Rule 5 Draft Fixes Would Benefit Players, Add Intrigue For MLB Teams

The best potential Rule 5 picks are usually a mixture of ready-to-go role player position players and less-appreciated relievers. But nowadays, with fewer players to worry about thanks to the 165-player roster limits and the faster speed at which players are being promoted, it seems like the 50-50 protection calls have become 75-25 calls. Teams are now protecting anyone they had even a slight worry about losing.

Jake Mangum, Travis Adams, Chase Lee, Jack Dreyer and Tyler Owens were all protected this year. None of them are household names, but all would have been interesting Rule 5 picks.

Now, I’m not saying that the Rule 5 eligibility rules should be changed to make the Rule 5 Draft more interesting. As much as I may selfishly want that, I acknowledge it’s not a reasonable or persuasive argument.

I’m saying the Rule 5 eligibility rules should be changed because they are failing to produce the decision point they are designed to create. The Rule 5 draft is designed to provide opportunities for players who have MLB ability but are blocked within their current organization. It also provides a key moment at which teams must decide how much they actually like a player.

Even if he doesn’t reach the big leagues immediately, a player added to the 40-man roster immediately gets a better quality of life, from spring training invites to the MLB club to higher salaries in the minor leagues. Teams are understandably risk averse to losing talent. The Rule 5 draft has long provided a trigger point that forces teams to show if they really do believe in a player or not.

A system where college players faced a roster-protection decision after three seasons, high school players after four seasons and international signees (who signed before they turned 18) after five seasons would better reflect the reality of modern professional baseball.

Until 2007, the Rule 5 draft eligibility rules stated that college players (and high school, junior college or international signees who signed as 19-year-olds) had three seasons before they became Rule 5 eligible. Anyone who signed at 18-years-old or younger had four seasons before they were Rule 5 eligible.

In 2007, teams were given an extra year, pushing those eligibility decisions to four years (19+ at signing) and five years (for 18-year-olds and younger).

That was at a time when there were complex levels, advanced rookie leagues, short-season leagues and four levels of full-season minors. Now there’s just the Dominican Summer League, the U.S. complex leagues and four full-season levels of the minors. Players are moving faster, partly because, without short-season levels, teams have no choice.

And that means by the time a roster protection decision arrives, the decision has usually already been made. It’s pretty obvious.

Eleven of the 14 college first rounders from 2021 had already made their MLB debuts before they reached the roster protection deadline this November. Two more were added at the deadline, leaving only Will Bednar unprotected. 

Four of the 11 first-time eligible high school first rounders from 2020 have already reached the majors. Of the other seven, only three were added to 40-man rosters. For the other four, it was pretty clear a year ago that they would not be added.

But now let’s tweak it to look at the hypothetical decisions teams would face with one fewer year before Rule 5 eligibility. Of the 15 college first rounders from 2022, four have made it to the majors already. Several others like Chase DeLauter and Cade Horton would be easy calls to be added to 40-man rosters.

But the decisions for players like Jacob Berry, Kevin Parada, Gabriel Hughes, Eric Brown and even Spencer Jones might be a little tougher. Similarly, a decision to add Marcelo Mayer, Andrew Painter, Chase Petty or Carson Williams to the 40-man roster would take two minutes if 2021 high school first rounders reached Rule 5 eligibility this offseason. But for others, it would be a real decision to be made.

The current imbalance in which a 16-year-old Dominican signee faces a decision by the time they turn 21—and often have just had one or two seasons of full-season ball in the U.S.—while a 23-year-old college signee doesn’t face a roster decision until he turns 27 has long made no sense. But under the current system, it makes even less sense. Even a year before they will face a Rule 5 roster protection decision, every first round college pick from the 2022 draft has already reached Double-A. Most did so in 2023. Many have reached Triple-A. These are players who are pretty well known at this point.

For Rule 5 purposes, they are treated as being on the same timetable as the January 2021 international signing class. While Jackson Chourio has leapt to the majors from that class, the more typical progression is the path of interesting prospects like Twins shortstop Danny De Andrade. De Andrade has played just 29 games above Low-A and zero games in Double-A. Rays shortstop Gregory Barrios played 100 games in High-A last year while turning 20. For Rule 5 protection rules purposes, he’s considered a contemporary of 2022 first rounder Zach Neto, a 23-year-old who has 239 games in the major leagues.

Catcher Thayron Liranzo, a 2021 Dodgers signee who is now 21, will face a Rule 5 decision next year. He’s moved quickly, but he still has yet to play in Double-A and has just 256 MiLB games played. His Rule 5 decision date is the same as that of Athletics 2022 first-round catcher Daniel Susac. Susac will turn 24 early in the 2025 season, and he’s played 227 MiLB games (with 101 games in Double-A), as well as an additional 125 games of Division I baseball at Arizona.

The Rule 5 eligibility rules don’t need to be blown up, but they could use a tweak. It would benefit numerous players, and as a nice side effect, it would hopefully add some life to the Rule 5 draft.