Rule 5 Draft Results

Just 12 players were taken in the major-league phase of the Rule 5 draft, but two of them were Nationals — RHP Brad Meyers and OF Erik Komatsu.

The Nationals passed with the 16th pick.

Meyers was the expected choice, but Komatsu was the wildcard and was actually taken ahead of Meyers by the Cardinals with the 22nd pick. The Yankees took Meyers with the 29th pick.

Gut reaction: We’re going to see at one of these players returned in early March (Komatsu), the other by late March (Meyers). For their sakes, I hope I’m wrong, but the odds are in my favor.

In the AAA phase the Nationals acquired C Beau Seabury from the Colorado Rockies, a 26-year-old that has never played above High-A. Much will be made of his UVA connection. Offensively, Seabury has been a late bloomer, having cracked the plateaus .250/.300/.400 just twice in his career: his rookie season as a 22-year-old in the Pioneer League and this past season as a 26-year-old in California League (the minors’ equivalent to Colorado).

In the AA phase, the Nationals selected RHP Matthew Buschmann from the San Diego Padres, a 27-year-old that has languished in AA and AAA for the past three seasons, bouncing between the bullpen and the rotation. Buschmann was originally drafted in 2006 out of Vanderbilt.

At first blush, these two picks resemble a replacement for Brian Peacock and a Erik Arnesen-like swingman. As stated in the reviews, the Rule 5 draft is not what it used to be, But thankfully for the Nats, its importance has changed from being a hope of getting someone for the bench in the majors to someone to plug a gap in the minors.

Author: Luke Erickson

Since 2009, Luke Erickson has been chief writer, editor, and bottle-washer of Potomac is his home base as a season-ticket holder, but he has visited every affiliate north of Florida at least once, with multiple trips to Hagerstown and Harrisburg.

11 thoughts on “Rule 5 Draft Results”

  1. Somewhat predictable losses. Both guys were guys I thought we should have protected .

    What I don’t get is this; we’re at 37/40 on the 40-man AND there’s room to DFA/assign guys to make room if we do sign FAs.

    I just don’t agree with allowing these guys to go so easily. Yes, the likelihood is that they’ll be returned, but why take the chance? We drafted, developed and promoted Meyers because we valued him, for years, so why suddenly is he of no value? Meanwhile, Komatsu was valued at some point and could be an option in CF for this team clearly … so why take this chance?

    I guess that’s why we’re not the GM. 🙂

    1. It seems to me that there may be one advantage to leaving borderline guys unprotected rather than putting them on the 40 man only to remove them when you make your roster moves later on in the offseason.

      When you cut a guy off the 40-man (like we did with Cole Kimball), he is likely lost to the organization forever if somebody claims him off waivers and can stash him on their 40 man roster. When a guy is left unprotected but picked up in the Rule 5, there’s a high probability that he gets returned anyway because he can’t stick on somebody’s 25-man roster.

      Don’t know if that makes sense, but it may explain why a team like the Nats that was expecting to sign Buerhle and maybe one or two additional players (CF, bench help) would want to choose to expose some people rather than fill up to 40 and have to make cuts when there were players to add to the 40-man.

      1. But its 6 of one, half a dozen of the other in some ways, no? We add Meyers and Komatsu, guarantee we don’t lose them in 2011, and then if they’re not really in our future plans you waive them in 2012 anyway. Kinda like what we did with Carr this past season.

        Plus, if it really came down to it and we still needed space, there’s 2-3 names that immediately are droppable off our roster. Guys who have proved at the MLB level they can’t cut it and are not long term solutions. Spare part pieces, yes. Valuable to keep? Yes. Worth keeping instead of signing a FA starter? no.

        1. I’m still curious as to why there’s this fixation on acquiring a FA starter when even Stevie Wonder could see that the team needs more offense.

          1. Yes!

            I have been saying this all along. Detwiler is fine to pencil in, and if he fail you have Milone, and Peacock.

        2. Actually after Detwiler you have
          Tommy Milone
          Danny Rosenbaum
          the soft-tossers …
          Sammy Solis
          Matt Purke

          and oh yeah there’s Lannan who is still sub-30

          all nice looking south paws …

          Peacock is a right handed starter he’s the stand-in
          for Stras and Zimmermann if those two get injured.

        3. You could argue Rule 5 endlessly and it would still come back to hindsight. Yes, Rizzo could have protected Meyers & Komatsu & taken the roster to 39, but to what end? If/when a trade is made, or a FA is signed, someone would likely be exposed to waivers.

          In my mind, leaving a player off the roster kind of hides them from scrutiny, but a DFA to clear roster space waives a flag in the face of the other GM’s. A lot more players are claimed and kept off waivers annually than Rule 5 pickups.

  2. Well, at least we’ve progressed to the point where we are deep enough to have two selected in Rule 5!

    Or we have such a plethora of AAAA talent we can’t protect them all.

  3. As I said over at FB, I am torn between cheering for the players to sick, and hoping they prove they arent ready yet and get the time to develope and become MLB players with the Nats.

    Good luck to both Meyers, and Komatsu!

  4. Nats pitching prospect development may have just taken another huge blow. Byron Kerrr is reporting that Rizzo has sent Sammy Solis to Dr. Lew Yocum because of elbow soreness he developed after his last start in the AZ Fall League.

Comments are closed.