Rule 5 Draft and Injured Players

[ptwarr18]

Trying to figure out how to treat a situation here....

The deadline to protect players from the Rule 5 Draft has passed and GM's are already submitting lists for the draft... however, one player that has come up on numerous lists is an injured player that probably should have been protected - I have a feeling that he wasn't protected because on the transactions screen there isn't a "#" next to his name because he's on the Disabled List. You would have had to look at his profile to see it says "Eligible" or checked out his service days manually to know. Granted, other players are in the pool that I feel should have been protected, including one of my own (oops).

It's a decent SP (7-7-6) potential with (7-5-4) current ratings which projects out as probably a #3 SP if he reaches potential. He's not one of the top 100 Prospects in the league despite his good potential.

My question is...

1) How do I handle this? Should I contact the GM and make him aware, and even if I do, can I really retroactively protect him now that the deadline is passed and he's on a few Draft Lists? I feel like this would open the can of worms to others who wish they would have protected someone.

2) I draft in a relatively high spot (#7) and I may select the player if one or two other guys go off the board ahead of him. As I Commish, can I do this in good conscience? Or should I allow him to fall farther in the draft and be picked by someone else? Seems like I shouldn't have to put my own club at a disadvantage but I don't know what to do here.


Any suggestions? I know he's not a mega-prospect that's going to reshape a league but its just something I was having a hard time with.

[Corsairs]

It's a judgment call. I wouldn't say there's a wrong answer; it's probably more important that you take a firm stance one way or another and stick to it. Personally, I would grudgingly go with not allowing the player to be protected under the premise that it's the responsibility of each individual owner to monitor his players and protect them accordingly. I don't know when the player was injured, but the owner has theoretically known that the player would be Rule 5-eligible at this time for multiple in-game years and thus had ample opportunity to protect him.

As for your second question, this is precisely the kind of conundrum that is why I'm stepping aside as an owner to focus on my commissioner duties. While you remain an owner, though, you have a responsibility to do right by your team, and since this isn't a case where any cheating took place I say go ahead and draft the player if he falls to you.

[ptwarr18]

Well this is the 1st year of the league, so it's all new to our GM's which makes it more complex.

This player was involved in a trade in May and was injured in August, so theoretically the GM did, or should have known, that he was Rule 5 eligible for 3 months of game time.

As you can see, it's just a complicated situation but I'm leaning towards the remedy you posted above. In the past, I've taken a hard stance on things like this so I shouldn't let up now. Thanks for the help.

[adamj]

I think part of the problem is that many OOTP players don't know that putting a guy on the 60-day DL removes him from the 40-man roster, thereby making him Rule 5 eligible, assuming he has the service time.

It seems that many GM's will put a guy on the 60-day DL, simply because his injury is scheduled to last more than 60 days. In many cases, like the one described in the OP, it makes more sense to just put the guy on the 15-day DL, no matter what the length of his injury is. Unfortunately, a lot of people just don't get that.

[ptwarr18]

Yeah - it stinks. I selected this player in our Rule 5 Draft and never heard a word about it from anyone. Maybe I'm missing something and he's not that good, but it's Carlos Carrasco and he's the 2nd best pitching prospect in my farm now. I feel like he was a huge pickup despite his injury and stamina concerns, but who knows, maybe I'm wrong.