Post by JakesSnakes on Mar 31, 2009 2:14:21 GMT -5
According to MLB: “A player shall be considered a rookie unless, during a previous season or seasons, he has (a) exceeded 130 at-bats or 50 innings pitched in the Major Leagues; ..."
Since we have had difficulties defining what a prospect is and who is eligible, that definition is the simplest one to use. If at the beginning of a year (any year, including 2009) a player has totalled 130 AB or 50 IP, he is NOT eligible for the farm team at any time. Thus, if Justin Upton (who has had over 130 ABs) was to be sent down to his team's AAA team, he is NOT eligible. MLB no longer considers him a rookie, so we should not either. Under our old definition we would be allowing some guys to be on the farm team with more MLB experience and banning others with less simply because of their opening day 2009 roster status. Since MLB treats them equally (whether they meet the 130/50 threshold), so should we. If Rookie A made his opening day team but rode the pine all season, he was not eligible under our old definition to be on the farm team even though he is still a rookie (per the MLB definition). If Rookie B were sent down for the first month and then called up and pulled a Ryan Braun, he would still have been eligible for the farm team. That would have been an unintended result. They BOTH would be eligible for the farm team because they began the season under 130/50.
THEREFORE, if you have ANY player who has under a total of 130 ABs or 50 IP in MLB at the beginning of a season, he is eligible to be moved down to your farm team regardless of his status with his MLB team. If a player accumulates 130/50 MLB experience, he is still eligible for THAT SEASON ONLY, and then cannot be on the farm team in any subsequent year. If a player begins 2011 with 125 MLB AB's, he can spend any part of 2011 on your farm team (even if he is pulling a Ryan Braun type rookie year). However, once he goes over 130/50 total MLB experience, the following year after that number is met he is NO LONGER ELIGIBLE for the farm team.
Does this make sense? Please ask any questions.
Since we have had difficulties defining what a prospect is and who is eligible, that definition is the simplest one to use. If at the beginning of a year (any year, including 2009) a player has totalled 130 AB or 50 IP, he is NOT eligible for the farm team at any time. Thus, if Justin Upton (who has had over 130 ABs) was to be sent down to his team's AAA team, he is NOT eligible. MLB no longer considers him a rookie, so we should not either. Under our old definition we would be allowing some guys to be on the farm team with more MLB experience and banning others with less simply because of their opening day 2009 roster status. Since MLB treats them equally (whether they meet the 130/50 threshold), so should we. If Rookie A made his opening day team but rode the pine all season, he was not eligible under our old definition to be on the farm team even though he is still a rookie (per the MLB definition). If Rookie B were sent down for the first month and then called up and pulled a Ryan Braun, he would still have been eligible for the farm team. That would have been an unintended result. They BOTH would be eligible for the farm team because they began the season under 130/50.
THEREFORE, if you have ANY player who has under a total of 130 ABs or 50 IP in MLB at the beginning of a season, he is eligible to be moved down to your farm team regardless of his status with his MLB team. If a player accumulates 130/50 MLB experience, he is still eligible for THAT SEASON ONLY, and then cannot be on the farm team in any subsequent year. If a player begins 2011 with 125 MLB AB's, he can spend any part of 2011 on your farm team (even if he is pulling a Ryan Braun type rookie year). However, once he goes over 130/50 total MLB experience, the following year after that number is met he is NO LONGER ELIGIBLE for the farm team.
Does this make sense? Please ask any questions.