Hembree Rule

[Deleted]

Mar 22, 2019 20:26:01 GMT -5 Minnesota Twins said:

My general feeling is we want to discourage signing guys who aren't major leaguers. Hembree rule does that, or at least makes you think seriously about it.

Agreed. the Hembree rule should only be used for a very select players and a second chance. That said, I think Honeywell and Kopech are looking at Hembree's. Who drafted them?? You got it, Philly. Sold for pennies but i'm not bound the Hembree rule.

So right now we have a salary cap which you can go over and a ABs & IP threshold you can go under?? This is great. We don't need a constitution.

[Deleted]

Don't like the Hembree rule?? Don't hit the thresholds, cut your player and let him enter the draft again.

[Deleted]

Mar 22, 2019 20:29:11 GMT -5 @philadelphia said:

Mar 22, 2019 17:51:16 GMT -5 ex-Pittsburgh Pirates said:

Now, if you don't mind, I have an 8 hour fantasy baseball auction to prepare for. The Phillies are tough to beat.

More like 10 hours if Bruce asks who are we bidding on again for every other player,

Add an hour if Jeff wants to look up ever single player. Does Trea Turner steal bases?

[New York Yankees]

If u keep a MiLB player by signing him to a MLB contract, then he should b treated the same way as any other MLB player. U can keep him on bench, WW him, trade him, or cut him! Y make it the worst of both (MiLB/MLB) worlds where u r forced to take up a roster spot all year??? I understand the punitive desire but like it was said, u r already being punished by having a useless bench player!

[Deleted]

Honestly, it isn't that big a deal. I hembreed three last season and all three got their time in. In new Tex's case, he inherited an obviously bad decision and should be able to dump him.

[ex-Pittsburgh Pirates]

It's more of a problem than it ever was because too many teams are keeping players in the minors way longer than they should be.

[ex-Pittsburgh Pirates]

Mar 22, 2019 20:34:40 GMT -5 torontobluejays said:

I agree with you Minny.

Can you and Minny explain why we want to discourage signing your own minor league players? That's the part I don't understand.

[Minnesota Twins]

It makes managing your minor league yrs less important. I don't feel strongly about it but would vote still vote to keep h rule

[torontobluejays]

If there is no penalty to sign a MiLB and then cut him, why not allow teams to sign MiLB players as FA during the season. There is no difference between MLB players and MiLB players then. Why make us wait until the reach 50/150 to bid on a MiLB FA when we may want them earlier. If they are a bust, we can cut them like any other FA.

[[e-mail]]

Yeah but Toronto, you did not spend the draft pick on someone else's premature MiLB signed player that was cut.

I don't think anyone is suggesting this turn into the wild west. Only thing being advocated is the team who spent the draft pick on the guy who he felt needed to be signed b/c he ran out of years...that team have full MLB tools at his disposal (incl cut/waiver).

I'll counter the naysayers here. What is the difference between cutting a MiLB after his years expired (Opting not to exercise the hembree rule) and cutting that signed same MiLB player under this proposal?

Kind of rhetorical, but I'll tell you. One cut was of no expense to the team beyond losing the player and the other one was the financial hit against a 600k/5 yr contract as well as losing the player.

This to me is a no brainer why the hembree, though unintentional, over-penalized teams who chose to utilize it.

[torontobluejays]

The difference is you can not attempt to sign a MiLB who gets cut, because he has not reached the 50/150 threshold. He goes back into the draft. A player who has reached the 50/150 threshold is available to be signed the next Wednesday/Sunday. Any player cut from your roster should become a MLB FA immediately.

[[e-mail]]

I wouldnt agree with that - if the player cut was a MiLB who had not reached requisite IP/ABs signed to MLB contract. That is certainly not something I had proposed with the first post. That's fundamentally changing the system in a dramatic way. What I'm proposing I don't believe is dramatic, rather reflects the owning team being able to have full measures of control over a contract. Simple.

If I signed a player under my proposal, I don't believe you should have any opportunity at said player unless you were willing to re-invest a draft pick in them at the next MiLB draft. I'm the one who assigned up to 5 years on a player, not you. I'm the one who took the risk at signing the player via hembree, not you.

I'm still trying to understand what the intent was to prohibit Hembree player waivers and cuts. I am not hearing anything that justifies these stipulations as it is currently written. Nothing. Nada. Maybe I missed something up above?

Please, take none of this personally. I just disagree.

[torontobluejays]

I'm not taking it personally. You use the correct phrase "took the risk." Risk implies potential negative consequences. The consequence of being stuck with a rookie contract is minor. This risk is the same a cutting a recent FA signing. The risk of signing a MiLB before he reaches the 50/150 threshhold should be more severe. Forcing you to hold him until he reaches the 50/150 threshold is reasonable. You know the risk before you do it. I own Kopech and I fully expect to sign him after his minor league years expire this year. I see his potential and I see the risk. It is a risk that I am willing to take. I would not take that same risk with Dom Nunez.

[Deleted]

Mar 23, 2019 19:44:56 GMT -5 torontobluejays said:

I'm not taking it personally. You use the correct phrase "took the risk." Risk implies potential negative consequences. The consequence of being stuck with a rookie contract is minor. This risk is the same a cutting a recent FA signing. The risk of signing a MiLB before he reaches the 50/150 threshhold should be more severe. Forcing you to hold him until he reaches the 50/150 threshold is reasonable. You know the risk before you do it. I own Kopech and I fully expect to sign him after his minor league years expire this year. I see his potential and I see the risk. It is a risk that I am willing to take. I would not take that same risk with Dom Nunez.

If you don't understand the Hembree rule go back and read all of Toronto posts. I think he is the only one who got it.

Milwaukee, what you want to do is make an exception the to 150abs/50ip rule. All players have the same threshold. If your player does not hit the threshold why should your player get all the same benefits as the other players who do?? You are getting a second chance to hit the 150/50 threshold rather than release the player to the MiLB draft. Since no one else in the league can get your second chance player in return you agree to wait until the player hits the required threshold (which is what he is required to do anyway). I think it makes perfect sense. Would you like to release Bryce Harper in year 5 with 147 at bats, of course not. Harper with have hit his threshold the first week of next season for another team.


If no one likes the Hembree rule go ahead and make a threshold and stick to it. Why make an exception.

[Deleted]

The rule wasn't created with the idea to keep player who has not had an MLB AB or IP. I think it would be crazy to Hembree a player like that but losing a roster spot for 5 years makes it very hard to contend. That is your penalty for the league to keep the league from drafting him. Would I like a second chance at Honeywell or Kopech, sure I would. Let them go back into the MiLB draft if you don't like the Hembree rule.