Two draft rule suggestions

[Rangers]

Two draft things I'd like to suggest that we take another look at:

1. Dec 31 signing deadline for all players
2. 12 hour (or shorter) time limit after the 5th round

One major factor on both of these - with how wild the market is and how valuable players have the potential to come out of nowhere, our current rules make it too likely that someone gets a big advantage comparable to a first round pick just based on timing of signings/FA news and being on the clock so that only they are eligible to add that player.

Additionally on the first one, the situation with Cubans has continued to evolve and now we're getting a flood of teenagers down to 16 year olds. It's too hard to make a clear delineation at this point. This year, for example, an unsigned 16 year old top talent from Cuba emerged in the middle of the draft and was eligible to be drafted, while a 16 year old from DR/Ven who signs this month is not.

Also, as Shawn noted during his Sierra pick, it is currently in guys' best interest to let the clock roll right up to 24 hours just to see how stuff plays out. We should not be encouraging this and setting the date to 12/31 removes that motivation.

On the second one, we have guys who either have been skipped or are notorious for taking entire days requesting multiple rounds of extra picks, essentially allowing them to dominate the market for undrafted 2015 players for however long they would like (with the BA Prospect Handbook becoming available around that time). By this point, people should really be picking off of their queue anyway and there should be no reason that you need a full day and night to ponder a 6th/7th round player.

[Dodgers]

Counter suggestions:
1. Don't start the draft until much later (2/15, 3/1?). At that point we'll have all the projections and the outlook for the vast majority of foreign players should be decided. Downside is it doesn't allow a lot of time for trading your draftees for players to help you that season and kills the entire winter flurry of activity.
2. Should we consider the elimination of the extra rounds and just put all non-drafted players on 24 hour waivers after the last pick? Would be kind of complicated priority wise with multiple teams putting in multiple claims plus the public nature of the claims.

[Rangers]

I would be fine with the second suggestion. I'm also good with starting the draft later - specifically because prospect lists are done by those dates so the information available to guys is even and the difference would be actual insight.

However, starting the draft later does not address the issues that I mentioned with the first one. Players sign right up to opening day and it's entirely possible that someone high profile could be declared a free agent and sign in March. You're focusing on projections and 2016 impact but that is not the only key point. First round (in a couple of cases potentially even mid-high 1st) value players have uncertain outlooks as far as eligibility.

I think we just need to fix it and I've always been confused why some guys have resisted just fixing it and making it fair for everyone since the answer is so simple.

[Dodgers]

Yea, it sucks having impact mlb players not playing in ibc, but I do agree that players should have to be signed by the start of the draft or they go into next year's. It might actually increase the value of the earliest picks.

[Padres]

Dec 31 signing deadline for all players.

I agree

12 hour (or shorter) time limit after the 5th round.

I don't care one way or another ... not like there is a lot going on and the 12/31 signing deadline should address most of the concerns this proposal seemingly addresses.

Don't start the draft until much later (2/15, 3/1?).

I personally think 2/15 is too late and quite frankly I am fine with the 1/1 start. I could see waiting until 2/1 as most of prospect rankings and most of the team ZipS are released by then.

Should we consider the elimination of the extra rounds and just put all non-drafted players on 24 hour waivers after the last pick?

I would prefer to keep the current system ... simple and it works just fine.

In addition I believe we should clarify or state there is no more re-draft. You pick a player you have him until you drop him (or trade him) and in the case of a duplicate selection the pick is treated as a skip. Skipped picks (missing the 24 hour window, duplicate picks) may be made up by making an additional pick after the completion of the original 5 rounds.

[Astros]

I'd be fine with starting a month later. There were a number of times I was looking at prospects and their team lists weren't out yet so I had to depend on random blogs to get some idea of their ceiling. That'd eliminate that.

As for the extra rounds, 12 hours seems fair to me but I don't care either way there

[Cardinals]

I'm in favor of starting the draft slightly later, but not too much so, and just going with that date as a hard cutoff. Usually the high-profile Japanese and Cuban players have signed by early to mid January formally. Maeda, for example, agreed before 2016, but didn't sign until 1/7. I think Darvish was a little later in January as well. 2/1 may be the best idea since like Jim said, most of the prospect rankings are out, a lot of ZiPS are out, and I can't recall a high profile Asian or Cuban signing after that date, or at least any that would affect our league for the upcoming season.

I actually do think we should eliminate the sixth+ rounds. In a pretty extreme example, JB traded every one of his picks this year. I think that gets you out of the draft entirely, and giving him exclusive rights over a remaining pool for X amount of time is a bit silly.

[Padres]

I actually do think we should eliminate the sixth+ rounds. In a pretty extreme example, JB traded every one of his picks this year. I think that gets you out of the draft entirely, and giving him exclusive rights over a remaining pool for X amount of time is a bit silly.

I will admit that when I traded out of the 5th round and only had 4 draft picks [prior to the draft starting] I did so knowing I could request an (early) pick in the 6th round -- and for me in this year's (and most year's) draft there isn't a large talent difference between a 5th and 6th round pick. I also knew I had plenty of "14" players to maintain a legal draft roster.

[Nationals]

Catching up here, I'm totally fine with using the draft start date as the signing cutoff. It kinda boggles the mind that we haven't done this in the past. Shifting the draft back to mid-January or even the beginning of February would allay concerns about guys signing late.

Thinking about it, I'd rather see the late rounds just go away...or perhaps a hybrid system where a 6th round pick may be requested but no more rounds after that.

[Padres]

Thinking about it, I'd rather see the late rounds just go away...or perhaps a hybrid system where a 6th round pick may be requested but no more rounds after that.

Concerning post-5th round picks ... in the end I want to do whatever is easiest for Shawn and his system. Whether that is maintaining the current process or simply going to waiver system or an "open season" free for all teams to sign whomever they wish 24 hours after the draft has been declared over ... in the case of the later I think we should have a period where everyone knows the draft has ended so we don't have a team make a pick at 148 and then the teams with picks 149 and 150 suddenly declare they are done drafting in which case only those teams that monitor the board frequently are aware that a free for all signing period has begun.

[Guardians]

I'm 100% behind eliminating 6th round picks. I think we set it at 5 rounds and if anyone else wants a guy, it's a free for all post-draft. Shawn, if you want to put several hundred guys on waivers, you can, but I'd be fine with it being open season after the last 5th round pick.

As for draft date, I can understand the issue of Cubans being declared free agents during the draft...I'm not sure we can completely legislate around that. It could happen between November 1 and March 1, so I don't think we can find a time that perfectly fits. What I don't want is for a guy like Yu Darvish to be undrafted for a year only to be eligible the following year. I think the reason behind making it an opening day signing date was to allow those types of guys to be eligible so we avoided that situation.

What if we move the draft back to 2/1 in order to eliminate the prospect list/zips issue (mostly), but create a rule that basically only makes professional foreign free agents over a certain age (say, 18 ), the July 2 signees and 2015 draftees are eligible?

These would have to be players who have played in professional leagues in other countries and be of a certain age, which would probably solve the problem with a guy like Lazarito, right? Yet a guy like Jose Fernandez (2B) would be eligible and only able to be kept if he signs by opening day.

I'm generally of the opinion that the more talent, the better and I don't really have a huge issue with pick values changing as new info comes out, but I agree that waiting 24 hours to see what a 34-year-old middle reliever's projection would be was ridiculous.

[Cardinals]

I'm generally of the opinion that the more talent, the better and I don't really have a huge issue with pick values changing as new info comes out, but I agree that waiting 24 hours to see what a 34-year-old middle reliever's projection would be was ridiculous.

That's my main thing, and where I disagree with you. There's no circumstance in which pick 49 should be more valuable than pick 34.

[Guardians]

I'm generally of the opinion that the more talent, the better and I don't really have a huge issue with pick values changing as new info comes out, but I agree that waiting 24 hours to see what a 34-year-old middle reliever's projection would be was ridiculous.

That's my main thing, and where I disagree with you. There's no circumstance in which pick 49 should be more valuable than pick 34.

I just don't think we can avoid that all together unless we draft before the end of the regular season (pre-any foreign free agent announcements/rumors) and we eliminate any foreign guys other than the July 2 players. And everyone else is pushed to the next season (ie: Maeda, Puig, Yu, etc). Otherwise, I don't think there's a perfect date that fixes the issues raised previously.

[Cardinals]

I think all the major contributors to our projections/season are almost always signed by the middle of January. Darvish was mid-Jan., Maeda was early Jan., etc. I think February 1 does a good job of ensuring most players who will contribute are in the pool.

[Rangers]

I think all the major contributors to our projections/season are almost always signed by the middle of January. Darvish was mid-Jan., Maeda was early Jan., etc. I think February 1 does a good job of ensuring most players who will contribute are in the pool.

That's where I think we're at after the discussion as far as common ground. Do we want to vote on a Feb 1 universal deadline?

[Padres]

That's where I think we're at after the discussion as far as common ground. Do we want to vote on a Feb 1 universal deadline?

Yes ... I am in favor.

[Nationals]

Sure, February 1st works for me.

[Guardians]

I'm fine with that.

[Cardinals]

Count me in.

[Guardians]

Where does everyone stand on the other draft issues?

I vote we eliminate anything after the standard 5th round picks, especially in light of people's worry that draft values can change as time lapses. I also believe we would be fine with no waivers post-draft, but if Shawn says it's easy, I'd have no objection.

A) Stick to 5 rounds or allow additional picks
B) Place players on waivers or not after the draft

[Dodgers]

I like February 1st.

I'm ok with allowing additional picks, everyone had their chance to extend their draft (this is something I would like to make self-serve in the future). I think we're probably best not bothering with a waivers process after the draft.

[Cardinals]

Where does everyone stand on the other draft issues?

I vote we eliminate anything after the standard 5th round picks, especially in light of people's worry that draft values can change as time lapses. I also believe we would be fine with no waivers post-draft, but if Shawn says it's easy, I'd have no objection.

A) Stick to 5 rounds or allow additional picks
B) Place players on waivers or not after the draft

You'll have to have signed by Feb. 1 to be eligible for the draft, so the only way the pick value will fluctuate is because of prospect lists, etc.

[Rangers]

I'm thinking that it is about time to announce any rules changes for our draft. We decided to move the draft to start on Feb 1 and that only players signed by then would be eligible. I can post a poll on post-5th rounders and on the Tebow Rule.

[Guardians]

If we're moving to 2/1 and only players signed by the start date are eligible, I don't think the additional picks are an issue. That was really only an issue if we were adding picks so that we could hope to snag a foreign player who signs late. That is a moot issue, so I think additional picks are fine. As for Tebow, yeah, he should be in the draft as a free agent signed in 2016 (much like July 2 int'l kids).

[Rangers]

Agreed on Tebow but what I was going to poll is whether we should add any language to change that. I don't really have an opinion on that but I wasn't sure if others might. I guess I will only post a poll for that if anyone thinks that a 29-year-old who was last draft eligible like seven years ago should be a free agent without going through our draft.