|
|
Post by Minnesota Twins on Jan 12, 2019 0:45:54 GMT -5
I brought this idea up on the chat & it seemed to gain a lot of positive momentum. I think we all would agree the poaching rule in itself needs some changes. The debate can hinge on whether we are on board with a poach to just “force a move,” but that’s not what this suggestion is about.
My suggestion is that moving forward, successful poached players be treated the same way that players selected in the MLB portion of the rule 5 draft are treated. Say Chris (Reds) poaches Mookie Betts from my minors. If he wins the bid, he would have to keep Betts on his 31 man active roster for the entirety of the remainder of the season. If the player must come off the big league active roster to be demoted, then the player must be offered to be returned to the original owner before he can be placed in the minor leagues.
Essentially, a poached player cannot be optioned without being offered to the original owner.
Thoughts, suggestions, comments on the poaching rule would be helpful. This is something I’d like for us to clear up & make better before things get rolling again on the 2019 TPB season.
|
|
|
|
Post by St. Louis Cardinals (Andrew) on Jan 12, 2019 1:05:40 GMT -5
I brought this idea up on the chat & it seemed to gain a lot of positive momentum. I think we all would agree the poaching rule in itself needs some changes. The debate can hinge on whether we are on board with a poach to just “force a move,” but that’s not what this suggestion is about. My suggestion is that moving forward, successful poached players be treated the same way that players selected in the MLB portion of the rule 5 draft are treated. Say Chris (Reds) poaches Mookie Betts from my minors. If he wins the bid, he would have to keep Betts on his 31 man active roster for the entirety of the remainder of the season. If the player must come off the big league active roster to be demoted, then the player must be offered to be returned to the original owner before he can be placed in the minor leagues. Essentially, a poached player cannot be optioned without being offered to the original owner. Thoughts, suggestions, comments on the poaching rule would be helpful. This is something I’d like for us to clear up & make better before things get rolling again on the 2019 TPB season. I could not agree more, sounds like a perfect fix to me. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 12, 2019 6:33:16 GMT -5
I'm in agreement as well. Only thing I'd clarify is that this would also apply if the poacher tried to cut him (not just demote him). Basically any move to take him off of a 31 man roster.
This requirement should travel with the player for the duration of the season. Using your example, is Chris then traded me Mookie, I'd have to keep him on the 31 man roster.
|
|
|
|
Post by Arizona Diamondbacks on Jan 12, 2019 9:31:58 GMT -5
Sounds like a good idea to me
|
|
|
|
Post by Cincinnati Reds - Chris on Jan 12, 2019 11:54:56 GMT -5
Using the Betts scenario above, say Mookie was demoted IRL. Would the team who had poached Mookie be allowed to place him on their 60, or would they still have to offer him back to the original team he was poached from.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 12, 2019 12:22:12 GMT -5
Would have to stay on the 31 man unless offered back to the original team.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 12, 2019 12:42:15 GMT -5
Taking the Mookie example further though, if Mookie was demoted IRL and was offered back to the original owner, would that original owner need to keep him on their 31 man roster if they accepted him back? I'd say they wouldn't have to, though he'd be poachable again once called back up to MLB IRL.
Thoughts?
|
|
|
|
Post by Minnesota Twins on Jan 12, 2019 13:43:13 GMT -5
Taking the Mookie example further though, if Mookie was demoted IRL and was offered back to the original owner, would that original owner need to keep him on their 31 man roster if they accepted him back? I'd say they wouldn't have to, though he'd be poachable again once called back up to MLB IRL. Thoughts? Agree with what you’re saying. Demotable to the original owner, but poachable when promoted again. |
|
|
|
Post by Cincinnati Reds - Chris on Jan 12, 2019 15:40:10 GMT -5
Say the player was poached a 2nd time, would he still have to be offered back to the original team?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 12, 2019 15:52:09 GMT -5
You mean a second time from the original owner? If so then yes doesn't matter if he's poached 100 times, a poach is a poach
|
|
|
|
Post by Cincinnati Reds - Chris on Jan 12, 2019 16:03:21 GMT -5
Or if the original owner rejects the offer back, does he continue to have to keep being offered back if the original team doesn't want him
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 12, 2019 17:02:32 GMT -5
Same as rule 5. If the original team doesn't accept him back, all rights go to his new team.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dodgers GM on Jan 15, 2019 20:56:27 GMT -5
put it to a vote and if it passes lets get it implemented
|
|
|
|
Post by Minnesota Twins on Jan 27, 2019 23:45:04 GMT -5
Have added a poll here for everyone to vote. Any questions before voting, don’t be afraid to place them here.
|
|
|
|
Post by Minnesota Twins on Feb 2, 2019 21:49:24 GMT -5
Last call for any further votes, discussion. Would like for as many teams as possible to cast a vote.
|
|
|
|
Post by Minnesota Twins on Feb 4, 2019 15:33:52 GMT -5
18 out of 20 votes for yes... We good with writing this into the rules?
|
|
|
|
Post by WhiteSox on Feb 4, 2019 15:34:43 GMT -5
More than 50%
|
|
