So, basically...

[Admin]

Walt, am with you with not drafting 16-17-18 yo. no guarantee that after 5 yrs they will become MLB'ers. Remember last year, maybe a bit earlier, Yorman and Juan Doran? Young players and they are doing nothing. That young is such a crapshoot.
I'm in the same situation as you I'm really not that concerned about it. UR gonna slap a franchise tag on a player thats down to 1 yr anyway and they rest of 'em are lost to free agency. Plus the rules havent been established yet.

[Deleted]

If you're talking about Yorman Rodriguez, I would draft him anytime if I get unlimited minor league years for him - ie franchise tag. There are certain young minor leaguers that I would gladly gamble on under those conditions. But because of the rules in place it was not realistic to do so. If the franchise tag can be applied to players already drafted then I never was given a reasonable chance to draft such players, while the owners that misunderstood the rules profit from thei misunderstanding.

[ex-Pittsburgh Pirates]

My point is that the rest of us understood the rule as written. So did you. The way the rule was written it could legitimately be interpreted either way. Now, if you could point to something in the rule that makes it clear we were wrong, then I'd totally agree that you are getting screwed.

[Deleted]

Oct 3, 2010 7:46:31 GMT -5 ex-Pittsburgh Pirates said:

My point is that the rest of us understood the rule as written. So did you. The way the rule was written it could legitimately be interpreted either way. Now, if you could point to something in the rule that makes it clear we were wrong, then I'd totally agree that you are getting screwed.

That is exactly what I was trying to say.

[Admin]

This is un-official but i'm leaning toward it...

a franchise tag can be placed on only 1 player who reaches 0 years remaining, when final rosters are due. this will add 1 additional year for the player to reach major league status. during the following year if the player fails to reach MLB status he is lost to MiLB free agency NO MATTER WHAT. contracts dont matter, nothing matters then. is this clear to everyone? there will be no exceptions.
the penalty will be the franchise tag penalty of 5 years, in addtion to the extra year the player gets. this tag penalty works as if its another player drafted. 5 years are added and is worked off 1 year at a time, as if its a player.
also considering the max penalty tag years a team can accumulate before you cant use the tag

[Deleted]

OK, try to follow this...

Minor Leagues
« Thread Started on Dec 5, 2007, 11:07pm » by Admin
"There is one MiLB draft per year in mid-January. Our initial draft will be to stock our teams and consist of 12 rounds. Any player who hasnt gained major league status(150 AB's/50 IP) is eligible. Subsequent years will be 7 rounds each.

We assign 'controlling years' to each player drafted. Can assign 1-5 yrs per player. The cap for each team is 75 years. There is no limit as to how many players you can draft other than not to exceed 75 yrs."

1) So major league players are defined as (50 or more IP / 150 or more AB). Thus any player with less than that is by definition a minor leaguer. Nowhere does it say that a player becomes a major leaguer upon signing a major league contract. 50 IP or 150 AB is the sole criteria for determining whether a player is a major leaguer or a minor leaguer.

2) Each player drafted (only minor leaguers may be drafted) is assigned a a certain number of controlling years (1-5). I assume you will agree that the only logical conclusion is that when the controlling years get to 0, you lose control of that player, ie the player becomes a minor league free agent. Otherwise, what purpose would the controlling years serve?

Therefore, every drafted player who has not achieved major league status (50 IP or 150 RBI) and has his controlling reach zero becomes a minor league free agent.

I realize you have to use a little logic to come to the correct conclusion, but all us are capable of that.

In fact Baltimore queried as to why one of the players he had signed to a major league contract still had 2 controlling listed on the spreadsheet. He was told by the Admin that even though signed to a major league contract, he had not attained major league status (50 IP or 150 AB) and was still a minor league player.

[ex-Pittsburgh Pirates]

You are correct. Nowhere does it say that a player become a major league player by signing a major league contract.

But I file that under 'seems like it is self evident.'

[Deleted]

Now show me where it is written in the rules that signing a major league contract makes a player by definition in our league a major league player. Otherwise, you have no argument. You made an assumption not supported by any of the rules in our league.
In fact, that assumption contradicts the rules of our league.

[Deleted]

Question about minor league hours
« Thread Started on Jun 23, 2009, 6:38am » By Balt
I was wondering how the minor league years are set up. I have 5 players who have gained major league status. Are those players years removed and added to the available years?

I also have a player (Samardzija) who has already been signed but is still showing he has 2 minor league years.

Just wondering if someone could clear this up for me.

Re: Question about minor league hours
« Reply #1 on Jun 23, 2009, 6:50am » By Admin
those 5 with MLB status reached it by attaining 150ab's or 50ip's so their minor league years were eliminated. Smardj?? was promoted so he has to have a salary but his total ip in the 'bigs' is only around 30ip's. so he's still classified as a minor guy but with salary. until he reaches 50ip's, he's a minor.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Isn't that clear enough for you. The definition of what is a major league player and what is a minor league player has never changed. IF YOU HAVE LESS THAN 50 IP OR 150 AB, YOU ARE A MINOR LEAGUE PLAYER. there are no other definitions anywhere in the rules or discussion threads.

[Minnesota Twins]

I think the rule has been established and the fact that we were operating under an incorrect assumption also. However, now there will will be a new rule to include a franchise tag.

[Deleted]

Yes, but my concern at this point is that it would be unfair to those who understood the rules correctly for the league to allow the franchise tag to be applied to minor league players already drafted. The information for the correct understanding of the rule was available to everyone from the beginning. No clarification of minor league years was asked for until 6/09, at which time the Commish reiterated the definition of minor league players. Those who misunderstood the rules should be held accountable for their choices and not be bailed out by a franchise tag rule.

[ex-Pittsburgh Pirates]

Sorry. It isn't clear enough for me.
My understanding of the rules comes from....the rules. Not from some thread from a year and a half ago. I thought that after the season was over, when you submit your final roster, you decide if you want to sign your minor league guys or not (at least the ones that haven't already been signed.) If you decide the sign someone, they get moved off your minor league roster. I understood all that stuff you posted between Balt and Admin. I just thought it applied only to the current season.

The rule I would like to see put into place that makes the most sense and would be the most fun is not going to happen. So I don't really care what we do with the rules. Whatever the commish wants to do is fine with me.

[Deleted]

All I am asking is that any new rule not be enforced retroactively - inherently, retroactive rules favor some teams over others. New rules should apply only to what happens in the future so that there is a level playing field for everyone.

[Admin]

thanks to milw for the research BUT you all need to go back to 6-13 and read the 150ab - 50 ip thread. look at the last reply which i just edited and updated.
THERE is where the confusion lies. I mis-spoke in my response to the question.

chat->page 2

[Deleted]

Yes, you misspoke on 6/13/10. This affected only the Entry Draft of this year as that was the only draft held following your statement. As a result I would be willing to allow all players starting with that draft to be eligible for the franchise tag. Before your mis-statement there should have been no question as to the proper rule.