Organization Roster Idea

[calsnowskier]

Just spitballing here, but maybe it would make some sense to have a minor league version of the 40-man roster and everyone else would be treated like a practice squad player in the NFL (meaning if another team wants them, they are free to go, as long as the new team adds them to one of the 2 40-man rosters). Maybe have rules about players are exempt for the first 3 years in the org?

Example…

A player is drafted (or signed as an amateur) in ‘25. He does not have to be “protected” until the ‘28/‘29 off season (placed on the minor league 40-man). He can sit on that list for 2 additional seasons with no risk before he needs to be placed on the MLB 40-man (or be exposed to the Rule V draft).

This would essentially create 4 different classes of players…

MLB 40-Man
MiLB 40-Man
Rookie Exempt
Practice Squad

This should essentially remove the need for the Minir League portion of the Rule V draft (“practice squad” players would be free to get a promotion from another team if they want/can)

 

[LHG]

Just spitballing here, but maybe it would make some sense to have a minor league version of the 40-man roster and everyone else would be treated like a practice squad player in the NFL (meaning if another team wants them, they are free to go, as long as the new team adds them to one of the 2 40-man rosters). Maybe have rules about players are exempt for the first 3 years in the org?

Example…

A player is drafted (or signed as an amateur) in ‘25. He does not have to be “protected” until the ‘28/‘29 off season (placed on the minor league 40-man). He can sit on that list for 2 additional seasons with no risk before he needs to be placed on the MLB 40-man (or be exposed to the Rule V draft).

Interesting idea but maybe modify the current rule about high schools versus college players by making it 3 years for guys signed at age 18 or under and 2 years for guys signed at age 19 or older.

 

[calsnowskier]

Interesting idea but maybe modify the current rule about high schools versus college players by making it 3 years for guys signed at age 18 or under and 2 years for guys signed at age 19 or older.

I thought of that as I was writing it up, and I just couldn’t think how to add that caveat in without making the post a parenthetical nightmare.

 

[calsnowskier]

Fine-tuning thoughts (this idea is fun)…

- The MLB Rule V draft will further be simplified. The drafting team must add the drafted player to their MLB-40, but there are no further restrictions. The new team now owns that player.

- In order to keep a player who has been DFA’d from the MLB-40, the player must be placed on the MiLB-40 roster. Otherwise, the player is treated as a vet and can walk while collecting whatever MLB-40 salary applies to him (assuming he doesn’t have an actual MLB contract).

- DFAing a player from the MiLB-40 would allow the player to be “kept” by the org on the “Practice Squad” roster (As the rule currently exists for the 40-Man)

- Players can only be taken by other teams from the MiLB-40 during the annual Rule V draft. But other teams can take “Practice Squad” players at anytime, as long as they have an available MiLB-40 slot available. Maybe this should be through a waiver-process so the current team can counter by adding said player themselves? I am open to debate on this point. Or should the PS players just act as day labor and they have the freedom to move on their own?

- An IL will exist for the MiLB-40, similar to the existing MLB-40, meaning there will be some sort of 60-day equivalent in order to protect additional players. I am also open to discussion on this point.

 

[calsnowskier]

Also, making the MiLB roster “40” is probably too high.

I will see if I have the energy to do the Giants current situation and place players accordingly…

 

[calsnowskier]

Damn. I just saw a pretty big hole in this “plan”.

This makes “rookies” eligible for a much more powerful Rule V draft after only 3 seasons (I understand the issue of HS players and International FAs, but let’s shelf that issue for now). Teams would never agree to that.

 

[calsnowskier]

Spitball idea…

Treat the Rule V draft almost like an expansion draft.

- If a team loses a player, they can protect 3 additional players from the Rule V (either a MiLB-40 OR PS player).
If a team doesn’t pick, they are “out“ of the draft, but they get to protect an additional player in their org at the time they would be drafting.

- At the end of each round, all teams get to protect 1 additional player.

- The “protected” players are only made visible to the teams still drafting.

- The Rule V draft would continue until no team drafts in a round.

I think this would be acceptable to the teams AND the players. It allows teams to still keep high potential players in their system for about 10 years (?? - 3 years as a Rookie Exempt, than 3 years of options, than 4 Arb years?). It also quickens the clock on the Kris Bryant’s of the world and there is less ability for teams to “stash” big rookies.

 

[calsnowskier]

As for the “Rookie Exempt” list, how about this…

I will be referring to ages based on the players ”age N season”. The exact definition of this will need to be defined, but I will ignore that aspect for now…

Anyone 21 or younger is “Rookie Exempt”.

Anyone who played their entire age 22 season at A+ or higher is “RE“. Playing in A- or camp ball must be associated to a rehab assignment, or the player loses his “RE” status for the following season.

Anyone who played their entire age 23 season at AA or higher is “RE“. Playing in A+, A- or camp ball must be associated to a rehab assignment, or the player loses his “RE” status for the following season.

Players entering their age 25 Season are no longer eligible for the RE list, thus, their age 24 placement has no bearing on this discussion.

 

[calsnowskier]

Ages for RE list eligibility…

Camp = 20 yo
A- = 21 yo
A+ = 22 yo
AA= 23 yo

 

[calsnowskier]

As for the “Rookie Exempt” list, how about this…

I will be referring to ages based on the players ”age N season”. The exact definition of this will need to be defined, but I will ignore that aspect for now…

Anyone 21 or younger is “Rookie Exempt”.

Anyone who played their entire age 22 season at A+ or higher is “RE“. Playing in A- or camp ball must be associated to a rehab assignment, or the player loses his “RE” status for the following season.

Anyone who played their entire age 23 season at AA or higher is “RE“. Playing in A+, A- or camp ball must be associated to a rehab assignment, or the player loses his “RE” status for the following season.

Players entering their age 25 Season are no longer eligible for the RE list, thus, their age 24 placement has no bearing on this discussion.

Modification…

A player will have had to been in camp or higher during their age 21 season to be RE in their 22 season.

The season he joined the org does not count, and and his first full season is an automatic RE as well. So all of this years draftees are RE in ‘25, regardless of age.

Looking at a few examples…

Tibbs - A- in his 21 season. He would automatically be RE next season, but would have to play the whole season at A- or higher to retain that status for ‘26.

Jordan - He has not appeared yet in ’24, but this is his age 21 season, so he would need to be in San Jose next year to keep his RE status for ‘26.

Eldridge - He is in his age 19 season, so he still has 2 season before the level-qualifier kicks in, but he is already “qualified” at the A- level, which is the equivalent of his age 21 season.

 

[calsnowskier]

I ripped these posts out of the Down on the farm thread…

 

[calsnowskier]

Doing a quick study of the Giants this year, just to get a rough idea of what we would be looking at, and ignoring WHY a player played at a lower level (rehab assignments are just considered assignments for this purpose, purely for ease purposes), the Giants currently have 117 non-MLB40 players who would fail to qualify for the RE list based on my above criteria. This only included players who have actually played in at least 1 game, though (again, limited resources for my research), but…

Players of interest on this list (in no particular order)…

Thomas Szapucki
Vaun Brown
Raymond Burgos
Maui Ahuna
Aeverson Arteaga
Will Bednar
Jonah Cox
Austin Strickland
Joe Whitman
Seth Corry
Matt Mikulski
Nick Sinacola
Garrett Frechette
RJ Dabovich
Carson Seymour
Hunter Bishop
Carson Ragsdale
Andy Thomas
Brett Auerbach
Ismael Munguia
Will Wilson
Nick Swiney
Jose Cruz
Ryan Murphy

This was a somewhat quick passthrough of a list I created from BBRef. Some additional players probably should have been added and some of these players probably didn’t necessitate inclusion. And obviously, as stated, I am not including players who didn’t appear due to injury reasons.

 

[calsnowskier]

In review, the different lists and what they mean…

MLB-40 - This is the same as it is today. These player are fully protected by the org and their “clock” is running.

Rookie Exempt - These players are playing at age-appropriate levels (or higher), and are thus equally protected by the org. These players are not eligible for the Rule V draft. They are advancing, thus the purpose of the Rule V does not apply. This eligibility is determined after the World Series is completed. Each player’s status is maintained until the next reset date (after the next World Series).

MiLB-40 - This is a manual list of “protected” players that did not qualify for RE. These players can be taken in the Rule V draft, but their MiLB level is not important. There would need to be a DFA process applied to removing players from this list throughout the season (though that may be unnecessary due to the waiver rules explained below). If these players qualify for RE in the future, they may be removed from this list without being DFA’d. The “40” part of this list would likely need to be changed to something like “20”.

Practice Squad - The name of this group sucks, but it gets the idea across (it is based on the NFL’s practice squad rules). These are players not on any of the above lists. They are eligible for the Rule V draft. They can also be “claimed” via waivers at any time during the season by another team. Their current team would have to add them to the MiLB-40 themselves to prevent the claiming team to take them. The claiming team would have to, in turn, place this player on their MiLB-40.

 

[LHG]

Doing a quick study of the Giants this year, just to get a rough idea of what we would be looking at, and ignoring WHY a player played at a lower level (rehab assignments are just considered assignments for this purpose, purely for ease purposes), the Giants currently have 117 non-MLB40 players who would fail to qualify for the RE list based on my above criteria. This only included players who have actually played in at least 1 game, though (again, limited resources for my research), but…

Players of interest on this list (in no particular order)…

Thomas Szapucki
Vaun Brown
Raymond Burgos
Maui Ahuna
Aeverson Arteaga
Will Bednar
Jonah Cox
Austin Strickland
Joe Whitman
Seth Corry
Matt Mikulski
Nick Sinacola
Garrett Frechette
RJ Dabovich
Carson Seymour
Hunter Bishop
Carson Ragsdale
Andy Thomas
Brett Auerbach
Ismael Munguia
Will Wilson
Nick Swiney
Jose Cruz
Ryan Murphy

This was a somewhat quick passthrough of a list I created from BBRef. Some additional players probably should have been added and some of these players probably didn’t necessitate inclusion. And obviously, as stated, I am not including players who didn’t appear due to injury reasons.

Interesting that Maui Ahuna shows up on this list. He was just drafted last year.

 

[calsnowskier]

Interesting that Maui Ahuna shows up on this list. He was just drafted last year.

He would be an auto-add the the MiLB roster, though. He was an older draftee, though. I think he also shows on this list due to a rehab stint.

Again, I put the list together real quick, just to get a sense of what the irl situation would look like. If this system were in place, minor league roster configuration would look very different.

 

[LHG]

He would be an auto-add the the MiLB roster, though. He was an older draftee, though. I think he also shows on this list due to a rehab stint.

Again, I put the list together real quick, just to get a sense of what the irl situation would look like. If this system were in place, minor league roster configuration would look very different.

He did spend a bit of time in the ACL on a rehab assignment.

Its an interesting concept you suggest. However, I've not read it well enough to fully understand it yet.

 

[calsnowskier]

He did spend a bit of time in the ACL on a rehab assignment.

Its an interesting concept you suggest. However, I've not read it well enough to fully understand it yet.

It is an idea I just came up with today. I am sure there is a poison pill in there somewhere, but it does appear to solve a lot of the problems that exist with “holding players back”.

 

[LHG]

It is an idea I just came up with today. I am sure there is a poison pill in there somewhere, but it does appear to solve a lot of the problems that exist with “holding players back”.

That may be a problem MLB doesn't want solved. I would think the players' union would want to look at it if they were serious about truly helping minor leaguers.

 

[calsnowskier]

That may be a problem MLB doesn't want solved. I would think the players' union would want to look at it if they were serious about truly helping minor leaguers.

It seems like there has some movement on getting the minor leaguers into the MLBPA in the last couple years.

Politics aside, though, I think this system pretty much solves all the existing problems. Of course there is still the matter of legally defining the “age year”, and it would need to go through a pretty rigorous QA to find the loopholes (I am certain they exist). But I do think it works well with both American draftees (both HS and college) as well as international amateur signees.