2019 Rule 5 draft

Home The Cardinal Nation Forums Open Forum 2019 Rule 5 draft

Viewing 25 posts - 26 through 50 (of 70 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #115168
    Brian WaltonBrian Walton
    Keymaster

    Paid - Annual

    #115237
    AvatarMinuteman3
    Participant

    Free

    One question about the Rule 5 draft. I cannot find the answer in any of the descriptions for Rule 5. How long does a player have to stay on the 40 man to avoid the Rule 5 draft? Can the team remove a player from the 40 man who was put there for protection the day after the draft is over? For example, the Cards pick up a free agent in the off season and he needs a 40 man spot. Can they remove one of the guys just put on who was being protected from the Rule 5 draft?

    #115238
    UConn CardUConn Card
    Moderator

    Paid - Annual

    MM,
    Any player selected in the MLB portion of the Rule 5 draft must remain on the selecting team’s 26-man roster the entire next season.

    #115245
    Avatargscottar
    Participant

    Paid - Annual

    MM,
    Any player selected in the MLB portion of the Rule 5 draft must remain on the selecting team’s 26-man roster the entire next season.

    I don’t think that is the question he was asking.

    I think he was asking how long do the Cardinals have to keep Woodford, Seijas, and Montero on the 40 man roster? Could they remove them the day after the Rule 5 draft or would that expose them?

    • This reply was modified 8 months, 3 weeks ago by Avatargscottar.
    #115251
    AvatarCariocaCardinal
    Participant

    Paid - Monthly

    MM3 – they could remove them at anytime but they would have to expose them to waivers. If the team was worried that one of these players might be taken in the rule 5 draft then they would certainly be taken on waivers.

    #115290
    AvatarCariocaCardinal
    Participant

    Paid - Monthly

    Brian deserves kudos for being one of the few people to even mention Seijas as a strong possibility to be protected in the rule 5 draft and even more for not only going on record correctly with that prediction but also with the prediction that Leone would be the one removed from the 40 man roster to make it happen.

    #115299
    Brian WaltonBrian Walton
    Keymaster

    Paid - Annual

    CC, I appreciate it. My gratitude in return to you and others for subscribing and supporting our work.

    #115333
    Avatar14NyquisT
    Participant

    Paid - Annual

    I agree with CC…. Brian great work with your crystal ball. Now what will the Cards starting OF look like?

    #115334
    Brian WaltonBrian Walton
    Keymaster

    Paid - Annual

    I am not that good. 😉

    #115371
    AvatarMinuteman3
    Participant

    Free

    <CC posted: MM3 – they could remove them at anytime but they would have to expose them to waivers. If the team was worried that one of these players might be taken in the rule 5 draft then they would certainly be taken on waivers.>

    Is a player automatically waivered when taken off a 40 man? I had never heard that before. I remember a couple of years ago when there was a lot of discussion about Patrick Wisdom not being protected for the Rule 5 draft…..FOR TWO YEARS……yet he was never taken but that has nothing to with the main topic we are discussing here.

    #115581
    Brian WaltonBrian Walton
    Keymaster

    Paid - Annual

    MM3 asked:

    Is a player automatically waivered when taken off a 40 man?

    Yes.

    #115587
    AvatarMinuteman3
    Participant

    Free

    <MM3 asked:

    Is a player automatically waivered when taken off a 40 man?

    Brian Walton answered: Yes.>

    Just goes to show that you can learn something new everyday. Thanks.

    #115609
    Brian WaltonBrian Walton
    Keymaster

    Paid - Annual

    Let’s call this “Rule 5 REMORSE. If you think the Cards should have protected a player they did not, now is the time to speak up. Anyone can complain after the fact. Instead, if you make the call ahead of time, and you are right, your concern would carry weight.

    #115612
    AvatarCariocaCardinal
    Participant

    Paid - Monthly

    I would add the requirement that they indicate who they would replace on the 40 man roster.

    #115613
    AvatarCariocaCardinal
    Participant

    Paid - Monthly

    Not buyers remorse but I see Dobzanki e Nogawski as our two most vulnerable unprotecteds.

    #115617
    AvatarCariocaCardinal
    Participant

    Paid - Monthly

    The complexities involved in who to protect are numerous. Here is an example. I would rather have Nogawski on my roster than Ravelo. HOWEVER, I would not have protected Nogawski and removed Ravelo. Why? Because assuming the Cards sign at least one free agent they will need to remove someone from the 40 man roster. I would rather that be Ravelo that passes through waivers than Nogawski.

    #115618
    AvatarCariocaCardinal
    Participant

    Paid - Monthly

    Thinking out loud. Why should a team need an open spot on their 40 man roster to participate in the rule 5 draft? Why should acquiring a player via the rule 5 be different than any other acquisition where you add a player and if the 40 man roster is full you simply remove another the same day? Inquiring my minds want to know!

    #115631
    AvatarCardsFanInChiTown
    Participant

    Free

    CC, you are correct, but then they would likely need another draft for the guys dropped after adding guys?

    Ravelo is someone who the Cards keep due to providing depth in AAA, but if he could catch on with a lower expectation team and get a shot, it could be life changing for him.

    #115647
    Avatarforsch31
    Participant

    Free

    But the guys that are dropped would be available to pick up on waivers from any team. There is no need for an additional draft.

    #116279
    Avatargscottar
    Participant

    Paid - Annual

    Not buyers remorse but I see Dobzanki e Nogawski as our two most vulnerable unprotecteds.

    I agree about Nogowski. I could see another team taking him. With rosters expanding to 26 it makes it a little easier to carry a rule 5 player on the roster. I would hate to lose Nogowski but I would be happy for him to be on a MLB roster.

    #116281
    Brian WaltonBrian Walton
    Keymaster

    Paid - Annual

    What about Connor Jones? His sinker is a plus pitch. Maybe another organization thinks they might help him fix his control problems.

    At 27 years of age (in a few weeks) and a first base-only player without the power expected from the position, Nogowski’s fits are limited.

    #116288
    Avatargscottar
    Participant

    Paid - Annual

    Yes I think Connor Jones is a logical rule 5 candidate also. The extra roster spot could lead to more rule 5 selections league wide.

    #116290
    AvatarCariocaCardinal
    Participant

    Paid - Monthly

    With all indications that MLB will require a 13/13 roster split it seems unlikely the new roster rules would affect the pitchers market much since most teams already carried 13 pitchers.

    #116300
    Brian WaltonBrian Walton
    Keymaster

    Paid - Annual

    True, but I haven’t seen that 13-13 mandatory split set in concrete yet. Have you?

    #116307
    AvatarCariocaCardinal
    Participant

    Paid - Monthly

    No I haven’t but not sure I waste a roster spot and 100k on a long shot to find out.

Viewing 25 posts - 26 through 50 (of 70 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

First-hand news and commentary on the St. Louis Cardinals™ and their minor league system for 20 years