as West and 18 when they signed? By the counting you just posted, the 2009 Rule V Draft will be "four" years for these players, when the rule on Cot's says teams have "5 years." Are these guys not going to be eligible? That doesn't seem right, as I can't imagine a rule that forces us to protect G. Sanchez/Leroux/Hayes TWO years before we have to protect Thompson/Morrison/Winters/etc

 

The pattern shows us protecting 2005 college guys and everyone 2004 and prior is fair game. Next year, should be the 2006 college guys and all drafts 2005 and prior. I think everyone is "right," but something is missing here with all the interpretation of sources. I hope I articulated this correctly for you. I'm tired of doing this every offseason. It's time to figure this out.

I'd suggest e-mailing the cots guy. Whenever I had question about options, he always was willing to answer them for me.

 

He's by no means the end-all to be-all guy but he's going to probably be the most knowledgeable person you could actually get in contact with.

 

Or is it possible to get in contact with Keith Law? I'm not sure if he has a publicly available e-mail address on ESPN. He's one of the few guys in the media I'd actually trust, since he actually worked in a front office and is competent (a.k.a. Steve Phillips doesn't count)

A general observation - people are suffering from Rule 5-itis and forgetting the purpose the 40 man roster serves most of the year in baseball.

 

Things will get back to normal after the winter meeting, and new players come aboard via signings and trades, and spring training, and the active roster being set.

 

 

edit: They didn't leave Sean West off because this is some circus act running the front office, they know what they're doing. That should tell you your theories are incorrect.

Lou, I mean this politely and respectfully but I believe you are over-thinking this. If what I postulated is correct for West, and you agree it is, then the same criteria applies to every other player.

 

Eighteen and younger get five, older four, that first part season immediately after being drafted doesn't count in the Rule 5 because the clock starts with the first subsequent R5D.

 

You go from there.

My head hurts. I think you guys are looking too hard at things.

 

Sean West never got about Jupiter last year, did he? Dosen't a player have to be on your roster for the year if you take him in the Rule 5? Is West that ready, or at least close enough for any team to take that chance? I would have to think the FO dosen't think it is that much of a gamble to not protect him. Am I missing something here or do I have something wrong?

My head hurts. I think you guys are looking too hard at things.

 

Sean West never got about Jupiter last year, did he? Dosen't a player have to be on your roster for the year if you take him in the Rule 5? Is West that ready, or at least close enough for any team to take that chance? I would have to think the FO dosen't think it is that much of a gamble to not protect him. Am I missing something here or do I have something wrong?

It doesn't matter what level he is at, it depends on how much experience or 'time' the player has had as a professional. He would be a no brainer to protect if he was eligible. He'd be the unanimous 1st pick in the Rule V if there.

 

You basically have to think of it as all players drafted 2004 and prior are eligible, and players who were 19 (i.e. college players) who were drafted in 2005 are eligible. The CBA gives organizations an additional year to evaluate high school draftees.

 

The problem with the recent posts is, Sean West was 18 when drafted, but turned 19 the day he signed his contract. There isn't solid rule language of eligibility on the Internet (or no one has found it yet) to figure out why he is not eligible, so that's been the issue.