The Nationals will have the first selection in the Rule 5 draft on December 11 (background about the Rule 5 draft).
The basics are that a team with an open spot on their 40-man roster can select any unprotected player who meets the service time requirements. Given that the Nationals have 39/40, they can make one selection to remain on their 25-man roster for nearly the entire season. (There is also a Triple-A and Double-A portion to the Rule 5 draft, but typically that involves the shifting around of roster filler type players).
Fortunately for me, Baseball Analysts has done the heavy lifting in analyzing the available arms and bats, so I am going to piggy-back off of their lists.
I’ll start with the bats. There are two names that jump out at me from the available hitters:
- Jordan Brown 1B from Cleveland … the 24-year old Brown (25 on 12/18) was a 2005 4th round selection by the Indians as an OF out of the University of Arizona. Over the last two seasons, Brown has seen more time at 1B than in the OF and it looks like his future is there. He is a lefthanded bat but does not have the power a team typically looks for at 1B. His 18 combined homers over the past two years are not prolific by any stretch of the imagination (though to be fair Buffalo and Akron play slightly less than a fair park for home runs … Akron actually is a bit tougher [data here]). But Akron BBA ranked him as the Indians #7 prospect just last season. Their scouting report read, “Brown profiles as a first baseman in the mold of Sean Casey or Lyle Overbay.” He is not the impact bat at 1B that someone like Mark Teixeira or Adam Dunn would be, but he is an interesting option if the Nationals have any concerns with the availability of Nick Johnson in 2009.
- James Skelton CA from Detroit … Another catcher might seem like an unusual option given the presence of Jesus Flores, but the 23-year old Skelton is intriguing as a lefthanded counterpart to Flores. He was a 14th round selection by the Tigers in the 2004 draft and has batted right around 300 for his minor league career. I doubt the Nationals will want to have two young catchers on the roster, but Skelton’s LH bat is something not typically found in the Rule 5 draft.
They are already chock full of outfielders and the middle infielders mentioned by Hulet at Baseball Analysts are interesting but I’m not sure whether the Nationals are going to tie up four 40-man spots with young and unproven guys (to go along with Anderson Hernandez, Alberto Gonzalez, & Ian Desmond).
If the Nats do make a selection (and my gut says they will) they seem more likely to take an arm from an attractive pool. The guys I like the best are:
- RHRP Eduardo Morlan from Tampa Bay … this is the guy that most sites out there are targeting as the best available player in the draft. The 22-year old was part of the Matt Garza/Delmon Young trade from last season. He throws in the low-90s and has struck out 382 batters to 120 walks in 321 minor league innings. The 6′2″ 220-lb righthander has made eight appearances in the Puerto Rican winter league with a 1-0 record with 2 saves, striking out twelve and walking three over eleven innings pitched.
- LHSP Chuck Lofgren from Cleveland … starters are typically not selected in the draft given that they were unprotected because their organization did not consider them ready to fill in as a major league starter in the immediate. The 22- year old Lofgren (23 in January) might be an exception a rebuilding team like the Nats can take. Drafted out of high school in the 4th round of the 2004 draft, Lofgren fits the mold of a solid back of the rotation starter. BBA had him ranked as the Indians #2 prospect last season. Their scouting report read “Lofgren adds and subtracts with his full arsenal of pitches, beginning with a fastball that ranges anywhere from 87-93 mph and tops out at 95. He added a slider in 2006 and developed it into a true out pitch last year. He also throws a spike curve in the upper 70s and an average changeup. An imposing presence on the mound, he gets downhill easily and pounds the bottom of the strike zone. The Indians love his makeup.” He had a terrible 2008 where he was 2-6 with a 5.99 ERA and 1.69 WHIPfor Double-A Akron. The Nats could use another lefthanded option in their rotation if Odalis Perez does not return.
- LHRP Jose Lugo from Minnesota… Lugo throws a sinking mid-90s fastball. The 24-year old has struck out 295 batters over 300 minor league innings with 124 walks. It would be a huge jump for him from High A to the majors but the Nationals could use a lefthanded power arm out of the bullpen to complement Mike Hinckley.
One other name that has been drawing interest is RHRP Pedro Strop. Strop is a converted shortstopwho was claimed off of waivers by the Texas Rangers from the Colorado Rockies despite undergoing surgery for a fracture in his right elbow. Reports are that he will be able to resume throwing in early 2009. He is all about potential, ranking as BBA’s #9 prospect for the Rockies in 2008. His scouting report, “Having pitched just 81 pro innings, Strop has a fresh arm that delivers power stuff. His fastball ranges from 92-96 mph, while his slider runs from 85-88 mph. He can make hitters look silly with his splitter, giving him three swing-and-miss pitches. He has adapted quickly to the nuances of pitching, most likely because of the feel for the game he showed at shortstop, and is an elite fielder, another sign of his shortstop background.” I’d be more intrigued by that choice if the Nationals had a couple of Rule 5 spots but it seems too risky for their one and only selection.
If I were to rank order, my choices would be:
- Eduardo Morlan
- Jose Lugo
- Jordan Brown
- Chuck Lofgren
- Pedro Strop
- James Skelton
#1 by Gal Revels in Pee - December 1st, 2008 at 13:29
What about Donald Veal? Wouldn’t he be a perfect Rule V pick?
24 years old, hard thrower, former top prospect. Could probably be an effective LOOGY next year at worst.
I can’t believe they’d even look at Brown with Whitney and Eldred in the system now.
#2 by Tofu Dog - December 1st, 2008 at 13:53
Morlan would be a great pickup. He was a highly regarded part of the Minnesota trade and pitched at AA last season so the jump is within reason. I don’t know Veal, but as much as Manny Acta uses his bullpen he needs another arm. Morlan is still young enough and–in the past–has been considered strong enough to progress into a closer role. He is far enough along that spending a year on the MLB roster works, although his 3.65 ERA last year for the Biscuits is worrying. He should be able to contribute, but would have some rough spots for sure.
#3 by Dick - December 1st, 2008 at 14:25
I’m sure Mike Rizzo will weigh in with his thoughts about Matt Torra!
#4 by Willy - December 1st, 2008 at 14:51
I wish that they had another spot, since this looks like a good crop this year. I think that it has to be an arm. I like Morlan #1, followed by Pedro Figueroa (although admittedly not very far along) and Lugo. Maybe Lofgren, if they felt they could hide him in the bullpen for a year while fixing him enough to get back to starting in 2010.
#5 by Kirkie001 - December 1st, 2008 at 14:57
The other thing that the Nats have in their favour is, of course, the first pick in the draft. Given Capt’n Leatherpants’ predilictions for thinking outside the box, I wonder if he’d pick someone in order to trade them elsewhere?
#6 by Terry Byrom - December 1st, 2008 at 15:25
Brian,
Again, you’d think I would know this but… why does Skelton have to be taken in the MLB portion? He’s never played about AA, so why can’t he be taken in the MiLB portion?
Chuck Lofgren has struggled badly the past two years with control. He was a very high draft pick, but has not lived up to expectations. As a side note, he went to the same high school as Tom Brady, Gregg Jeffries, Lynn Swann and Barry Bonds – Serra High School in San Mateo, CA (Bay Area).
I saw Skelton in six games, very thin, good athlete, can’t imagine he is going to keep being a catcher just because of his size.
I’m not sure Brown is a guy that would be a big leaguer for the Nats or not.
#7 by Brian Oliver - December 1st, 2008 at 15:43
Terry – Someone like Skelton would have to be selected in the major league portion because his service time dictates that he has to be placed on the 40-man roster. There is a lag between becoming Rule 5 eligible and becoming a minor league free agent (typically two-three years). What the Rule 5 does is allow a player to find a better circumstance if he is blocked in his current organization.
Where they have played level-wise does not come into play. It’s based strictly on the time between when a player was drafted and how long they have played.
#8 by Brian Oliver - December 1st, 2008 at 15:44
The minor league portion of the R5 allows additional players to be protected beyond the 40-man. None of the names you will read as likely picks would be unprotected for the minor league portion.
#9 by expo_ram - December 1st, 2008 at 16:04
Good stuff Brian, although I agree with GRiP on Veal. I always thought it would be Morlan or Veal depending on if they thought they needed a RHP or LHP.
On a side note, did anyone notice that Lo Duca and Ayala are both Type B FA?!?!
#10 by Terry Byrom - December 1st, 2008 at 16:06
Thanks Brian. I’m not sure I’d take any of the players I’ve seen to keep on the MLB roster all season.
#11 by Brian Oliver - December 1st, 2008 at 16:30
expo_ram – Those are the free agents that will likely not get offers. The salary they’d likely get when they rushed to accept the arbitration offer would be ridiculous
#12 by Pilchard - December 1st, 2008 at 17:54
Don’t forget that it’s pretty common for teams selecting at the top of the Rule V draft to trade their pick for MLB ready player. With the top pick, there may be a couple of MLB teams that covet one of the available pool of players and be willing to give up someone on the roster (at very deep position) for a top Rule V pick.
#13 by BinM - December 1st, 2008 at 18:34
Lofgren sounds like a possible St. Claire project (convert him to a LHLR/MR to complement Hinckley). That would give Martis or Estrada another year in the minors to work on a third pitch / control.
#14 by estuartj - December 2nd, 2008 at 10:46
Does anyone know if we can still make room for another rule V draftee as this point or are rosters “ocked” for the draft?
I think Morlan is a lock for the 1st selection because bullpen is an area of need and the easiest position to “hide” a player.
If we had 2 slots open and he’s still available I’d love to grab Skelton. Backup catcher is the least utilized spot on your 25 man roster and potentially having a lefty alternative bat to Jesus Flores makes a lot of sense, especially if you have another “emergency” catcher elsewhere so you can safely use the backup catcher as a pinch hitter. Willingham can catch in a pinch, right?
#15 by Brian Oliver - December 2nd, 2008 at 10:57
estuartj – The rosters are locked, I believe. The only exception might be a trade of someone off of the 40-man but I’d imagine that the other teams are going to wait until after the draft.
The Nats could have someone else select a player and trade for them after the draft with the same R5 requirements holding.
#16 by Marc - December 2nd, 2008 at 11:21
Lofgren to me sounds too much like just about every other starting prospect we have in the system right now – some potential, probably a high-end 3 at best, more likely a back-of-the-rotation guy. That’s every arm we have in the upper levels of the system except maybe Zimmermann. If we’re going to take a flier on a maybe-not-quite-ready for MLB guy, let’s try Martis or Mock or Chico and sort out who’s got value and who doesn’t.
Sort of the same deal with Brown to me – I think I’d rather see an OF bat who seems squeezed out of the rotation handed a 1b mitt, or even Rhinehart and his .990 AFL OPS or Len Davis and his 1.015 OPS handed a 1b mitt. May as well see what we’ve got, since Brown doesn’t seem to be lightyears better.
Morlan seems like an interesting option – bullpen arms are a little easier to hide if it turns out he can’t cut it, so the risk is a little lower, and since we’re going in to ‘09 with such an unsettled bullpen anyway, it may make sense to have as many arms as possible in that mix.
#17 by Marc - December 2nd, 2008 at 11:41
Brian – separate question on the Arizona league – what’s the common wisdom on it being a pitcher’s league or a hitter’s league? I was really worried about Nats pitchers ERAs (and really excited about Rhinehart and Davis’ OPS numbers) until I looked, and each team seems to have at least 3-4 and sometimes 6-7 players who are OPSing 1.000+. Is it sort of like the PCL?
By the way, don’t look know (and not to raise the he-who-must-not-be-named issue), but Smoak is OPS-ing 1.056 in 51 ABs for the other Peoria team. I’m not saying, I’m just saying. =)
#18 by Ryan Sullivan - December 2nd, 2008 at 11:47
Morlan seems like a slam dunk… he looked solid in the futures game last summer and his numbers look good for a 22 year old in AA- and from what has been written, it was a down year for him. Sickels had him as a B prospect before this season and he was #15 prospect according to BA.
I like this kid and I hope we grab him to fill out our middle relief.
#19 by estuartj - December 2nd, 2008 at 12:22
How many guys have been taken in the past few years in rule V? The chances of any of these guys being still around for a second round seems remote anyway.
It would be just like trader jim to have a side deal in place to have someone else pick a guy, if available and then “flip” him for an existing player. Say maybe ARI grabs Skelton and we pick him up for Belliard. Just a for instance.
Do I have the jist of the rules right?
#20 by Brian Oliver - December 2nd, 2008 at 12:35
From what I can recall, the AZ Fall League typically is more hitter friendly. Pitchers don’t go long (2-3IP max) and often just to work on a pitch or two.
You can look at past R5 drafts here
There have been some solid choices over the past couple of seasons (No one in particular from 2007; Joakim Soria & Josh Hamilton stand out above Flores from 2006; Dan Uggla in 2005; Shane Victorino in 2004)
#21 by Brian Oliver - December 2nd, 2008 at 12:36
and the Nationals could make a deal with someone like the Pirates to grab a guy and flip him to them for something … typically it ends up as cash, but it could be a player. I doubt it would be the caliber of a Belliard, though.
#22 by Terry Byrom - December 2nd, 2008 at 12:44
Well I would take Luke Montz as a back-up catcher over Skelton without even thinking about it. Montz made himself into a much better defensive catcher last season, and can hit for power.
The AFL is very much a hitters league. If I recall (this is off the top of my head) two or three years ago all of the hitters but a couple batted over .300. Big(ger) ballparks, warm/hot weather, and pitchers running out of gas and not going many innings all contributing to it being a hitter’s league.
#23 by Scott Wrightson - December 2nd, 2008 at 14:12
How about Adam Dunn not getting offered arbitration? Will the Nats switch their pitch from Texeira to Dunn knowing he’ll cost less money over less years and they won’t have to give up a second round draft choice to get him?
#24 by Mark L - December 2nd, 2008 at 14:20
The Texeira talk has always been more P.R. than substance. The D-Backs not offering arbitration to Dunn is a game changer for the Nats. He wasn’t worth losing all those picks before, but now there is no downside at all. Braden Looper wasn’t offered arb either and with St. Clair around could be a another guy to fill out the rotation, certainly better than Odalis Perez.
#25 by estuartj - December 2nd, 2008 at 14:31
I don’t think Teixeira is a smoke screen. Chico at NJ conjectures that kasten & Bowden believe Teixeira is a team changing player and a once in a blue moon opportunity. They apparently have sold Mark Lerner on this fact and he seems willing to break the bank to make an offer that will be very competitive with the big dogs like LAA, LAD, BOS & NYY.
I think it will come down to what Teixeira’s priority is, gross dollars or dollars/season. I can see us going to $200/10, but will an offer of $150/6 ($25mil/season) or 157.5/7 (22.5mil/season) be more appealing. My guess is Boras wants gross dollars guaranteed, but will push for opt outs after maybe season 5-7 so he can re-hit the FA market at 33-34 for one more big payday without risking his total contract value.
#26 by estuartj - December 2nd, 2008 at 14:33
As for Dunn I think his not being offered arbitration makes him more marketable and thus more expensive (and thus less likely to come to DC?) than if he was offered. Now all those teams with unprotected first round picks will take another look at Dunn…
#27 by Pilchard - December 2nd, 2008 at 14:46
I think that the Nats interest in Texiare is legit. That said, I fear that the Nats are going to miss on Texiera and sign Dunn. Gag.
#28 by Willy - December 2nd, 2008 at 15:11
While Mark L said that the non arb offer to Dunn was a gamechanger for him (Dunn), which I agree with, I wonder if it isn’t bigger than that. If you look at all the recent non arbitration-offering decisions, it looks like MLB front offices are running scared over economics. That should mean that there may be several competent free agent big leaguers available at very cheap prices, when all is said and done, and also some interesting salary dumps. This may be an opportunity to improve the MLB team without sacrificing too much economically in terms of dollars or years, or delaying the rebuild of the farm system. While I would be fine with Dunn, so long as it is no more than 3/$40m or thereabouts, I think that the real value may be people like Braden Looper, Brad Penny, Jaime Moyer, Juan Rivera, Joe Crede. All of whom were not offered arbitration, have some issues about them making them something of a risk, yet have demonstrated past quality MLB performance, and so may come at very low 1 year contracts, or 1 year plus a team option for the second year. The concern, of course, is why wouldn’t the Lerners be just as scared as everyone else (if I am reading it correctly), especially being a group that made its money in real estate, which usually means that they are still holding a lot of fallen-value RE. My hope is that (a) their payroll is so low compared to their baseball revenues that they could comfortably add $15m or so in payroll without coming close to going in the red, and/or (b) their concerns over the poor MLB product further impacting attendance.
#29 by BinM - December 4th, 2008 at 20:11
One of the interesting things (to me, at least) is how the Nationals lost nine players in the 2006 Rule V draft; talk about the vultures picking the bones clean.
#30 by Ric - December 5th, 2008 at 18:22
An interesting possibility for Rule V would be Jay Sborz from the Tigers. He’s from Fairfax Co., was a supplemental first rounder out of HS (Langley), but experienced injury problems. He bounced back strong last year in hiA after being converted from starter to reliever and getting healthy. He was known for having a live arm, and reports say it came back last year. Probably a reach for the MLB portion of Rule V, but it could prove to be a worthwile long-term investment (even if at the expense of the 2009 bullpen).
#31 by Tom - December 6th, 2008 at 17:38
Only if Sborz is available for the minor league Rule V draft.