NationalsProspects.com

Nats Restock with Five in the Rule 5 Draft

Two years ago, the Nats took four in the minor-league phase of the Rule 5 Draft. Last year, they took one—Thad Ward—via the MLB phase. This year, they did both – one in the MLB phase, and four in the minor-league phases for a total of five players.

One the one hand, you can argue the Nats are doing what the system is designed to do: enable last-place teams with weak farm systems to rebuild. (Yes, I know the Nats are a Top 15 farm system, but 90% of that ranking comes from roughly 10 or 11 players)

On the other hand, it’s really hard to not make the inference that this is mostly driven by economics, especially at the MLB level. Is Nasim Nuñez really better than Luis García now or perhaps Darren Baker next year? Defensively, probably, but it’s hard to conclude that a speedy, glove-first 2B is going to stick at the MLB level. And when was the last time Mike Rizzo decided a guy who can’t hit but can field should get playing time over the opposite?

As for the minor-league-phase picks, as was the case two years ago, these appear to be in lieu of free-agent signings:

  • RHP Samuel Vasquez (CLE) – Spent all of 2023 at Low-A Lynchburg, repeating the level with a line of 4.54/3.94/1.43 in 42IP across 35 appearances
  • RHP Wander Arias (KC) – pitched 65 innings in relief at High-A Quad Cities with a line of 6.23/4.52/1.52
  • RHP Daison Acosta (NYM) – appears to have been coming off an injury with one start in the FSL in early May, then 29 appearances for AA Binghamton for 36 innings and a line of 4.75/5.53/1.44
  • CF Moises Gallardo (OAK) – 2023 was his first in the U.S., having spent 2022 and 2021 in the DSL as a teenager (he turned 20 in April). Batted .280/.376/.452 in 31 games

Baseball America did name Gallardo as one of its 9 Minor League Rule 5 Picks That Caught Our Attention, describing him as the rather common “above-average raw power and a strong throwing arm, but needs to develop a feel for hitting and cut down on the swing-and-miss.” [Insert Elijah Green joke here]

As always, feel free to discuss in the comments.


34 Commments

  1. Thanks for this. I was wondering about these Rule V minors guys. More depth is a good thing.

    1. Nick Senzel reminds me of a struggling version of the Penn alum who Davey Johnson had around as a mentor on bench and super sub

      1. Quite a decision the Nats might have had to make in Rule 5 if Shane Dohan the Seminole alum Lefty from Bosox was available at pick 5

  2. The best pick up yesterday wasn’t anyone drafted, but Juan Yepez, as Souldrummer pointed out yesterday. I thought we might go after a guy just like him in the R5, but Yepez is probably better than anyone available, and being signed to a minor league deal, gives us a lot more flexibility than trying to stash him for a whole season on the major league roster. Yepez, currently still 25, isn’t older than a lot of the R5 eligible guys either.

    I am glad we signed Yepez yesterday, or I’d be a lot more annoyed with Rizzo. The Nunez pick makes absolutely no sense to me whatsoever. Nunez’s best value is his defensive ability. He’s supposed to be very, very good. But literally the only infield position we have occupied by a half-decent player is at SS, which is Nunez’s position! We also already have a perfectly uninspiring utility infielder in Ildemaro Vargas, who is well equipped to play back up to Abrams, and eat innings at 2B if Garcia and Alu falter.

    Nunez also can’t hit a lick. He batted .224 in AA with a .627 OPS. If you can’t hit in AA, you definitely can’t hit in the majors. And we just saw how this played out with Lucius Fox. Who, in comparison to Nunez, dominated AAA pitching with a .242 AVG and .710 OPS before we’d signed him.

    Basically, we’ve taken a guy with one skill (SS defense), and can’t even use him in a way to use that one skill. Unless, the Nats are intending to move Abrams to 2B, which would in itself be insanity, that a R5 pick with a .220 AVG in AA would dictate use of your future star infielder…

    It just doesn’t make sense to me from any angle. I strongly doubt Nunez even makes it out of ST, but I hope to be happily surprised and wrong!

    2. I’d argue he has three skills, defense, taking a walk and base running. whether that’s enough to make him an asset remains to be seen.

    3. I would analyze Nunez a bit differently. If Vargas becomes regular 3B, he won’t be available to back Abrams up. (Have you looked at his competition?) And if the Nationals sign somebody who can play 3B, Nunez is easy come, easy go.

  3. On the minor league picks, Moises Gallardo really excites me. He looks like a better version of Roismar Quintana (better eye, power and defense). And still only 20 years old. It seems like a no brainer to take a flyer on a guy like him!

    Meanwhile, among the arms, not much stands out, except that all 3 struck out more than a batter per inning. But again, can’t hurt to beef up the depth charts.

    1. Strange… it cut off the text:

      5. Washington Nationals (38)
      Nasim Nuñez, SS, from Miami Marlins

      Nuñez is a twitchy, glove-first middle infielder with virtually no power. Long-term he projects as a team’s sixth infielder, a slick-fielding defensive replacement and runner. Given the relative dearth of middle-infield free agents, he’s a logical addition to the Nationals’ position player group as they shore up their defense on the dirt (most likely as a late-inning replacement for Luis García), even without contributing much at the plate. For how little power production he puts up, Nuñez maintains a good feel for getting his bat on the ball, with a swinging strike rate under 10% in 2023, and he buoys his overall profile with a ton of speed, to the tune of 52 stolen bases last year and 70 the year before. But it’s his incredible hands, range, athleticism and infield versatility that should drive a John McDonald-esque career.

      https://blogs.fangraphs.com/the-2023-rule-5-draft-scouting-reports/

  5. The three arms selected in minor league phase reminds me of a recent off season when several minor league bullpen arms were selected .
    I doubt any of the three could morph into a swing starter or starter ? Maybe the Met farm hand ?

  6. Also now that the Soto deal is finalized, it’s interesting to compare the two hauls. Clearly a year and half less of control makes a big difference:

    Nats get ¦¦ Pads get
    Former SP prospect: MacKenzie Gore, 23, 0.8 WAR in 70 IP, 5 years of control vs Michael King, 28, 2.2 WAR in 102 IP, 2 YOC
    Fringe Top 100 SP prospect: Jarlin Susana, 18, 2.45 ERA in Rookie Ball vs Drew Thorpe, 23, 2.52 ERA between A+/AA

    After that the comparison kind of falls apart, but:
    James Wood, 20, top 100 prospect, OF vs Jhony Brito, 25, recently graduated, #5 SP ceiling
    Robert Hassell, 21, top 100 prospect, OF vs Randy Vasquez, 25, also recently graduated, swingman ceiling
    CJ Abrams, 22, recently graduated former top 100 prospect, SS vs Kyle Higashioka, 33, career back up catcher

    There’s a strong argument to be made that the best player the Padres got (arguably Thorpe) is worse than the worst player the Nats got (Susana)

  7. I have felt for awhile that 2024 was going to be another tank year. I want to mention that both the A’s and White Sox will be ineligible for the lottery in 25. The top of that draft is stacked.

    I will also predict that if MLB does not fix this TV rights situation that there will not be baseball in DC next decade. Small/mid market will not work.

    While a Reds type season is possible, I do not thonk it is likely as the top prospects all need more time. My realistic hope for this season is a MASN solution, a new owner, and a great lottery result.

    1. the MLB TV rights issue across the board is a mess. they can’t rely on the short term fix of gambling revenue much longer

    2. Why do you think that having MASN will mean that MLB abandons DC (#9 media market, just behind Boston and ahead of San Francisco/Oakland/San Jose) and not Baltimore (#29 media market)?

      1. DC is the one getting screwed. Baltimore has no reason to leave with this setup. If this situation stays as is, the attendence will continue to drop. DC will expect a team that spends in the top ten. They have never legitimately had a top payroll when you factor in the deferrals and the loan from MLB. Now not only are they not using the deferrals, they are paying off the orevious ones. I thonk MLB recognizes the problem and will attempt to rectify it, but if they do not, the Nats won’t last another 10 years.

        2. Well, OK. That’s a take.

          FWIW the Nats paid back the loan from MLB a long time ago. And despite the differing team postures (Nats coming off of a 105 loss season, the O’s coming off of a surprise run to a winning season in 2022 and winning 101 games in 2023) the two teams drew essentially the same number of fans (the difference of 876 fans/game is even a little high, as the Nats were the home team for the Williamsport game, which drew only 2,473 fans due to the size of the ballpark).

          MLB isn’t interested in moving existing franchises, because they’re leaning in to expanding to 32 teams and want to hold the marginal markets that still exist open for expansion teams.

          It will be interesting to see if John Angelos’s greed in trying to extort public lands out of Baltimore as part of a new lease agreement on OPACY (which, despite what the O’s said in a press release, has not been signed and the current lease expires at the end of the month) turns into just one more self-inflicted wound.

    3. The MASN mess is a legitimate grievance, and something that never should have been allowed in the first place (another awful Bud Selig legacy), but for all the bellyaching about it, it has never dictated Nats’ spending. There were several years in the late teens when they were top five MLB in salary, and they went over the tax line two or three times (once by accident). The squeeze of Nat payroll over the last couple of years has been surprising, and never reasonably explained (a new owner presumably would want a healthy franchise).

      Also for all the bellyaching about it, there are a number of teams with worse TV issues, particularly those tied to Bally’s. (Probably part of the reason the Pads had to move Soto.)

      And no, baseball isn’t leaving DC. But the current or prospective owner is going to have to open the checkbook to get the team back to respectability. Our prospects aren’t going to do it by themselves.

      1. Actually, when you use real money, taking out the deferrals and the loan from MLB, they have not spent big. The reason they are not spending now is because they are not doing deferrals and are paying off the previous ones. Baseball will leave DC if the situation is not fixed. I believe it will be fixed though.

        1. Look, I get it, you’re committed to your narrative so this is almost certainly a waste of time. I’ll just note that (1) you keep mentioning the loan from MLB, which took place years ago in a specific context (the MASN litigation) and has long been paid back; and (2) If you don’t think that future obligations count as “real money” then it’s clear that you aren’t really understand finance.

          1. Actually, I have probably forgotten more about finance and accounting than you will know in a hundred lifetimes. What we are talking about is yearly payroll, not total commitment. Yes deferred money is counted as a liability for accounting purposes, but that is not what we are discussing. In terms of actual spending the Nats did not pay out the money to be a top 5 payroll. They had two intangibles that will not have again that inflated things in their favor. Now they not only are not receiving those benefits, they are paying of deferrals. If you factor those facts in, it is easy to see why their MLB measured payroll is so low. I can tell you do not have a clue, since you keep bring up the loan being paid off. They benefitted from the loan at the time they had a high payroll. I agree we should end this discussion. We will see if they spend before the team is sold or at least the TV situation is settled.

  8. NatsTalk had a lot about how Nunez could be a pinch runner and defensive replacement for Garcia or Abrams. Maybe. But it seems quite a stretch to expect him to hit. And they already have Vargas to fill a similar role. And Alu. And Kieboom, who is out of options and therefore in a similar pickle to a Rule 5 pick.

    So we’ll see. There’s nothing that says that they have to keep him.

    Yepez seems stuck in AAAA territory but certainly worth picking up and giving a look. Lane Thomas looked like AAAA when they picked him up from the Cards as well.

    I share the curiosity about Gallardo, but it’s hard to see the need, or where he’ll play. He’s presumably ticketed for F’burg . . . along with Green, Vaquero, and Cox, among others. I don’t think it’s advisable to play four guys in CF at one time, and the Nats have large-to-massive investments in those other three.

    Rule 5 pitching pickups don’t seem to offer much other than filler.

    1. What are the rules for the minor league R5 picks? Because while we do have a glut of OFs, it rapidly thins out at the FCL and Fburg levels. The bottleneck is at A+-AAA.

      While Cox was a 4th rounder, he hit a putrid .147/.312/.213 in the FCL this season. That’s not worthy of a promotion to Fburg. There’s likely to be at least one more guy who the Nats can’t squeeze onto the Wilmington squad, perhaps Johnathon Thomas?, but he also shouldn’t be a serious impediment to playing time. Still, we made do with an OF of CFs in Harrisburg (Crews, Wood and Hassell), I think we could do the same with Green and Vaquero splitting time between RF and CF and Gallardo in LF, with Thomas as the 4th OF. Without the ’24 draft picks, the FCL Nats OF is going to be very bad. Cox’s worrisome offense, coupled with Enmanuel Ramirez (.259/.400/.333), Eliesel Santana (.242/.345/.333), Nick Peoples (.172/.289/.333), and then hope and pray that Carlos Batista can contribute something stateside. So if Gallardo gets some playing time there, it won’t be harming any other prospects’ development.

      1. They paid Cox a million. They’re gonna move him up and give him a lot of chances. That doesn’t guarantee anything (see Sammy Infante), but it’s hard to see a Rule 5 guy or a 20th-rounder (Thomas) getting preference ahead of Cox in his second full season.

    2. Well Nunez does offer more to Davey than Herb Washington did to the Oakland Swingin As .

      1. LOL, that’s a pretty low bar, since Washington never came to the plate and never fielded a position. Sort of an extended version of Moonlight Graham. But he did get picked off in a crucial situation during the 1974 World Series.

  9. I think of Nunez as the replacement for Michael Chavis. Chavis had a whopping 96 plate appearances last year, with an anemic .622 OPS, yet contributed .5 WAR I guess through defense and baserunning. If Nunez can give you something resembling that next year – and if he’s a defensively elite shortstop and baserunner, he probably can – you then have 3 option years to see if his bat progresses with more playing time. That seems worth the gamble over a never-was free agent.

Comments are closed.