Nobody is being selected in my Rule 5 drafts

[nymetsfan5]

Originally Posted by Curve Ball Dave

IRL the Rule 5 Draft isn't that big of a deal for the very reasons stated in this thread: slim pickings. Only a small handful of guys make rosters this way because the players worth protecting, by and large, are protected. As another posted stated, few picks in this draft means the AI is protecting the right players.

Even still teams do take shots on players. On average like 8-10 players get drafted.

[itsmb8]

Originally Posted by doubles

How many teams have full 40-man rosters? That could be a factor as well. You can't take anyone if your 40 is full.

That could be the issue many are having. Teams might be protecting all of their players using up all 40 roster spots, and now they can't take anyone because their roster is full.

[KBLover]

Currently doing the Rule 5 now in a fictional league.

Four players have been chosen including a 60 HR Power, 60 Eye hitter that's got little else going for him (editor Pot. ratings: 79 BABIP, 40 Av.K, 122 Gap, 146 Power, 121 Eye). He's 27.

There was expansion this year and one of the expansion teams picked a 24-year-old utility infielder with a decent bat and average, but adaptable, infield defense. He's also a plus baserunner.

I'm going to select a 24-year-old southpaw reliever that's got command but fringe pitching skills. I'm hoping it's been a playing time issue - only 102 major league innings in 3 years, not a lot of minors innings. He was taken in the 109th round of the initial draft. 45/45/70 ratings by my scout (I don't want to look at the editor for my own guys).

Second round - expansion teams make another pick each, and another infielder goes. I'll grab a SP with a not-bad-for-a-pitcher bat and try him as 5th starter in spring. Last year I just returned the player I picked in S.T.


More players taken this time because of expansion but usually I see 4-6 picks.

Checking the 40-man rosters, 17 of the 32 teams had full 40-man rosters. Many others had one or two spots that they probably didn't want to fill up in the draft (maybe they have better minor leaguers in their system, FA's they are pursuing, etc.).

The expansion teams took 3 players each, and, of course, their 40-man rosters are not nearly full.

Of the non-expansion AI teams that made picks - two took one player that did indeed filled up their roster, and they were also high in the order (top-14). The other team was lower in the order like I was and they took one player and had 5 slots open.

I rarely see NO picks. Four to six sounds like it's "too low" from what others are saying, but I'm good with it. This is the first year in the league's five offseasons that I made 2 picks.

[OrangeP47]

Originally Posted by itsmb8

That could be the issue many are having. Teams might be protecting all of their players using up all 40 roster spots, and now they can't take anyone because their roster is full.

I'm not having this problem (people are still getting chosen in my Rule 5 drafts) but in my experience, at least with 21, the AI *does* like to run their teams right up to the 40 man limit. We can say that's because they're protecting players, but personally I think it's just the AI being the AI Granted, I'm not complaining, but it's not how *I* would manage a team, as evident by my massive frustration when I hop teams mid-save and inherit a mess that I have to sort out without much in the way of options because the 40 man roster is so clogged up.

[wallewalls]

I remember in previous versions that there was so much talent available in the Rule V, and it needed to be tuned down some so teams would better protect the obvious guys that needed to be protected. The best players I've seen in the Rule V this year have mostly been relievers, but with obvious flaws, and other players that are maybe 45/45 overall/potential, so not exactly the most desirable players. I would greatly prefer that than what we saw in previous versions, but if it's an issue of the AI just filling their 40 man just for the sake of filling their 40 man, and doing so with players that are poorly rated, than I agree that would be an issue. I don't know that to be the case though, perhaps someone should take a closer look.

[jaguar8311]

Originally Posted by wallewalls

I remember in previous versions that there was so much talent available in the Rule V, and it needed to be tuned down some so teams would better protect the obvious guys that needed to be protected. The best players I've seen in the Rule V this year have mostly been relievers, but with obvious flaws, and other players that are maybe 45/45 overall/potential, so not exactly the most desirable players. I would greatly prefer that than what we saw in previous versions, but if it's an issue of the AI just filling their 40 man just for the sake of filling their 40 man, and doing so with players that are poorly rated, than I agree that would be an issue. I don't know that to be the case though, perhaps someone should take a closer look.

That's good news. I've been waiting to start my typical Jays save until the 2nd patch, so I'll be starting today, and one of the first things I do is turn off the Rule 5 draft for this reason. I feel guilty about robbing teams through it.

[SirMichaelJordan]

Originally Posted by wallewalls

I remember in previous versions that there was so much talent available in the Rule V, and it needed to be tuned down some so teams would better protect the obvious guys that needed to be protected. The best players I've seen in the Rule V this year have mostly been relievers, but with obvious flaws, and other players that are maybe 45/45 overall/potential, so not exactly the most desirable players. I would greatly prefer that than what we saw in previous versions, but if it's an issue of the AI just filling their 40 man just for the sake of filling their 40 man, and doing so with players that are poorly rated, than I agree that would be an issue. I don't know that to be the case though, perhaps someone should take a closer look.

This was the case in previous versions even with AI leaving good prospects unprotected. However, different settings gave different results when it came to 40 man management. I’m sure it’s the same issue here.

[Daniel_09]

Originally Posted by wallewalls

I remember in previous versions that there was so much talent available in the Rule V, and it needed to be tuned down some so teams would better protect the obvious guys that needed to be protected. The best players I've seen in the Rule V this year have mostly been relievers, but with obvious flaws, and other players that are maybe 45/45 overall/potential, so not exactly the most desirable players. I would greatly prefer that than what we saw in previous versions, but if it's an issue of the AI just filling their 40 man just for the sake of filling their 40 man, and doing so with players that are poorly rated, than I agree that would be an issue. I don't know that to be the case though, perhaps someone should take a closer look.

That's absolutely true, in the 2020 Draft the majority of the players were relievers, and only Baddoo is making a case for the start of the season.

If the AI is protecting the prospects, is doing a great job.

[RchW]

Slim pickings should be the default expectation for Rule 5. In my MLB clone fictionals I get some variation from year to year and occasionally pick one myself. Given that I've played close to 1000 seasons my conclusion is that the module works well.

[fcabanski]

Here's the issue I find. For Rule 5 and in other aspects of the game, the CPU GM's far under value high contact,. high avoid K's guys. They're cheap and easy to get. It's easy to load a team with these guys, even some with good defense. I have a few who hit .300+, OBP high 300's, low 400's, not much power but great at the top and bottom third of the lineup.

[KBLover]

Originally Posted by fcabanski

Here's the issue I find. For Rule 5 and in other aspects of the game, the CPU GM's far under value high contact,. high avoid K's guys. They're cheap and easy to get.

That's not been true for me. I wish it was.

I have one: 70/60/35/45/75 and he was not cheap to get and certainly not cheap to keep (one of the top salaries in the league).

There's no way I could afford to load my team with guys like this. I'd love it, but it's not happening. My $180M budget would get overwhelmed really quick.

Only way I'm going to load my team with these is to develop them...and then cry in 3 years when they start eating me out of budget room

And these kinds of players are certainly not in my Rule 5 draft. Literally, the highest contact rating the last Rule 5 I did was 55, there was one, and he was snatched. The rest were 45's and same for Av.Ks.

[RchW]

Originally Posted by fcabanski

Here's the issue I find. For Rule 5 and in other aspects of the game, the CPU GM's far under value high contact,. high avoid K's guys. They're cheap and easy to get. It's easy to load a team with these guys, even some with good defense. I have a few who hit .300+, OBP high 300's, low 400's, not much power but great at the top and bottom third of the lineup.

What type of league? This bears no resemblance to any of my MLB clone fictional saves.

I think there may be different drivers to the AI based on league type.

[eas9898]

I'm convinced it's broken somehow. Maybe it's because the rosters are all full, I don't know.

But to test, I left a 2.5*/4.5* 22 y/o 2B available, and nobody drafted him. That should not happen.

[RchW]

Originally Posted by eas9898

I'm convinced it's broken somehow. Maybe it's because the rosters are all full, I don't know.

But to test, I left a 2.5*/4.5* 22 y/o 2B available, and nobody drafted him. That should not happen.

I'd have to see more than that to be convinced.

[eas9898]

Originally Posted by RchW

I'd have to see more than that to be convinced.

If 6 seasons of zero Rule 5 picks, and not even picking a young 2.5*/4.5* IF is not enough to convince you, then nothing is going to convince you.

[SirSaab]

I just had my 2022 Rule 5 draft. Definitely players being picked. There were 5 picked in total. Ok, four were picked by me, but still... I’m in a rebuild and picked two fringey relievers that may be able to help out, as well as a catcher and Reynaldo Lopez, because what the heck, let’s see how he does at Oracle Park.

[RchW]

Originally Posted by eas9898

If 6 seasons of zero Rule 5 picks, and not even picking a young 2.5*/4.5* IF is not enough to convince you, then nothing is going to convince you.

My interest is seeing what the AI team had that made him expendable.

[SirMichaelJordan]

Originally Posted by SirSaab

I just had my 2022 Rule 5 draft. Definitely players being picked. There were 5 picked in total. Ok, four were picked by me, but still... I’m in a rebuild and picked two fringey relievers that may be able to help out, as well as a catcher and Reynaldo Lopez, because what the heck, let’s see how he does at Oracle Park.

So the AI picked 1 player?

[SirSaab]

Originally Posted by SirMichaelJordan

So the AI picked 1 player?

Correct. While it did actually happen, the structure of my post was a swing and miss at a joke about the situation.

FWIW, I think the “full 40-man rosters” hypothesis is on the mark. If you go through rosters (in my save at least), there are a lot more high-potential, fringe Rule-5 picks protected than there seemed to be last year.

On the whole, I think the issue (if it is one) is a combination of the AI filling 40-man rosters, whilst also not being probe to add as much fringe talent to the active roster as was seen in the past (I’m thinking of the “top prospect left unprotected while 1-star guy sits on 40-man roster” posts that were popular for OOTP21).

[RchW]

So a fake Rule 5 draft?