Birmingham Trading One Rule V guy

[aaronweiner]

We got an embarrassment of riches from the Rule V draft, and so we're looking to deal one of the relievers we acquired in the draft.

Gene Reilly
James Moultrie
Porter Capps

Reilly and Moultrie have significant upside and are young players. We'll be happy to use all of these guys all year long, but we'd like to hear what you've got to offer.

[mad0die]

You can't trade a guy you claim in the rule v

[scottsdale_joe]

You can't trade a guy you claim in the rule v

Maybe not in MBBA. But you can in MLB:
"Any player chosen in the Rule 5 draft may be traded to any team while under the Rule 5 restrictions, but the restrictions transfer to the new team. If the new team does not want to keep the player on its 25-man roster for the season, he must be offered back to the team of which he was a member when chosen in the draft."

[Afino]

he must be offered back to the team of which he was a member when chosen in the draft."

And he needs to do that first.

[scottsdale_joe]

he must be offered back to the team of which he was a member when chosen in the draft."

And he needs to do that first.

Yeah, the new team has to, not the team that trades him.

[recte44]

I dont see why you cant trade a Rule 5 guy.

[DoubleB]

Our Constitution says this:

"They must keep that player on their active roster or Disabled List all season or offer him back to the original team."

[DenverZeppo]

It al depends on your goal. The MLB allows them to be traded, but the new team must keep them on their 25 man roster since they still carry the Rule V designation for the season.

Neither the team that drafted them in the Rule V nor the team that trades for them can demote them off the 25 man roster without them first offering them back to their original team.

I personally believe the way the GUBA handles Rule V players is best, in part because there is no payment made to draft them. Out in the MLB it costs money to draft a Rule V guy. The idea of drafting a Rule V guy and then trading him away really hurts the spirit of the game for me.

If there's no cost to draft them, and they can be traded right away, that completely changes the way we draft.

At the very least, they should be subject to free agency restrictions, no trades until June.

Zep

[aaronweiner]

We're back! Oh, by the way, as there's nothing in the rules against it, I'm not really digging the whole blockblock thing.

Three guys are still available.

[recte44]

It al depends on your goal. The MLB allows them to be traded, but the new team must keep them on their 25 man roster since they still carry the Rule V designation for the season.

Neither the team that drafted them in the Rule V nor the team that trades for them can demote them off the 25 man roster without them first offering them back to their original team.

I personally believe the way the GUBA handles Rule V players is best, in part because there is no payment made to draft them. Out in the MLB it costs money to draft a Rule V guy. The idea of drafting a Rule V guy and then trading him away really hurts the spirit of the game for me.

If there's no cost to draft them, and they can be traded right away, that completely changes the way we draft.

At the very least, they should be subject to free agency restrictions, no trades until June.

Zep

I can get on board with that line of thinking.

[mad0die]

We're back! Oh, by the way, as there's nothing in the rules against it, I'm not really digging the whole blockblock thing.

Three guys are still available.

"They must keep that player on their active roster or Disabled List all season or offer him back to the original team."

[aaronweiner]

Except when I offered to send Omar Epps last year back to his original team, I was told to go shove it, that I can buy him out or keep him but I can't do anything else.

I'm with Recte and Zeppo - I think we should be allowed to deal the guys. Not until June would be a reasonable caveat.

[mad0die]

I think their should be a price to drafting multiple guys in the Rule V and then deciding you don't really want them.

[aaronweiner]

Oddly, I do not. Considering the talent level in the Rule V is usually second-rate, it's sort of bizarre to suggest that drafting people and then trading them is somehow off-limits, yet it's somehow okay to deal a first round amateur pick immediately after drafting him.

[mad0die]

Does team trading for a Rule V guy have to leave him on their 25-man roster all season long? I'd be ok with it if that were true.

[lynchy34]

Does team trading for a Rule V guy have to leave him on their 25-man roster all season long? I'd be ok with it if that were true.

I would think it would have to be yes to make this work. There has to be some penalty for just plucking gyus from a team's system.

[aaronweiner]

Oh, absolutely yes. Whoever takes him has to keep him on the active roster. I drafted the guys because I can do it and I'd expect anyone trading for a guy to do it.

[elligator]

Does team trading for a Rule V guy have to leave him on their 25-man roster all season long? I'd be ok with it if that were true.

I would think it would have to be yes to make this work. There has to be some penalty for just plucking gyus from a team's system.

Yeah, you remember that, bucko, since you decided to raid mine! You snagged my starting second baseman. I consider him a casualty of wedding prep.

I also hate that OOTP doesn't model the Rule V correctly. It should be that if you want the guy, you have to keep him on your active roster all year or offer him back to the original team for cash. The lack of the latter option irritates me to no end.

[ronzonie7]

Trading Rule V'ers is weaksauce. I hate the Rule V.

[lynchy34]

Trading Rule V'ers is weaksauce. I hate the Rule V.

I hate quitters.