UPDATE: New Additions To Rules That Should Be Changed

I posted back in September about Rules I would like to see changed by MLB.  The text of that post is at the end of this post.  Since then a couple of other Rules I would like to see changed have come to my attention.

Non-tender Date vs Rule 5 - Roster Freeze Date

Right now the date for tendering returning players a contract is Nov. 17th. Players not offered contracts immediately become free agents.  

However, the date to set your ML roster/minor league reserve lists is Nov. 15th in preparation for the Rule 5 draft.  That means, theoretically, that teams would have to use a roster spot for a guy they intend or are likely to non-tender two days later.

Now, I know teams are already DFAing/outrighting guys who they don't want on their roster this winter.  So you could clearly do that and not have the above two dates be an issue.

But why?  If the non-tenders were cleared from the roster before that roster has to be frozen it would eliminate the possibility of a team wasting a roster spot for a guy who they don't intend to/shouldn't keep on their roster and plan to expunge from their roster two days later.

Yes, Ramon Laureano, I am thinking about you as I type this. 

Allow trading of draft choices in the 11th and later rounds of the draft

Allow trading of draft picks after the 10th round of the draft for the following year and allow a draft pick to be designated as the PTBNL in a trade.  Here's my rationale

• The amateur draft budges are set up to account for signing draft picks in the top 10 rounds.  Any draft pick after that can be signed for $150,000 or less without being counted against a team's draft budget.  So, in essence these picks do not impact your draft budget unless you want them to.
• Picks on the 3rd day of the draft (rounds 11-20) are generally considered fungible.  That is, almost worthless.  That being said, some major leaguers do come from those rounds.  For the Guardians they got Adam Plutko, Zach Plesac and Doug Jones later in the draft.  
• "PTBNL or cash" is the way the phrase reads when a player is traded not for a player but the possibility of a player withing 6 months of the trade.  Too many times teams opt for cash, maybe because they are cheap or maybe because the teams can't agree on who the PTBNL is.  Not sure, haven't been involved in any discussions.

I am thinking about the Owen Miller trade, the Amed Rosario trade, the Richie Palacios trade and others.  I think teams would rather have a low round pick than cash and, if they would rather be cheap and take the cash, let's make it more obvious that they are cheap.  This might also entice teams that want to pick up these players to actually pay for them instead of hope for a waiver claim, at least when trades are available.  For Miller we got cash.  I would have rather had a 12th round pick.  For Rosario we had to take on Syndergaard's contract.  I think it was obvious that Rosario was worth more to LA than Syndergaard to us.  If we could have gotten a 14th round pick to sweeten the pot it would have helped. I think.  Palacios was an interesting case and represents a number of in-season DFAs necessitated by having to bring up renforcements for injured players or in the case of deadline deals.   The DFA'd players often get claimed on waivers.  Wouldn't it be great if teams could trade for those players using late round draft picks instead of hoping their waiver claim would be upheld?  

ORIGINAL POST

I have discussed that the waiver wire rule should NOT be changed as it is one of the few rules that favor small market teams who struggle to compete in most areas (free agency (domestic and foreign), spending on the draft (i.e., going over draft budgets) and international amateur free agents).  The powers that be will likely push for reform after the Guardians and Reds snapped up guys on the waiver wire at the end of August (funny, no one made a fuss when Cleveland's claim to Ramon Laureano went through!).   The teams/fans that complained the most saw the waiver wire as a way to defeat the single trade deadline instituted as part of the new CBA and get veterans for pennies as part of their push to win the WS.  They were incensed that teams with a marginal chance to make the playoffs would put claims in on these guys.  Most comically, I saw an article in a Cincinnati rag that chastised the Guardians for keeping the Reds from Giolito, Moore and Lopez and claimed retribution might come for this slight in our last two games with the Reds this year.  Hello pot.  It's kettle.  You're black.

While the rule above needs to stay the same there are rules that DO need to change.  Here are the ones that I have recently made suggestions about and a couple of new ones that have come to mind since:

 Rule 5 Criteria:

• Players selected in the ML portion of the Rule 5 draft MUST be on the active ML roster of the team that drafted them for 90 days in the season after they are chosen or they have to be offered back to their original team.  No longer will a team be able to draft a player who is injured and stash him on the DL/IL during the season while he recovers from his injury and gets more experience.  This also eliminates that player having to pass through waivers before they are offered back to their original team.  The current rule allows for a player to be passed from team to team during the season, effectively eliminating the need to roster the player during the season after they were drafted in the ML Rule 5 as they can be stashed until the next year where they would have to finish their ML service time to be able to be sent to the minors without being offered back to their original team..
• Players signed before they are 17.5 years old have an extra year of protection before they are Rule 5-eligible

Team Control 

• For players who were 19 years of age or younger at the time the 2020 minor league season was originally scheduled to begin:
• Teams get an extra minor league option year for players who fit this description who are currently on a team's 40 man roster.
• Teams get an extra year of player control relative to that player becoming a 6-year minor league free agent

NOTE: This makes up for the loss of experience that a young player would have gotten during the 2020 season.  Although a few players got an extra year of development by being on alternate site rosters, no one was actually playing minor league games during 2020.

Roster Control Issues

• Create a perpetual 27th man spot on ML teams to avoid the travesty and injury risk and travesty to the game when position players pitch in ML games.   It would go like this:
• Each ML team is allowed to carry a 27th player on their roster for all games. The player must be:
• a pitcher
• someone not on the 40-man roster who has not appeared in a major league game that season as a 40-man roster player.
• Must have played in at least 5 professional seasons (2020 counts even though there was no minor league baseball)
• must not appear as the 27th player more than one week every calendar month
• must only appear in a game where his team is trailing by more than 10 runs.   If you are winning by more than 10 runes (say, Minnesota last night) you don't get to take advantage of this rule.
• The player
• receives his minor league salary on all days where he does not pitch
• receives major league salary in games where he does pitch
• does not receive credit towards his pension for time as the 27th man
• does not have to be optioned to the minors after his time as a 27th man is complete
• A 28th man is allowed to be carried on the roster for a doubleheader situation under the same rules as the current 27 man rule.
• Position players are no longer allowed to pitch in a ML game unless the ML team has used, as a pitcher, every pitcher on their active roster not counting the starting pitchers they used in their previous 2 games.  

Challenge Rules

Maybe it is because I am old and my mind doesn't work that fast any more but I think we need to make some changes to the challenge system to help managers of a certain age.

• Every team gets 2 'evaluation periods' of 45 seconds each during the game during which time they need to decide whether they are going to challenge.  Teams can challenge within 15 seconds of a play without using one of these evaluation periods.  If they ever lose a challenge in a game the evaluation periods, obviously go away.
• Like in football, the team that wants to challenge  (or that wants to use an evaluation period) should throw a yellow flag/towel onto the field to signify this.  The hand gesture of earphones will still be used to signify that they want to actually challenge.
• I think check swings should be challengeable except in cases where the batter is trying to avoid being hit by a pitched ball.  The latter should still be umpire discretion.
• If they are not already, I think fan interference should be challengeable.  Player interference should remain the discretion of the umpires.
• I think MLB should review every manager ejection over the past three years to see if there are any other areas that are not currently challengeable that should be made challengeable.